A WELSH court has recently agreed to demands by lawyers acting for Cardiff’s Labour government to force four working-class mothers and a single father to pay massive legal bills; the courageous five lost a judicial review case last month over Wales’s policy of teaching children as young as three about sex and gender identity.
An order issued by the Administrative Court Office for Wales just before Christmas said the mothers must find £50,000 in costs.
All of these parents are members of the voluntary action group, Public Child Protection Wales, which represents 5,000 parents and grandparents who want to protect their children from exploitation and sexualisation. I myself am a mother of two. I live in Port Talbot and chair this campaign group which supported their action. Though we have few resources left, we have been asked to find the sum on account of costs. Our lawyer acting in the case, Paul Diamond, had warned us that the final bill fighting against LGBTQ+ indoctrination would be likely to be substantial.
Appallingly, the Cardiff court wants to intimidate us into silence by what are in effect threats of bankruptcy. But we believe too much is at stake to be muzzled. We mothers have nothing, no property, no savings, so we will be offering a few pounds a week each to satisfy their threats.
The court ruling is alarming and far reaching. It means that from now the state rather than mothers and fathers will control what enters little children’s minds. The government’s forced curriculum cannot now be avoided by anyone. There are no rights for parents to request information on what will be taught, at what age, or to ask that their child sit out. Please read the 78-page ruling.
When we said we objected to three-year-old children learning about penises and vaginas, the judge said this is a matter for teachers to decide and not parents.
The guidance to schools includes the notion that pupils ‘explore sexual attraction’ and not just the biology of having sex. It is to be introduced in special classes, and all lessons and in the ‘whole school environment, with the court ruling by Mrs Justice Steyn confirming that any opt-out will be illegal.
Public Child Protection Wales believe that the court’s claim of a ‘values neutral education’ is a Trojan Horse, designed to sanction sexual experimentation of all kinds. The group decided to act after 88 per cent of parents objected to the removal of their rights during the Welsh government’s consultation process.
No one should be fooled by the Cardiff court’s claim that the unilaterally imposed curriculum is about ‘safeguarding’ children. The truth is that behind these decisions are anti-family ideologues who want to normalise all types of sexual practice as supposedly equally ‘valid’ choices. What they are doing, which should be unacceptable to all decent parents, is imposing their amorality on kids and is nothing less than grooming them for exploitation. We say, ‘No thank you’. We must protect our children from this. Adults and strangers talking to children about intimate sex at any age, let alone the youngest, most innocent and powerless, is the very opposite of safeguarding and it risks even great sexual abuse of children in years to come than we are already tragically witnessing.
So where exactly is Rishi Sunak’s pledge to act for families? Why is Kemi Badenoch vocal when she wants to lead the Government, but so silent once she has a role inside it? It’s high time someone in Westminster stood up to fight for our children as there is no justice available in Wales. I thought the Government was meant to care about parents and families.
Our barrister Paul Diamond has said that it is vital that the mothers’ case is taken to the Court of Appeal, given that the Curriculum and Assessment Act 2021 introduces mandatory sex and religion classes and this decision will affect both England and Wales.
The decision taken against these parents is but the first case of this nature. The question is ‘who decides – the State or the parents?’ This judgment said the State, and this raises constitutional issues that require review. Most parents who have no choice but to send their children to state school thereafter will find they have no rights at all.
For the majority of parents, to follow a ‘take it or leave it’ approach of the ‘choice’ of state education versus private schooling or home-schooling is impossible on practical and financial grounds. It is the sheer impracticality for most, the absence of any choice, which necessitates consideration by the Court of Appeal. There is no ‘choice’ for most parents – they cannot afford private education, which is anyway also beset by subversive gender ideology; most have neither the resources or ability to home school.
Paul Diamond says the scale of the costs order being sought by the Welsh Government’s lawyers is ‘intimidating’. Their claim, he says, ‘is aimed at creating fear, to dissuade law-abiding, low-income citizens such as these parents from enforcing their rights. Cardiff’s bill is disproportionate to a public interest Judicial Review. Many Judicial Reviews of this nature are conducted at counsel rates in the region of £25,000 for example, in complex immigration cases. In short it will create a chilling effect on similar judicial review cases.
That is why we call on every parent in the country to support our case and campaign and why I am pleading for public support with the aim of taking the case to appeal and further, if necessary.