Debate contribution: Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Eóin Tennyson on .

MLA
Mr Eóin Tennyson
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
15 September 2026
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5706765

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The Member has overlooked, again, that the Bill is explicit that failure to do a thing is not a conversion practice; that is in the Bill. Therefore, not acting in a particular way would not be captured; it has to be proactive coercive behaviour. Aidan O'Neill is one KC. He is a KC who also said that equal marriage would pose serious human rights challenges in Scotland. As far as I know, the sky has not fallen in since equal marriage was introduced in Scotland. He is an ideological actor, and if Members are relying solely on his advice, I question the quality of their contributions to the debate.

109 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.26 (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 (0.85).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.10No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.04No
Cultural grievance politics0.03No
Dog-whistle messaging0.12No
Controversy escalation0.33No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.54No
Overall judgement0.26At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.85
Reports or questions it0.01
Criticises or condemns it0.08
Adopts it0.06
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.99
No identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

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.

Challenge this classification