On Monday, I had the chance to attend an all-day workshop hosted by the Government Equalities Office with the aim of working on ideas/concepts for the forthcoming government Transgender Action Plan. I’m going to do this as a two part post, because firstly I need to explain that the workshop was held under the Chatham House Rule. Discussion of politics, how it all works and so on is quite a seperate topic from the actual detail

To save everyone now franticly scrabbling around in Google, here’s the rule in question:

When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.

I can see the arguments for why this rule needs to be in place. As part of an all-day workshop, it’s probably unrealistic to expect civil servants to be on their guard constantly lest some chance comment suddenly gets interpreted as official government policy and having the rule allows those that are present to be a little more relaxed and productive as a result. I’ve seen first hand the way that reporting of meetings I have been at has been subject to inappropriate exaggeration and hyperbole so much that I don’t even recognise what has been written as being the same event.

On the flip side, there are arguments against having such a rule in place. There are some things going on already and as a result of people being able to chat face-to-face at the meeting that are genuinely positive and I believe would make people think better of the work the civil service and others are doing if I could tell you about them. It’s pretty safe to say that the rule is not entirely or even overall benefiting the individual civil servants present.

The most troubling aspect is the inability to talk about who was there at the workshop. In the context of the Trans community, this is probably the trickiest bit as the 2008 S’onewall protests reveal. There are groups that at the time were seen as out of touch because they were, rightly or wrongly, not talking to the community and did not appear to be reflecting grass roots views. If an individual or group of individuals had aired a view that it seemed was hugely at odds with the consensus view (And I did not see any evidence for this happening as the community, I’m posing this as a theoretical) it’s much harder to publicly hold them to account or rebut that view.

Having spent some time outlining that, I’ll go on to say that I don’t think it’s as much of an issue as it sounds. I’m not routinely in the habit of regurgitating attendee lists and I’m perhaps more free to pick out certain points as I would usually feel obliged to give attribution, something I can’t do for this meeting anyway.

If you believe today’s Metro (Page 13) then some government ministers and MPs are living in the 19th Century:

Digital hubs boost for faster internet

EVERY community in Britain will have a “digital hub” under plans to have the fastest broadband in Europe by 2015. These will boost internet speeds by operating as a local satellite station for “superfast” broadband, according to media secretary Jeremy Hunt. It is part of an £830 million plan to turn Britain into one of world’s most technically advanced nations.

We’ve had these hubs since 1870 for years: they’re called Telephone Exchanges. I’m guessing this is sloppy reporting and he is actually talking about the green cabinets in the street… which we’ve also had for decades. More specifically, the inaccurately named “fibre optic broadband” which runs fibre to the green cabinets in the street… which are already providing live service in many areas, with an established rollout plan for more.

I work in the industry and I have absolutely no idea what has been announced by Hunt or when based on this article. I don’t know why they ran this at all.

Next week, we shall hear of government plans to introduce big buildings where one can pay to see moving pictures.

It seems that yesterday, the Wikileaks domain name was pulled by their hosting company due to denial of service attacks. (And probably pressure from US authorities, although I suspect the hosts will not want to admit that)

As I predicted, it’s back online with a new domain name: wikileaks.ch.

OK, so it wasn’t Wikileaks I was talking about but rather FITwatch but the same principle holds. Your domain name can be a weak spot and if you’re doing something unpopular and you’d better make sure you have multiple domains people know about.

Interestingly, the new Wikileaks site is a Swiss domain name registered by the Swiss Pirate Party that points to a server hosted in Sweden that then redirects via IP address, not domain name, to a server in France. For contact details they’re using a PO Box in Australia. Looks like they’re trying to ensure they do not have all their eggs in one basket! (All the redirection makes me think that Wikileaks didn’t even register the domain name themselves, but that the Swiss Pirate Party did it for them as a favour. As they don’t control the target servers, they had to do it with an IP redirect rather than just pointing the new domain name directly at them)

Really, the most interesting event for me today is the leaked news of evidence of life having evolving twice, independently, on Earth. I wasn’t aware that the World Cup bid results being announced today and it looked like it was going to pass as one of those events that I only noticed because of the brief spike in Internet traffic and the Twitter discussion.

But Qatar popped up as they’re apparently hosting the 2022 World Cup. Qatar are on my personal “do not travel, except with either diplomatic passport or as a uniformed member of the armed forces” list. Here’s some excellent travel advice from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on Qatar, with the last few points in particular illustrating why:

There is an underlying threat from terrorism in Qatar. Attacks, although unlikely, could be indiscriminate, including in places frequented by expatriates and foreign travellers.

You should avoid large gatherings and demonstrations.

Although incidents are not common, female visitors should take care when travelling alone at night and should use one of the reputable limousine companies.

It is a punishable offence to drink alcohol or be drunk in public. Offenders may incur a prison sentence or deportation.

Women should cover their shoulders and avoid wearing short skirts. You should behave courteously at all times. Any intimacy in public between men and women (including between teenagers) can lead to arrest.

Homosexual behaviour is illegal in Qatar.

The last point is the one that seals the deal – I have no idea what they’d make of a mostly-lesbian-post-transition transwoman such as myself, but I suspect it’s not worth finding out. The penalty is up to 5 years in jail and a fine, I’ve also seen it suggested that lashes may be involved.

Any gay footballers who might be thinking of coming out but who also want to play for England are now faced with a tough decision: Stay in the closet or risk your career.