Stripped Responsibility

The women Labour MPs who want half of Ministers to be women obviously know what a woman is, yet Janet Eastham writes:

The Health Secretary stripped responsibility for a puberty blocker trial from a junior minister who had raised safeguarding concerns, The Telegraph understands.

James Murray stopped Preet Kaur Gill, the minister for health innovation and safety, from taking a leading role on the controversial Pathways trial, according to people familiar with the matter.

The trial will involve 226 children who believe they are transgender being offered puberty-suppressing drugs, with girls as young as 11 and boys as young as 12 eligible.

Ms Kaur Gill, a former social worker and MP for Birmingham Edgbaston, has in the past voiced alarm that “credible safeguarding warnings” about puberty blockers were being ignored.

When she took office in May, replacing Dr Zubir Ahmed, who had resigned in protest against Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership, Pathways was initially included in her portfolio, having previously fallen within Dr Ahmed’s brief.

It is understood that Ms Kaur Gill was preparing to raise concerns about Pathways with officials at the start of last month. At the time, the trial, which had been commissioned following the Cass review to gather data on the side effects of puberty blockers, was on hold over safety concerns.

However, she appears to have been sidelined, and by the time the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) announced on June 19 that Pathways could proceed with minimum age limits introduced, responsibility for the trial had passed to Baroness Merron, the minister for women’s health and mental health.

Three days later, Mr Murray told the Commons that, while he felt “discomfort and unease” at the prospect of trialling children as young as 11 on puberty-suppressing drugs, he thought “proceeding with the trial is, on balance, the most appropriate way forward”.

One Whitehall source told The Telegraph: “If this trial had stayed the responsibility of Preet Gill, she would have rightly cancelled it, at least until the child victims of the appalling Tavistock scandal had been tracked down to find out how badly damaged they are.

“Instead, in an increasingly desperate attempt to go ahead with this shocking trial, it has been taken away from her.”

Another source accused the Health Secretary of ignoring concerns not only from Ms Kaur Gill, but also from two other female health ministers said to have reservations about medicalising gender-questioning children.

“It shows women’s voices are still not being listened to on this issue, and that one man [Mr Murray] – who’s only been there for two seconds – is trying to push it through regardless,” they said.

Change of ministerial responsibilities ‘routine’

A spokesman for the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) insisted that any views Ms Kaur Gill had expressed on gender medicine had “no bearing” on the decision to transfer responsibility for the Pathways trial to Lady Merron.

Officials said the rearrangement of ministerial responsibilities was routine and done to centralise and consolidate roles.

The spokesman added that ultimate decision-making power sat “as it always has” with the Health Secretary, and said it would be “completely untrue” to suggest otherwise.

However, by removing Ms Kaur Gill from the brief, Mr Murray may have reduced the risk of internal opposition as the department faces legal and political challenges aimed at stopping recruitment beginning on Aug 1.

The Conservatives’ June 23 Opposition Day vote to ban puberty blockers was defeated by 283 votes to 112, after two-fifths of MPs, including Andy Burnham, the MP for Makerfield and assumed next prime minister, did not turn up.

The High Court will also hear an application on July 27 for an injunction to halt the trial. It has been brought by campaigners including James Esses, a therapist, the Bayswater Support Group, which supports parents of trans children, and Keira Bell, a detransitioner.

They are seeking a judicial review against the Government over the way Pathways was approved. If granted, the injunction would stop recruitment until the case is heard.

Other dissenting voices

Ms Kaur Gill is not the first senior figure whose role on the trial appears to have been curtailed.

In March, the MHRA announced that its chief medical and scientific officer Prof Jacob George, whose safety concerns had led to Pathways being paused, would no longer be involved.

The agency insisted his recusal was voluntary, and said the decision was taken as a “precaution” after social media posts emerged in which he praised JK Rowling and criticised the denial of “basic biological fact”.

After his intervention, King’s College London, which is running the trial, introduced clearer rules for stopping the drugs if children show reduced bone density and better monitoring of vaginal bleeding.

As minister for health innovation and safety, Ms Kaur Gill is responsible for “research” and “medicines”.

Her predecessor, Dr Ahmed, answered parliamentary questions on Pathways, including on ministerial approval, safeguards and clinician guidance.

A DHSC spokesman also insisted that responsibility for the trial “has not changed”. However, DHSC officials also conceded that the department had assumed Ms Kaur Gill would continue to be involved in Pathways, as Dr Ahmed had been, but this was later changed.

Before becoming a minister, the Labour and Co-operative MP for Birmingham Edgbaston had expressed significant concerns about giving children puberty blockers.

On Dec 17, 2025, during a Commons urgent question, Ms Kaur Gill told Wes Streeting, the then health secretary: “As a former children’s services manager, I am concerned that credible safeguarding warnings from clinicians and academics about puberty suppression in children are not being heard.”

She asked Mr Streeting to meet doctors who held those concerns and to review the lower age limit for the trial. That meeting went ahead in February.

‘Data linkage study’

The Health Minister also appears to have questioned why more efforts are not being made to complete the so-called “data linkage study”, another key Cass recommendation.

The study aims to link the records of former Tavistock patients with their adult NHS records to establish the long-term outcomes of treating children with puberty blockers and hormones.

But it was delayed after some adult gender clinics refused to share data. On Feb 24, Ms Kaur Gill asked whether the health department “will mandate data sharing across NHS trusts and adult gender services to enable a robust, independent longitudinal study consistent with the recommendations of the Cass Review”.

DHSC did not respond to questions from The Telegraph on whether data sharing is now compulsory.