Government could back Liz Truss’s transgender law reforms

Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch is understood to be sympathetic to proposals from the former prime minister, due to be debated in the Commons on Friday, that would “define sex in law as biological sex”.

The legislation aims to bar transgender women from female-only spaces such as changing rooms and toilets, along with preventing them from competing in women’s sport and stopping children from attempting to change their gender.

But the Cabinet minister is said to regard Ms Truss’s current proposals as “unworkable” and could look to amend them.

A Government aide said: “Kemi is very supportive of the aims of Liz’s Bill but it is unworkable in its current form.

“Nonetheless it can support Kemi’s work on the definition of sex, and colleagues’ work banning puberty blockers, and Liz is keen to help.”

Ms Truss has previously said her Bill would provide a clear dividing line with Labour on what has become one of the main “culture war” issues.

The aide agreed, adding: “The Labour Party is hopelessly split on these issues, so the Conservatives should be open to all ideas to improve protections for women and girls.”

As a backbench Bill, Ms Truss’s proposals are unlikely to become law without Government support, and may not even be debated on Friday as there are two other Bills on the order paper ahead of it.

But the Government is said to be largely sympathetic to her aims, with the Department of Health and Social Care understood to be the final block to accepting the former prime minister’s legislation.

A Whitehall source said: “The Bill has policy consequences which the Government is sympathetic to.

“The only questions which have puzzled ministers is why the MP proposing the Bill did not legislate for the changes when she was minister for women and equalities or when she was prime minister.”

Downing Street would not be drawn on whether the Government would back Ms Truss’s Bill, saying only that it would “be considered in the usual way by the House”.

The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: “But more broadly, we welcome the sentiment set out in the Bill, not least because it is consistent with our own approach on the fundamental importance of biological sex and the right that women have to access dedicated single sex spaces.”

In the Commons, Labour MPs were accused of trying to “talk out” Ms Truss’s Bill by prolonging earlier debates so there is no time left to consider her proposal.

Multiple Labour MPs have spoken in the debate on another Private Members’ Bill on animal welfare, leading Conservative Sally Ann Hart to claim they were trying to avoid debate on Ms Truss’s Bill, saying they had “no interest in safeguarding children against extreme trans ideology”.

But shadow environment minister Steve Reed denied this, saying in a lengthy closing speech that animal welfare was “important”, to cries of “rubbish” from the Conservative benches.

Labour sources also denied that there was an effort to “talk out” Ms Truss’s Bill, pointing to the large volume of correspondence MPs receive from constituents on the subject of animal welfare.

The debate on Ms Truss’s Bill follows the announcement on Tuesday that the NHS will no longer prescribe children puberty blockers, a move welcomed by the Government as being in “the best interests of the child”.

The Government also published draft guidance in December on how schools should support pupils who were questioning their gender, which stated that “parents should not be excluded” from decisions relating to children who want to “socially transition”, for instance by changing names, pronouns or clothing.

Ahead of Friday’s debate, Ms Truss said she was “very much hoping” that the Government would support her Bill, adding: “This would be hugely positive for the protection of children.”

She said: “I have been overwhelmed with supportive messages this week not only from constituents, but from people across the country and indeed all corners of the world who want to see my Bill put into law so that children and women get the protections they need in the face of the extreme agenda being pursued by militant gender ideologues.”