In my last post, I covered how the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (RCSLT) had appointed a new Chair, who is a WPATH member, and this after years of what looks like ideological creep.
That this 96% female profession has been so easily and relatively quickly captured is emblematic of healthcare as a whole. That’s why we deep dive into this as an example.
I received an amazing response from a reader and fellow Substack writer, and as a result, I now welcome Guest Author Genderwang.
It has been obvious that something has been going awry with the otherwise excellent RCSLT since 2020. Not just from the evidence of self-flagellation in 2020 and knee-jerk support for a US-based BLM organisation (listed in RCSLT “Putting in the work: An anti-racist reading and resource list” as “Black Lives Matter UK” but linking to blacklivesmatter.com)
- but then from committing to Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) as the guiding force of the organisation and, on top of all that, the insidious influence of gender identity ideology.
"Inclusion" might be the current watchword but "engagement" and "accountability" have gone right down the pan.
At the 2022 AGM the outgoing Chair, Mary Heritage, said:
Right back at the start of my term in early 2021 we held a mirror up to the RCSLT Board – in the form of a report from Kiki Maurey. She told us uncomfortable truths. The Board of RCSLT appears to its members as elitist, exclusive, old fashioned (fusty dusty, I think she said). Surely not us? Well yes, an uncomfortable message from our members. No wonder the Board membership had remained white and female and ‘mature’ for so long.
We acted fast – a 5-year vision, changes to the Memorandum and Articles, a new process of nomination and selections to replace elections, promoting diversity, a new Vision and a set of core Values that we hold one another to account for.
From Democracy to Oligarchy
To produce her report “Toward a more diverse RCSLT Board”, Kiki Maurey interviewed only 19 RCSLT members, of whom only four were “ordinary members”, ie. not Trustees or RCSLT staff members.
One of the interviewees is quoted as recommending that the then Board should be "less stuffy, dusty and remote".
It is not mentioned whether this interviewee was a Board Member (Trustee), a member of RCSLT staff or an "ordinary member". This matters.
On the basis of one remark from one interviewee, who might have been one of the 15 Trustees and Staff interviewed rather than one of the four “ordinary members”, the outgoing Chair, Mary Heritage, attributed the following view to RCSLT’s 20,000 members:
The Board of RCSLT appears to its members as elitist, exclusive, old fashioned (fusty dusty, I think she said).
At the 2022 AGM the outgoing Chair also emphasised that “we” need to “hold one another to account” for “a set of core Values”.
So how is that "accountability" working out? How enthusiastically have members embraced the opportunity to influence change? How has the leadership profile "at the top" changed?
Men on top
RCSLT (96% female membership) has swapped female CEO Kamini Gadhok (SLT) and female Chair Mary Heritage (SLT) for male CEO Steve Jamieson (mature, white, nursing background) and male Chair Sean Pert (mature, white, queer, SLT).
Forgive me if I am less than impressed by this start at ensuring that the leadership of RCSLT is decidedly unrepresentative of the membership.
Am I am also expected to celebrate the replacement of two “mature” females, ("stuffy, dusty and remote" apparently) with - what? Two “mature white males” who are, presumably, "fresh, sparkling and approachable"? Really?
Matched for age (roughly) and skin colour the only difference is their sex, which is startlingly unrepresentative of the membership. Diversifying into misogyny, are we, RCSLT?
Sean talks about “classism” but I am afraid I do not have the inside gen on the socio-economic background and current status of those concerned.
I was told as a child never to trust a man wearing a bow tie although never why, so I will try not to hold that against him. Probably a class thing.
Let us not forget that “Queer” these days does not mean “gay” or “lesbian” or even bisexual. Under the LGBTQIA+ umbrella almost everything to the right of “LGB” means “spicy straights” or “straight with kinks”.
Here is "queer" Sean, wearing his Stonewall T-Shirt, advertising an organisation whose CEO has described lesbians as "sexual racists" and which demonises the vast majority of the population, ie. those of us who recognise the reality of biological sex. That would be the vast majority of RCSLT members too. How lovely, knowing that the male Chair of your professional organisation regards most members (who are female), as bigots and “sexual racists”.
So, how are members responding to RCSLT’s response to George Floyd and the more "approachable" Board?
AGM 2021 - Democracy defeated without a fight
The November 2021 AGM (Zoom) tabled a series of resolutions proposing to dramatically alter the governance of RCSLT, as recommended in Kiki Maurey’s report.
For example, to replace the democracy of elected representation with a Board comprised of appointees.
Appointees would be chosen by Selection Panels. These would be made up of other appointees, chosen by a Nominations Committee, whose membership would be appointed by a Board of appointed Trustees, with the Board Chair also being the Chair of the Nominations Committee and able to overrule the decision of a Selection Panel.
So circular and cosy. Completely immunised from any taint of representative democracy, a self-perpetuating oligarchy.
In new money, a “diverse and inclusive” (possibly) “Central Committee”.
Despite the importance of the resolutions for the future of RCSLT, the 2021 AGM was attended by a grand total of 36 "ordinary members" with voting rights.
Another 16 voting members were either Trustees or members of RCSLT staff.
This was down from 313 "ordinary members" with voting rights at the 2017 AGM in Glasgow.
