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
- 22 September 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5741263
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I am sorry; I misconstrued the Member's question. The Education Minister — Paul Givan; he is speaking as a private Member — is correct in that there is a constraint. It has to be a regulatory body under section 25 of the National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002. The exclusion is specifically for healthcare professionals. I apologise if that was not the thrust of your question, Deborah. There is no blanket exclusion for other settings, because we know that abuse can happen in religious settings — we are all too well aware of that from some recent scandals — and in the home, so it would not be appropriate to have that. Such bodies are regulated, and their code of ethics would prevent them from engaging in conversion therapy anyway, so it removes a chill factor while providing reassurance for professionals that they will not be prosecuted for engaging in legitimate healthcare provision. There are other safeguards that we have debated at length: the reasonableness defence, the harm test and the definition of coercion. Mr Frew mentioned the difference between clause 1 and the second offence. I have said that it is not my intention that ministers, pastors or parents be tested against the first offence; my intention is that they be tested against the second offence. I have explained why, given the structure of the Bill, my view is that that is the outworking. I have also clearly said to the Minister today that, if people want that additional clarity, I am happy to look at an amendment to the Bill to bring the comfort that, Members say, they want.
It has to be a regulatory body as per the definition in the National Health Service Reform and Health Care Professions Act 2002. A church could not just be added to the list, because a church is not a regulatory body. They are not professionals and are not subject to a code of ethics in the same way. For example, the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) is not on the list, but it would be eligible to be added to the list, if the Minister deemed that it was appropriate to do so. There is a constraint in that it is supposed to be a healthcare exemption, not a broader exemption for other organisations. That would create a loophole in the legislation.
397 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Awaiting analysis
This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.