'You cannot take away choice from girls'- reactions to possible school skirt ban
A GROWING number of schools across the UK are moving to ban skirts from their uniform policies — and the reaction from parents and residents has been anything but quiet.
The latest flashpoint is Honywood School in Coggeshall, Essex.
Earlier this month, the school announced that from September, students would only be permitted to wear trousers or knee-length tailored shorts — effectively banning skirts altogether.
The school said the decision was due to ongoing issues with students rolling up their skirts.
However, following a backlash from parents, the ban was postponed — though not entirely scrapped.
The Gazette took to the streets to ask residents what they thought of the controversial move, and the community offered a range of strongly held views.
Kerry Martin (Image: Newsquest Reporter) 'I think it's a little bit extreme that these schools are banning skirts,' said Kerry Martin, 36, an artist living in Blackheath.
'I understand that there are some concerns, and they are valid and they must have rules in place to ensure everyone is wearing the right length skirt.
"However, they shouldn't take it away from everybody. Girls should be allowed to wear skirts if they choose to. Especially in this hot weather.'
James Ferris (Image: Newsquest Reporter) James Ferris, 39, an engineer from Tollesbury, said he sees the issue from the perspective of a parent.
He said: 'I don't think it's fair at all. As a girl dad, I fully believe that the girls should be allowed to wear whatever they want to wear.
"They should have the right to choosing if they want to wear a skirt or trousers. You cannot take away choice from young women as they are growing up.'
Anna Gayle (Image: Newsquest Reporter) Anna Gayle, 42, who works in HR and lives in Manningtree, said: 'As a mum, I feel that it seems unnecessary to ban the skirt.
"If the length of the skirt is an issue, have stricter guidelines about what's the appropriate length.
"As a parent, I believe schools should have the right to policy making, but you cannot take away choice from young women.
"Have rules in place about what's the right length of the skirt permitted, and for kids who don't follow that rule, have a chat with their parents.'
Matt Gayle (Image: Newsquest Reporter) Her husband, Matt Gayle, 43, a CBT therapist also from Manningtree, agreed that banning skirts goes too far.
He said: 'I know girls tend to roll up their skirts, but a ban is over the top. If there is a certain uniform, have a guideline and make sure people abide by it.
"Discipline is important but we cannot simply dictate girls to not wear skirts.
"Skirt or trouser, the choice must be theirs and parents must also take full responsibility in making sure the girls wear the right length of skirt that is outlined in the school's uniform policy.'
Matt Coowes (Image: Newsquest Reporter) Matt Coowes, 34, a production engineer, living in Clacton said: "Well my organisation had banned shorts last year actually, which we all sided with because it was from a health and safety standpoint.
"So, this sort of uniform policy is only acceptable in my opinion if it's to safeguard the children from a health and safety perspective. But clearly that's not the case.
"It's a case of taking away choice from young women to decide if they want to wear a skirt or a trouser, it's about controlling how they chose to express themselves.
"Sure the girls roll up the skirts, then find a better way so they don't. Banning is not the solution."
Linda Lloyd (Image: Newsquest Reporter) Linda Llyod, 56, a screening officer for a learning disability organization living in St Osyth, said banning skirts fails to address the real issue.
She said: 'Well girls rolling up school skirts is very normal for their age. It's life, it's just girls for you.
"Now it's absolutely ridiculous they want to ban skirts. I think they shouldn't ban it. Girls wear skirts and they should be allowed to wear it if they choose to.
"The length is an issue, and that should be addressed in a better way. If your concern is girls' safety, make sure you outline it as a rule they wear knee-length skirts, but don't ban it entirely.
