Our thanks to Len for this press release issued a month ago, written by the Ministry of Justice, Baroness Levitt KC and David Lammy. A related BBC piece is here. The opening paragraph of the press release:
“Overdue reforms to protect women [J4MB emphasis] and meet the needs of modern relationships as the government continues to prioritise tackling VAWG and working people.”
Another extract:
“Justice Minister Baroness Levitt KC, said:
Financial independence should be afforded to everybody – not just those who choose to marry or enter into a civil partnership.
Too many women [J4MB emphasis – so, ‘everybody’ other than men] who have suffered the horrors of domestic abuse [J4MB emphasis – allegedly, another pot of gold for dishonest women and their lawyers] are left destitute at the end of a relationship because they’ve been denied the rights they deserve. The outcome of our consultation will be a system which celebrates choice, autonomy, and tradition in equal measure.”
The CONsultation will launch on June 5 and run for 10 weeks, closing on August 14. In common with all consultations on gendered matters, seeking to influence what the government plans to do will be an exercise in utter futility. One inevitable consequence will be that huge numbers of men currently co-habiting with women will wish they’d stopped co-habiting before the introduction of the legislation. I should not be in the least surprised if the legislation covers formerly co-habiting couples.
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.
Our YouTube channel is here.
Justice for Men & Boys 
Ah yes the magic bullet of “domestic abuse”. All in fact built around the assumption that the man will always be the main provider in a relationship. No one talking about “widowers” nor the fact in many “partnerships” the woman is the one with the well paid public services job and the “tax payer funded gold standard pension” and so may lose out to her male partner! Though not explicit in the rest of the description one just knows that even framed as “gender neutral” as the headline says the intention is to favour women.
I was struck by the idea that “Financial Independence” is a goal and result of marriage or civil partnership. Because surely its the reverse in fact, that two people form a partnership to be a team not as a preparation to be independent of each other! I suppose the Orwellian reversing of the meaning of “partnership” or “marriage” from one of sharing and forming a family. To meaning something that is a preparation for “Financial Independence” through asset transfers at dissolving the partnership or death of a partner. Lays bare the intent. To enrich women via transfers of money/assets from men. But given that young women earn slightly more than their male contemporaries, and have done for some time. It may not totally benefit women.
One can imagine the future “outrage” when in the future less well off men actually receive more assets than their former partner! Which given the very high value of public sector Pensions (a mainly female workforce) is quite likely even if earnings are the same! As always this will depend on good advice to men and clued up lawyers acting on their behalf!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nigel, I doubt that it will even occur to many men to consider personal enrichment after the breakdown of a relationship, whether marriage or co-habitation.
LikeLike