THE Government should be able to order pension bosses to protect the rights of a York woman whose husband is about to undergo a sex change operation, according to Hugh Bayley.

The City MP is trying to amend the Gender Recognition Bill after again highlighting the plight of the couple, who live in York.

The couple, who have been married for 35 years and have three children, want to continue living together after the man has surgery to become a woman.

But if the transsexual then opts to register his new sex as a woman, they will have to divorce under current laws.

As a result, the woman will lose her entitlement to a share of her husband's private occupational pension.

Mr Bayley read out a letter from the woman, who does not want to be named, in the Westminster committee considering the Bill - which allows transsexuals to register their new sex for the first time.

He stressed the couple, whose case was first revealed by the Evening Press last month, wanted the Bill changed to allow them to remain married.

But Mr Bayley said that, if this is not possible, the Government should make sure the woman does not lose out.

Ministers should be given the power to allow a couple to retain the pension rights and benefits both held at the time the sex swap was registered.

He pointed out this would not impose any extra burden on the pension company, which would already be expected to pay. Also, the sex swap would not make either party likely to live any longer, which would increase the total cost of the premium.

Mr Bayley, who is a member of the committee, said: "Both partners are at the end of their working life - she does not have any opportunity to make alternative provision for her retirement.

"Yet, if her husband applies for recognition in his new gender, she will lose her security in retirement.

"What is so wrong with the Bill is that the invidious choice whether to put gender recognition or the marriage first rests solely with a transsexual person.

"It cannot be right to pass a measure that affects both partners of a marriage equally, but gives one less protection for their human rights.

"It gives the non-transsexual less protection for his or her human rights than the other partner in the marriage."

Junior Constitutional Affairs Minister David Lammy has promised the Government will "look closely" at pension arrangements.

Updated: 10:36 Thursday, March 11, 2004