"I see both sides of this argument but a ban... that's still a bit unfair and I hope they don't implement it.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Starmer Faces Brewing Rebellion Over £5 Billion Benefit Cut
(Bloomberg) -- UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is less than 10 days away from the biggest parliamentary challenge to his authority in his not-yet year-long tenure. Security Concerns Hit Some of the World's 'Most Livable Cities' One Architect's Quest to Save Mumbai's Heritage From Disappearing JFK AirTrain Cuts Fares 50% This Summer to Lure Riders Off Roads NYC Congestion Toll Cuts Manhattan Gridlock by 25%, RPA Reports Taser-Maker Axon Triggers a NIMBY Backlash in its Hometown Unpopular cuts to disability benefits unveiled earlier this year as part of Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves' efforts to balance the country's books are due before the House of Commons for their first vote on July 1, with a large-scale rebellion brewing on the Labour back benches. So far, at least 150 of the governing party's Members of Parliament have indicated concerns about the cuts in two letters to the government. Other non-signatories have told Bloomberg they also intend to vote against the bill. While Starmer's attention this week was centered on the escalating tensions in the Middle East, the domestic threat was laid bare on Thursday when Vicky Foxcroft, a government whip who would have been tasked with helping quell the revolt, quit, citing her own objections. The rebellion threatens to bruise Starmer's and Reeves' credibility and further damage their stock with the left of their party. In order to avoid falling to what would be an unprecedented defeat for a government enjoying such a large majority so early in its tenure, ministers could at worst be forced into major concessions that reduce the bill's expected cost savings, forcing the Treasury to conjure up money from other cuts or tax rises at the budget in the fall. 'It's a test of Starmer's authority and the way he and Rachel Reeves are running the economy,' Tim Bale, professor of politics at Queen Mary University London, said in a phone interview. 'If the rebellion is too big, you start to run into questions about the loyalty of your backbenchers and even perhaps the future of your leadership.' The welfare reforms allowed Reeves to save about £5 billion ($6.5 billion) a year by 2030 by making it harder for disabled people to claim a benefit called the personal independence payment, or PIP. The chancellor factored them into a spring statement as part of spending cuts designed to help meet her self-imposed fiscal rules. Reeves says the changes are necessary because an extra thousand people a day have been signing on for PIP, creating an 'unsustainable' impact on the public finances. PIP payments had been projected to almost double to £41 billion by the end of the decade, within overall spending on disability and incapacity benefits that the Office for Budget Responsibility — the government's fiscal watchdog — sees rising to £100 billion from £65 billion last year. The government has also says there is a moral case for supporting people back into work. But Labour lawmakers are concerned the government announced changes in a rush to deliver savings, without thinking through the impact on vulnerable people. 'There are alternative and more compassionate ways to balance the books, rather than on the backs of disabled people,' one Labour backbencher, Debbie Abrahams, told the House of Commons. There are particular concerns about a new requirement for claimants to score four or above in one of the daily living components of the PIP assessment, meaning people who can't wash half their body or cook a meal will be denied the payments if they have no other impairments. One Labour MP describing the process as letting the OBR tail wag the government dog. Some 45 Labour MPs signed a public letter objecting to the measures, while another letter — arranged in secrecy so that even signatories couldn't see who they were joining — garnered 105 signatures and was sent to the chief whip. While some of the would-be rebels have indicated they could be swayed by the government whips, one of them told Bloomberg they are confident that more than 80 MPs will commit to voting against the government. Given Starmer's working majority is 165, if all opposition parties vote against the bill, it would take 83 Labour rebels to defeat the government. The main opposition Conservative Party is planning to vote against the changes, Danny Kruger, one of the party's work and pensions spokespeople, told parliament in May. Its reasons are different: the Tories argue the measures don't go far enough. One Labour MP told Bloomberg that concerned lawmakers plan to put forward a procedural challenge to the bill. While they don't expect the speaker to select that amendment for debate, the aim is to force further changes from the government, and organize would-be Labour rebels into a coherent group which could eventually vote down the bill. Many in Labour had been waiting to see the bill before making up their minds. When the text was published on Wednesday, the concessions to their concerns were minimal, largely amounting to a 13-week transition period for those losing their PIP. Foxcroft — the whip who had previously served for four years as Starmer's shadow disability minister in opposition — quit within hours of the publication, saying she didn't believe cutting the disability benefits should be part of the solution to tackling ballooning welfare costs. Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said Friday that Foxcroft's resignation wasn't a sign of a major rebellion, while conceding that 'of course' there are dissenting voices on such a big reform. 'Vicky is the only front-bencher that I've had a conversation with about resigning,' she said. Nevertheless, many so-called 'red wall' Labour MPs in northern and central England face a tough decision. Health Equity North, a public health institute, found that all the places most affected financially by the PIP reforms are Labour constituencies in northern England. In several areas, the number of people affected by the welfare changes exceeds the Labour majority, meaning those MPs could see a crucial drop in support. The government is gearing up for a fight, indicating it will make no further concessions. On Wednesday, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner failed to rule out stripping the whip from Labour rebels, while government enforcers are warning MPs that their political career prospects will be ruined if they oppose the bill. Whips and wannabe rebels alike expect the potential revolt to be whittled down as July 1 approaches. Some opponents are weighing whether to abstain at the second reading and wait until the third reading to take a more decisive vote, as whips are encouraging them to do. 'I'd be amazed if he were defeated here,' Anand Menon, director of the UK in a Changing Europe think-tank, said. 'If the whips got a whiff they were going to get defeated, they'd give some concessions. The worst of all outcomes is to lose this.' Luxury Counterfeiters Keep Outsmarting the Makers of $10,000 Handbags Ken Griffin on Trump, Harvard and Why Novice Investors Won't Beat the Pros Is Mark Cuban the Loudmouth Billionaire that Democrats Need for 2028? The US Has More Copper Than China But No Way to Refine All of It Can 'MAMUWT' Be to Musk What 'TACO' Is to Trump? ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Former Centrica chief Laidlaw in frame to chair embattled BP
