Debate contribution: Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Peter Martin on .
- MLA
- Mr Peter Martin
- 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 5706636
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for his response. To be absolutely clear, I accept his comments about people perhaps not wanting to be identified specifically, but let me develop that argument a little bit. He could have asked, for example, "Do you live in Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, England, Scotland or Wales?" and identified how many people who responded to his consultation are from Northern Ireland. It is fair to say that we can now assume, from his response, that we have no way of knowing whether the vast majority of people who responded to the consultation actually live in Northern Ireland, which is where we are talking about the legislation taking effect. I will stay on the supporting evidence for a moment.
Yes, of course.
I thank the Member for her intervention. The Member is correct that the number that we are talking about is incredibly small — much too small, I think, to give cause for legislation, but I will park that for a second. However, I think that those who are listening to the debate today have understood — I have certainly understood it — that what we are talking about is the overreach that a piece of legislation that could well affect only a tiny number of people will have in this country.
I will give way to my colleague in a second. We have talked at length about the impact that this could have on parents, therapists, clinicians, ministers, pastors and so forth. We are talking about a piece of legislation that covers a very specific area — one that is way smaller than domestic abuse legislation or even stalking legislation — but that has massive overreach.
I completely agree with my colleague. I will come on to that later in my comments.
299 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: 0.16 (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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.85).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.10 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.10 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.08 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.85 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.16 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.91 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.02 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.02 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:22 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.