Debate contribution: Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Phillip Brett on .
- MLA
- Mr Phillip Brett
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 15 September 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5705648
Read the official Assembly record
Text
On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Obviously, your role as Chair is to facilitate debate and discussion, and, obviously, if Members who hold the office of Speaker or Principal Deputy Speaker wish to contribute to a debate, they can do so from the Back Benches and not from the Chair. The point on which I seek clarity is this: "gender identity" is in the Bill, but it is not defined in the Bill or the explanatory and financial memorandum (EFM), so are you saying, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, that you are ruling it out of order for Members to ask questions on legislation on which they will be asked to vote? We are being asked to legalise a term called "gender identity" that the Member has not defined in his legislation. When he was asked to define it, he refused to do so, and you, as Principal Deputy Speaker, then ruled it out of order for us to ask that question. I need clarity from you on that before we are asked to vote on the Bill.
On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.
You cannot do that.
On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.
No, it is not.
May I ask, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, that your ruling and your remarks directed at me be referred to the Speaker? I believe that you have breached your role to chair proceedings impartially and have personally attacked me, which you are entitled to do. You are here, however, as Principal Deputy Speaker to discharge the duties of the Speaker in his absence, to be fair and equitable in your comments and to facilitate debate, not to give your personal opinion, which, in my opinion, you have done. I therefore ask that your remarks be referred to the Speaker's Office.
305 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.30 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.86).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.21 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.47 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.25 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.30 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.86 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.08 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.06 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:20 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.