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
- 28 September 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5762711
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I cannot imagine the Member ever getting distressed in the Chamber. His point touched on ideology. That is a very important aspect of the Bill that we are debating. We have a view on the dangerous ideologies that the Bill could bring into law. Does the Member accept, however, that the range of individuals and groups that oppose this dangerous legislation are not just people of faith? I will give an example. I circled some bits of the Gay Men's Network's response to the Bill. It is a UK-based organisation, and the document that I have runs to 57 pages. It is comprehensive, and it is absolutely damning about the Bill. I thank that organisation for being so clear about the dangers that the Bill presents not just to people in Churches, for example, including pastors and ministers, but to those who are same-sex attracted. It is worth reading out point 199 and part of point 200:
"Criminal statutes are serious pieces of legislation with profound effects. They should not be a vehicle for ideological point scoring, and they should not be on the statute books where they risk over criminalisation, serious interference with family life and the chilling of free speech. There is no cogent evidence that conversion practices are widespread or a pressing issue in this country. Such surveys and statistics as have been cited are dubious and produced by self-serving actors with ideological prejudices."
That is from an organisation that does not claim any faith basis but that represents gay men across the UK, and it opposes the Bill. Does the Member agree with the passages that I read out?
273 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: 0.51 (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 (0.71).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.70).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- The overall probability was moderate at most and none of the culture-war criteria was close to being met.
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 | 0.29 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.14 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.05 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.37 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.23 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.71 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.51 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.27 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.02 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.70 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.98 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.02 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:37 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.