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

Debate contribution by Mrs Deborah Erskine on 22 September 2026.

MLA: Mrs Deborah Erskine
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 5741340

Text

Absolutely. Members may shake their heads at that, but this is what we are trying to drill down into; it is scrutiny of the legislation. The legislation will have to fly when it goes outside these doors, as I continually say, and the courts will have to look at and make a judgement call on this. In an intervention last week, Miss McAllister said that children should be aware of services outside the home to help them in certain situations in which they may question or want to talk about their gender identity. Although the Minister of Education is in the Chamber in his capacity as an MLA for Lagan Valley, I am sure that he will share my concern about that. There is no exemption for teachers. There is no exemption for charitable organisations that may go into schools to provide pastoral support, sitting down with children and talking through their concerns. It is not a worry just for parents; it could be particularly worrying for our pastoral teachers, our youth workers and many bodies that work in the education sector.
Yes, I am happy to give way.

189 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: 0.38 (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 (0.80).
No identity-based framing was identified (0.68).
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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
Question	Probability	Met?
Identity framing	0.15	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.16	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.03	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.38	No
Controversy escalation	0.18	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.80	Yes
Overall judgement	0.38	Between thresholds

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.68
Reports or questions it	0.08
Criticises or condemns it	0.01
Adopts it	0.23

Subject area (top five)
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.

Challenge this classification