Debate contribution: Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Frew on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Frew
- 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 5707392
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I agree about respect. We must be mindful of the hurt that is out there. I hope that the Member and the House will agree that I have been respectful the whole way through my contribution. However, he has already agreed that heterosexuality is a sexual orientation. That adds to that definition. I also want to address how the Bill will catch a parent who bullies a child into transitioning. What does the Member think about a bullying parent who forces their child to transition? He does not have to answer that question now — I get that it has been a long night — but there is an issue there that needs to be covered in the Bill.
119 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: 0.40 (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 (0.70).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.70).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- The overall probability was low and the text did not adopt any identity-based framing.
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 | 0.16 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.08 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.53 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.25 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.70 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.40 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.70 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.05 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.24 |
| 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 16:22 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.