Emails to Liz Truss and the response of the Government Equalities Office

I then received the following reply on 13th February from Alan Chapman, again from GEO correspondence at the Cabinet office:

Dear xxxxx

Thank you for your email of 22 January containing follow-up questions on legal gender recognition and single-sex spaces. To clarify, I am responding on behalf of the Minister for Women and Equalities. The previous response you received should have also stated this, my apologies for any confusion.

The Government Equalities Office agrees with you that every person has a right to dignity and privacy. Under the Equality Act, trans people should be treated according to the gender with which they identify.
There are some exceptions to this set out in the Act, meaning that a trans person can in some cases be excluded from a single-sex service where it is proportionate.

The Government is committed to tackling harassment and abusive behaviours by all individuals, and to ensuring safe-spaces are safe for those using them. Anybody seeking access to spaces such as toilets or changing rooms for malicious or violent purposes can and should be dealt with under existing criminal laws.

As previously mentioned, our response to the consultation on reform of the Gender Recognition Act will be published in due course. The Minister currently has an extremely full diary and is unable to accept your invitation to meet at this time, but I hope that I can sufficiently answer any further questions you have on behalf of the department.

Yours sincerely,
Government Equalities Office
Correspondence Team
@WomenEqualities www.gov.uk/geo

MY BOLD

I received no response, so 3 weeks later on the 11th February I wrote:

Dear Mr Vickery,

I appear not to have had a response to my email of the 22nd Jan. Do you need more time to answer our questions?

On the 22nd January, I responded as follows:

Dear Mr Vickery,

Thank you for your response. I am heartened to read that your department is committed to maintaining the safeguards that protect vulnerable women and to allow organisations to provide single-sex services.

The group of Conservative women that I represent is indeed keen to maintain protections for vulnerable women. However I would like to emphasise that we are not only concerned with vulnerable women: ALL women and girls, whether they consider themselves vulnerable or not, have rights to dignity and privacy, not just safety.
Please could I ask, do you acknowledge that single-sex spaces should be maintained for reasons of dignity and privacy in addition to any safety concerns?

Thank you also for your update on the GRA consultation, Please could you give me an indication of the timescales involved?
For example: how long do you expect the consideration of next steps to take? When do you expect to be able to start implementing these next steps? When can we expect an announcement on the consultation results?

I also asked for an update on the proposed inquiry into the sudden rise in girls wishing to access gender identity services. You may recall this was promised by Penny Mordant some time ago now.
Please could you update me on the progress of this enquiry or let me know when we can expect a public announcement on it?

I must admit I am confused by your mention of 'trans' people in your reply. I did not once mention 'trans' people in my email to Ms Truss. My email was all about maintaining single sex spaces for women and girls, I did not once allege that any problems were created by, or the fault of 'trans' people. I am very surprised you should interpret it that way. I wonder if we are talking at cross purposes a little?
Perhaps your definition of 'trans' would help me understand, as it has no legal definition as far as I am aware?

Please can I clarify: do you recognise, as do the group of women whom I represent, that transwomen must be treated as a sub-group of men as far as safeguarding is concerned? Or are you trying to say that you think the danger of Self ID is only that predatory men (who are not trans) may abuse the system and that transwomen (as a group) are not a threat in women's spaces in the same way that other men are?

I, and a number of other Conservative-supporting women are still keen to meet with Ms Truss. This is an issue of great importance to women across the political spectrum. We see huge numbers of women who traditionally supported other parties saying they feel politically homeless and we feel there is a big opportunity for our party to attract the support of women. I would love to be able to go back to the Conservative Women’s Pledge Group and let them know that Ms Truss is open to talking with us about this.
Please can you let me know how I can go about organising a meeting with Ms Truss on behalf of the Conservative Women’s Pledge Group?

Finally, I am rather confused as to whom you are responding to me on behalf of. Is it on behalf of Ms Truss? You say you are responding AS the Minister of Equalities, who I believe is Baroness Williams? Are you in fact responding on behalf of the GEO? Or are you passing on the response of the Baroness?
I would be grateful if you could clarify which person and department I am dealing with, as I directed my initial email to Ms Truss.

I hope you can answer my questions (I have marked them in bold, above, for convenience).

Kind regards

On the 21st January, I received the following reply from David Vickery, GEO correspondence at the Cabinet office:

Dear xxxxx,

Thank you for your email of 7 January, addressed to the Secretary of State, about the Gender Recognition Act 2004. I am replying as the Minister for Equalities.

Reform of the Gender Recognition Act would have an impact across several different public services and it is imperative that any changes work effectively and have support. We have analysed over 100,000 responses to the consultation and are working hard with colleagues across Whitehall and relevant agencies to consider the appropriate next steps.
We are aware that people have concerns about how any reforms to the gender recognition process might have an impact on the provision of single-sex services and on certain privisions in sport, prisons and schools.

We are committed to maintaining the safeguards that protect vulnerable women and allow organisations to provide single-sex services. Concerns of predatory men seeking to find ways to harm women are legitimate. However, this is not a new problem and is not a problem created by, or the fault of trans people. This problem needs specific attention and the Government is committed to tackling harassment and abusive behaviours by all individuals.

We will publish our response to the consultation once these next steps have been agreed.

Thank you for writing to us on this important topic and laying out your views.

Yours sincerely,

Government Equalities Office

On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 I wrote to Liz Truss as follows;

Dear Ms Truss

In your capacity as Minister for Women and Equalities I am sure you are familiar with this issue.

We are a group of Conservative women voters and members who would like you to speak out in defence of the rights of women and girls, and say NO to SelfID.

The GRA is bad law, and ideally should be repealed, but it would be a start if politicians could reassure women and girls' that single sex spaces are just that; single SEX, not 'gender'. No man can become a woman, despite the legal fiction of a Gender Recognition Certificate, and no man should be able to access our private spaces just by identifying' as a woman.

Many organisations, companies, and even the NHS and our prisons, are allowing 'self ID', allowing men into toilets, changing rooms, sports, hospital wards, even prisons, on the basis of them 'identifying' as women, even though the law allows single sex spaces. Many have been lobbied by groups like Stonewall, who have campaigned for the removal of the single sex exemptions in the 2010 Equality Act and have often wilfully misinformed organisations of the law, under the guise of 'inclusion'.

This must stop. Women are allowed single sex spaces for reasons of privacy, dignity, and safety. We know you know this, you have spoken about it, but we now need someone to stand up to the lobby groups.

Women are beginning to work together on a cross party basis, and we would very much like to be able to speak with you in person.
We note that the results of the consultation on the GRA have still not been published, nor have we heard any more about the proposed enquiry into the sudden rise of girls being referred to 'gender' clinics. We would appreciate an update on both of these issues.

We look forward to hearing from you, and would like to speak with you at your earliest convenience.

Kind regards