In a mere four years, AGM attendance slumped by roughly 90% and was even lower in 2022. Was this despite RCSLT’s efforts to refocus on EDI? Or as a result?
RCSLT AGM - accountability to members
In the figures below, "other RCSLT members with voting rights" means ordinary members with voting rights, ie. who were neither Trustees nor staff who were RCSLT members:
2017 - Glasgow
16 Chair, Trustees + Staff who are RCSLT members
313 other RCSLT members with voting rights attended
2018 - Cardiff
13 Chair, Trustees + Staff who are RCSLT members
97 other RCSLT members with voting rights attended
2019 - Nottingham
15 Chair, Trustees + Staff who are RCSLT members
230 other RCSLT members with voting rights attended
2020 - Zoom
24 Chair, Trustees + Staff who are RCSLT members
70 other RCSLT members with voting rights attended
2021 - Zoom
15 Chair, Trustees + Staff who are RCSLT members
36 other RCSLT members with voting rights attended
2022 - Zoom
22 Chair, Trustees + Staff who are RCSLT members
20 other RCSLT members with voting rights attended
By the 2022 AGM the number of Trustees and Staff with voting rights outnumbered the "ordinary members" attending.
The Quorum is 20, so both the 2020 and 2022 AGMs could have gone ahead without any “ordinary members” in attendance.
The AGM minutes do not record the number of proxy votes received and whether these were submitted by Trustees, Staff or Ordinary Members.
Quorum is just 20 members. That’s a 0.1% requirement of membership attendance (including voting Trustees and voting staff) for quoracy.
Just for comparison, the 2017 AGM (minutes), attended by 313 ordinary members in Glasgow, and the 2022 AGM (minutes), attended by 20 ordinary members on Zoom.
Following implementation of the Kiki Maurey “Action Plan” to "improve accountability", "accountability" is now non-existent in terms of the AGM holding the organisation to account:
accountability to members via the AGM has evaporated, from a high over 300 attending in 2017, due to members self-excluding
at the 2022 AGM “ordinary members” could have been out-voted by management + staff on any resolution put to that AGM.
the sharp decline in members attending is obvious but the 2022 AGM needs highlighting as a complete failure of accountability.
RCSLT, 96% female membership, has mutated from a democratic organisation run by its elected members into an organisation run by appointees with The Chair, a middle-aged white man, overseeing and gatekeeping everything. Alongside a new middle-aged white male CEO.
See the Nominations Committee Terms of Reference.
What next?
With the above in mind, and Lou Preston’s previous article indicating that members are both unhappy with the current situation and cowed into submission by an oppressive culture, fear of censure by RCSLT and sanctions by HCPC, it is worth emphasising that membership of RCSLT is entirely voluntary.
Lou states in “WPATH Member takes over at UK's speech therapy royal college”
Speech and language therapists can be members of any organisation they wish outside of HCPC and RCSLT
The last two words should be omitted as the only requirement to practice is membership of HCPC.
As the article also mentions, SLTs
usually join groups that help them with their continuous professional development or for peer support, to develop guidance in their area of specialism
Non-members can subscribe to RCSLT Bulletin. SLT Services can subscribe to or may have access to Research Journals via employing organisations or local University Depts.
It is perfectly possible for most SLTs to keep up to date and fulfil the CPD requirements of HCPC registration without being members of RCSLT.
Professional indemnity insurance can also be bought from other agents.
SLTs might choose to challenge the current regime or they might decamp and leave RCSLT in the red.
The majority of RCSLT’s income is generated through membership fees, which account for 82% of total income
There have been RSCLT “mutinies” before when there was a power-grab by those at the top but the difference then was that AGMs were “In Real Life”, not online. It is all too easy for those in control to eject members from a Zoom meeting or mute them.
If there is any chance of turning this around then members need to act constructively - or start leaving and hitting the RCSLT bottom line. The new CEO is not going to want to preside over an organisation that self-implodes and goes into the red.
To ensure that the Board is accountable to members:
AGMs need to be In Real Life or hybrid, not just online
members need to put in resolutions
and turn up and vote
Why this is important
It was impressed upon me when I was training to be an SLT that we needed to become effective advocates for our clients/patients, SLT services and profession. In clinical work we should strive to employ Evidence Based Practice, aim for Effectiveness, Efficiency and the best possible real-life outcomes for service users and their families.
Membership of RCSLT supported these aims throughout my student years and working life. Active involvement in RCSLT, and representation of RCSLT on outside bodies, enhanced my Continuous Professional Development and I would highly recommend it.
RCSLT and its members are doing an impressive amount of high quality work: it is truly phenomenal. However, one development undermines RCSLT’s Strategic Vision and has more negative impact on this profession than any other: institutional capture by gender identity ideology.
For the adverse effects on clients/patients, I would encourage you to read Lou Preston’s articles on “Language, communication disability and discrimination”. If you are well-versed in the complexities of communication disability, I would recommend that you skip straight to the fourth article:
Then go through the other articles in the series. Reflect on how the reality-defying language demands of adherence to Gender Identity Ideology heap additional disadvantage on people with communication disabilities: they are antithetical to the aims and best practice of Speech and Language Therapy.