This is written in a personal and emotive style, because that tends to resonate with MPs.

Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 23:09:45 +0100 From: Eleanor Clifford To: Joe Powell MP Subject: My human rights under the ECHR have been violated. As my MP, will you stand up for me? Dear Joe Powell, I write to you as your constituent, but also as a woman who is shocked and afraid, a woman who has been forced to watch as her fundamental human rights are steadily dismantled. Our continuing trajectory as a country has now become so bleak that I have had to begin preparing contingency plans to flee elsewhere in Europe. As you will be aware, the Supreme Court recently adjudicated that despite the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (GRA2004) clearly stating that a trans women's "sex becomes that of a woman" "for all purposes" when a Gender Recognition Certificate is issued, the Equality Act 2010 somehow simply ignores this, along with the EU law it was required to comply with when it was written, and implicitly imposes it's own incompatible definition, nullifying major parts of the GRA2004. Following this, the so-called Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has issued further trans-exclusionary guidance beyond even that required by the ruling, such as a full and seemingly mandatory bathroom ban. Meanwhile, Metropolitan Police guidance now suggests that when I travel to London to peacefully protest, I run the risk of being subjected to sexual assault by a man with impunity, under the guise of a strip search. As you will also be aware, the GRA2004 was enacted as a result of the UK being found in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in 2002. As the GRA2004 is undone, the UK is in violation once again. If I need to use the bathroom in public, new guidance suggests I be forced to "out" myself as trans by using a bathroom that does not match my appearance. Not only does this violate Article 8 of the ECHR, the "right to respect for private and family life", but it puts me at an even higher risk of violence than I already (increasingly) am. It's not just trans women like me, either -- cis women are now at risk of being harassed and "transvestigated" in the bathroom if they are gender non-conforming, and trans men risk being accused of predatory behaviour if they comply with the law, or worse, excluded from all bathrooms entirely. It's not just Article 8, either. The Supreme Court refused to listen to any trans people in their proceedings despite the profound implications their ruling would have on our lives, squarely violating Article 6 of the ECHR, the "right to a fair trial". Article 11, the "right to freedom of association", is also put in question by the seemingly mandatory nature of the bathroom ban. Amongst all of this, rhetoric and policy has increasingly used the phrase 'biological sex' to mean sex assigned at birth, a phraseology that, in the words of the British Medical Association's resident doctors conference, is 'reductive, trans and intersex-exclusionary, and biologically nonsensical'. It is of material importance in this matter that we call things what they are, and it cannot be overstated that the entire purpose of gender-affirming care is to modify attributes of biological sex! I can personally attest to the fact that it certainly does its job! I am a living, breathing, biological woman, regardless of what the judiciary or government think, and that will only become more true as time goes on. To deny that, as the resident doctors put it, 'has no basis in science or medicine'. The Supreme Court may have the power to interpret legislation, but it is members of Parliament like you who have the power to create and amend it. Likewise, the EHRC may propose guidance, but it is members of Parliament who have the power to make it statutory. Will you use this power to stand up for the human rights of your constituents? If you will, here are some concrete actions I hope you will take: 1. Urgently contact Bridget Phillipson MP, the Minister for Women and Equalities, asking her to rescind her comments suggesting trans people should use facilities corresponding to their sex assigned at birth, pointing out that the Supreme Court did not require this, and explaining that it would violate Article 8 of the ECHR and create a legal and societal disaster for the Government. 2. When the interim EHRC guidance is brought before parliament, put down a 'Prayer Motion' to stop the clock until the EHRC actually engages with the trans community and produces guidance that is workable and complies with the ECHR, as the Supreme Court did not do, and as a mere 2 weeks of consultation will not be nearly enough time to do. 3. Speak out for trans people, in parliament and in public, disavowing the 'biological sex' framing and challenging media figures and MPs, including prominent members of the Labour party, who openly engage in harassment against trans people in their rhetoric. I hope you will take the right path, because my life and my future may well depend on it. Yours sincerely, Eleanor Clifford

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 14:24:14 +0000 (UTC) From: Joe Powell MP To: Eleanor Clifford Subject: Response from Office of Joe Powell MP

Dear Eleanor Clifford,

Thank you for writing to me about this important and sensitive issue.

The Data (Use and Access) Bill sets out a framework for digital verification services, allowing people to securely share trusted information online. New Clause 21, proposed by the Opposition, would have required public bodies to record sex as biological sex where such data is collected.

I did not support this amendment, and it was not added to the Bill. The Government also opposed it, expressing concern that it would go beyond the scope of a recent Supreme Court ruling by allowing the Secretary of State to define sex as biological in all contexts.

During the debate, Ministers made clear that the Bill does not change how sex or gender can be evidenced. It simply allows people to present the same information digitally that they can already present physically. These services are expected to be used mainly for things like proving age, address, or qualifications—areas where sex or gender is generally not relevant.

The Government has also confirmed that it does not intend to bring forward similar legislation in the future.
I want to be clear that I believe trans people deserve to be treated with dignity, compassion, and respect. While the Supreme Court ruling emphasized the legal importance of biological sex in certain contexts, it also reaffirmed that trans people are protected under the law and should be able to live free from discrimination and harassment.

Thank you again for taking the time to share your views. I appreciate hearing from you.

With best wishes,

Joe

Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2025 18:48:52 +0100 From: Eleanor Clifford To: Joe Powell MP Dear Joe, Thank you for your response, and thank you for coming to meet with my mum and I last Wednesday in Westminster. It was great to hear from you how supportive you are of the trans community, and how willing you are to do what you can to protect us, and ensure that the new statutory guidance coming as a result of the Supreme Court ruling will be as trans inclusive as possible. I want to raise two further things with you today. Firstly, I would like to point you to my response to the EHRC's recent consultation on their interim guidance, which I hope will solidify for you some of the points I have made, and link them directly to the words on the page of the interim guidance (which I hope Parliament will review very carefully). You can find that here: https://eleanor.clifford.lol/outbox/ehrc-consultation.html Secondly, I want to ask that you please stop using "biological sex", or ("biological woman" etc) in the way that the Supreme Court has. The fact is that biological attributes of sex like hormones and sex characteristics can be changed, and even many cis people's chromosomes are not what they expect. A better term to use would be "sex recorded (or 'registered' or 'assigned') at birth", or, slightly less clear but still okay: "birth sex". This isn't just pedantry -- it's really important. Using "biological sex", even innocently, launders into public discourse the false idea that there is some important biological essence of sex that cannot be changed, and thereby denies the reality that trans people experience, one of our bodies truly biologically changing in sex due to the wonders of medical technology. The fact is that, trans or not, I am a living, breathing, biological woman, and the courts don't get to decide that, biology does! Thank you again for your time, Eleanor