Sam Laidlaw, the former boss of Centrica, is among the candidates being considered as the next chairman of BP, Britain's besieged oil and gas exploration giant. Sky News has learnt that Mr Laidlaw is being considered by BP board members as a potential successor to Helge Lund, who announced in April that he would step down. BP's chair search comes with the £62bn oil major in a state of crisis, as industry predators circle and the pace of its strategic transformation being interrogated by shareholders. Elliott Management, the activist investor, snapped up a multibillion pound stake in BP earlier this year and is pushing its chief executive, Murray Auchincloss, to accelerate spending cuts and ditch a string of renewable energy commitments. Mr Lund's departure will come after nearly a quarter of BP's shareholders opposed his re-election at its annual meeting in April - an unusually large protest given that his intention to step down had already been announced. BP's senior independent director - the Aviva chief executive Amanda Blanc - is said to be moving "at pace" to complete the recruitment process. A number of prominent candidates are understood to be in discussions with headhunters advising BP on the search. Mr Laidlaw would be a logical choice to take the role, having transformed Centrica, the owner of British Gas, during his tenure, which ended in 2014. Since then, he has had a long stint - which recently concluded - on the board of miner Rio Tinto, which has been fending off activist calls to abandon its London listing. He also established, and then sold, Neptune Energy, an oil company which was acquired by Italy's Eni for nearly £4bn in 2023. Last December, Mr Laidlaw was appointed chairman of AWE, the government-owned body which oversees Britain's nuclear weapons capability. He also has strong family connections to BP, with his father, Christopher Laidlaw, having served as its deputy chairman during a long business career. One person close to BP said the younger Mr Laidlaw had been approached about chairing the company during its previous recruitment process but had ruled himself out because of his Neptune Energy role. The status of his engagement with BP's search was unclear on Saturday. Another person said to have been approached is Ken MacKenzie, who recently retired as chairman of the mining giant BHP. Mr MacKenzie headed BHP during a period when Elliott held a stake in the company, and is said to have a good working relationship with the investor. Shares in BP have continued their downward trajectory over the last year, having fallen by nearly a fifth during that period. The company's valuation slump is reported to have drawn renewed interest in a possible takeover bid, with rivals Shell and ExxonMobil among those said to have "run the numbers" in recent months. Reports of such interest have not elicited any formal response, suggesting that any deal is conceptual at this stage. BP is racing to sell assets including Castrol, its lubricants division, which could command a price of about $8bn. This weekend, BP declined to comment, while Mr Laidlaw could not be reached for comment.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Rantzen warns peers not to hamper progress of assisted dying law
Assisted dying campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen has urged members of the House of Lords not to block landmark legislation on the issue. The Terminally Ill Adults (End Of Life) Bill cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday, but opponents have vowed to continue their resistance in the unelected chamber. The legislation could face a difficult passage through the Lords, with critics poised to table amendments to add further restrictions and safeguards to the Bill. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. 'Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. 'So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through.' Dame Esther, who turns 85 on Sunday and has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to 'buzz of to Zurich' to use the Dignitas clinic. Paralympian and crossbench peer Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told BBC Breakfast: 'We're getting ready for it to come to the Lord's and from my personal point of view, about amending it to make it stronger. 'We've been told it's the strongest Bill in the world, but to be honest, it's not very high bar for other legislation. 'So I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.' Conservative peer and disability rights campaigner Lord Shinkwin said the narrow Commons majority underlined the need for peers to take a close look at the legislation. He told Today 'I think the House of Lords has a duty to expose and to subject this Bill to forensic scrutiny' but 'I don't think it's a question of blocking it so much as performing our duty as a revising chamber'. He added: 'The margin yesterday was so close that many MPs would appreciate the opportunity to look at this again in respect of safeguards as they relate to those who feel vulnerable, whether that's disabled people or older people.' Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who steered the Bill through the Commons, told the PA news agency she hoped peers would not seek to derail the legislation, which could run out of parliamentary time if it is held up in the Lords. She said: 'I would be upset to think that anybody was playing games with such an important and such an emotional issue.' A group of 27 Labour MPs who voted against the legislation said: 'We were elected to represent both of those groups and are still deeply concerned about the risks in this Bill of coercion of the old and discrimination against the disabled, people with anorexia and black, Asian and minority ethnic people, who we know do not receive equitable health care. 'As the Bill moves to the House of Lords it must receive the scrutiny that it needs. Not about the principles of assisted dying but its application in this deeply flawed Bill.' Meanwhile, one of the leading opponents of the Bill, Conservative Danny Kruger, said 'these are apocalyptic times'. In a series of tweets on Friday night, the East Wiltshire MP – who is at odds with his mother, Great British Bake Off judge Dame Prue Leith in her support for legalisation – accused assisted dying campaigners of being 'militant anti-Christians' who had failed to 'engage with the detail of the Bill'.
