Welcome to Political Fix from the Financial Times with me, Lucy Fisher.

The UK Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling this week about the legal definition of a woman.

We'll discuss the political implications of the judgment on this most fiercely debated of topics.

Plus, we'll fill it the government's

rush to take control of British steel from its Chinese owner and examine what it means for

Chinese involvement in other critical UK sectors going forward. With me to discuss it all are my

colleagues Anna Gross. Hi Anna. Hi Lucy. And Robert Shimsley. Hi, Robert. Hello, Lucy.

So, on Wednesday, the UK's Highers Court ruled that the definition of a woman inequality legislation refers to someone who is biologically female.

The Supreme Court found in a unanimous decision that the meaning of woman in anti-discrimination law

does not extend to a trans woman with a gender recognition certificate.

Robert, it's been a big moment, hasn't it?

Obviously, welcomed by groups that campaigned for the primacy of sex-based rights,

criticised by activists who campaign for transgender rights. Could you give us just a sort of

brief sense of how we got to this point and how it ended up at the Supreme Court?

Just a brief one, Lucy. Well, I mean, I think fundamentally, I would take this back to the battle

over gender self-recognition. Prior to that, there was a process under which a trans person,

and although it is both men and women, the fundamental issue has always been around trans women.

Prior to that, there was a process by which people were recognised as having transitioned from

one gender to another, and it was quite cumbersome and slow, and I think it was two years.

And the move towards this notion of gender self-ID and the idea that once we had to

recognize this the moment somebody said they were now of a different gender, lies behind

a lot of the arguments, I think, that followed. But fundamentally, I think it became a major

...