Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson approved the advice.

However, Sir Ed has written to Ms Phillipson requesting she withdraw the ECHR guidance, describing it as not “fit for purpose”, the Telegraph reports.

He argued the advice could possibly subject transgender people to harassment and discrimination, which was not “compatible with long-standing British values” and ultimately, the guidance could be clearer.

The Liberal Democrats posted on X the letter Sir Ed and Marie Goldman, MP for Chelmsford and the party’s women and equalities spokeswoman, wrote to the Education Secretary with the accompanying message: “The new EHRC Code of Practice is not fit for purpose.

“It does not provide clear guidance, it does not do enough to protect everyone from discrimination and harassment and it is not compatible with longstanding British values.”

In the letter, Sir Ed and Mrs Goldman said they have spoken to members of the public who are “deeply concerned” to go about their daily lives.

Whilst their letter highlights the issues mainly impact transgender, non-binary and intersex people, they go on to say biological women are voicing concerns the guidance will lead to “gender policing” in which females will have their femininity questioned and “challenged to ‘prove’ their sex”.

However, the Lib Dem statement has attracted criticism – Dr Zoe Hollowood, chairwoman of the women’s rights campaign group in the party accused him of dismissing views of women to prioritise those of trans people.

She said: “Polling consistently shows that Lib Dem voters and members believe single-sex spaces should be protected based on biological sex.

“Ignoring this reality is a betrayal to women everywhere, including in our own party.”

Conservative MP and Opposition Assistant Whip Rebecca Paul told GB News the Lib Dems have “spend years dismissing women’s rights”.

She said: “The Lib Dems cannot even hold a coherent position on biological sex, so it is hardly surprising they struggle to hold a coherent position on anything else.

“The party has spent years dismissing women’s rights and safeguarding concerns, and now that approach has caught up with them.

“Having prioritised activist dogma over common sense, it finds itself unable to agree on guidance that simply reflects legal reality.”

Last year’s Supreme Court ruling, which found the word “sex” in the Equality Act refers to a person’s biological sex rather than their gender identification, triggered the ECHR to release guidance for businesses and public bodies on how to apply the new definition.

The ECHR said they have a duty to have distinct single-sex spaces for changing facilities and toilets.

Trans people, however, should not be asked what sex they are when they use such facilities.

Dr Hollowood said: “Liberal Voice for Women is profoundly disappointed by Ed Davey and Marie Goldman’s recent letter to Bridget Phillipson.

“By focusing on trans inclusion, the Lib Dem leadership has actively chosen to ignore the vast majority of women who rely on single-sex spaces when they are vulnerable and undressing.

“Across the UK, there are many examples of women and girls self-excluding from public life or being penalised simply for standing up for their privacy and safety in single-sex spaces and sports.

“This includes women from ethnic minorities and those who have experienced sexual trauma.”

The latest internal spat in the Lib Dems comes after the party erupted in a similar row at their conference in Bournemouth last September.

Within the first hour of the conference, a row began over trans rights, with gender-critical members forcing a debate and vote which proposed only biological women to take female roles within the party.

However, the motion was swiftly removed from the conference’s agenda after opposing campaigners said it would be used to “legitimise bigotry”, describing those behind the proposal as an “extremist faction”.

Dr Hollowood said the Lib Dem leadership had sidelined women from the conversation entirely, arguing the party’s stated commitment to fairness clearly did not extend to women.

Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat was equally critical, accusing Sir Ed Davey of trying to have it both ways and ending up standing for nothing, saying the party’s position neither recognised the existence of women nor took a clear stance on gender ideology, describing it as a “completely pointless statement, revealing everything”.