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
- 22 September 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5741151
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for giving me a second intervention. I am on a run here. I am thankful to the Member. There has been a lot of framing from the other side of the Chamber — particularly, I have to say, from Sinn Féin — that, somehow, it represents all the LGBTQI+X community in Northern Ireland and that, somehow, that amorphous body is all tremendously supportive of the Bill. You have just quoted Dennis Noel Kavanagh from the Gay Men's Network. Are you aware that the Gay Men's Network is opposing the conversion practices Bill in the UK if it proceeds? Are you aware of that?
107 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: 0.45 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- Criteria met: Identity framing (0.66).
- The text reports, quotes or asks about the framing rather than adopting it (0.54).
- 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 | 0.66 | Yes |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.10 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.07 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.27 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.36 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.38 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.45 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.15 |
| Reports or questions it (chosen) | 0.54 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.22 |
| Adopts it | 0.09 |
| 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 16:41 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.