Debate contribution: International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia
Debate contribution by Mr Eóin Tennyson on .
- MLA
- Mr Eóin Tennyson
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 12 May 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4937962
Read the official Assembly record
Text
As we debate such issues, each of us in the Chamber has a duty to be mindful of the impact of our words, because, whilst this debate is just one of many that we will have, for young LGBTQ+ people out there who are listening, what we say is everything. For them, it is not a debate about political hypotheticals or a culture war; it is about the real challenges that they face as they seek to go about their day-to-day lives. It is about the two thirds of LGBT people in our society who do not hold their partner's hand in public for fear of negative reaction. It is about those who have suffered verbal abuse or physical assault because of who they are. It is about those who have experienced discrimination in the workplace or faced barriers in accessing public services. It is about the fact that more than 40% of LGBT young people have experienced bullying in schools. It is about the fact that LGBTQIA+ people are more than one and a half times more likely to experience depression and anxiety than the rest of the population. It is about the fact that gay and bisexual men are four times more likely to attempt suicide in their lifetime and that 46% — almost half — of our trans community have thought about ending their life. I plead with Members: while it is, of course, right that we debate these issues, which are sensitive and complex, we must approach such debates with the compassion and empathy that they require, as has been referenced by other Members. In debates about section 28 and other issues, we failed a generation. I have no doubt that people in our community died because of the way that they were treated and because of toxic public discourse. Of course, we must come to the Chamber and debate these issues, and, of course, people are entitled to different views. However, I ask Members to be mindful of how they approach these issues. That is exactly what an LGBTQ+ strategy is about: addressing the issues and making life better for a small and marginalised group in our society. It is a sad indictment of the Assembly that this debate is even necessary. Consultation on a sexual orientation strategy was first launched in 2006. Indeed, this is the second time that my party has tabled a motion that calls for progress. The first was tabled 11 years ago. As we stand here, almost two decades on from that first commitment being made, we are the only part of these islands never to have published a strategy to advance the well-being and equality of our LGBTQ+ community. As is so often the case with equality and inclusion in Northern Ireland, we are falling desperately behind. Some have been more interested in frustrating progress, be it by wielding vetoes in the Chamber to block marriage equality or frustrating and delaying efforts to lift the ban on gay men donating blood.
Some will seek to weaponise these issues and to pit marginalised communities against one another, but rights and equality are not finite. By expanding protections to one section of our community, it does not necessarily follow that we must take them from another. None of us in this society will be equal until all of us are equal. Those of us in the Chamber have a responsibility to represent all our constituents: those who vote for us and those who do not; those who email us or contact us on social media and those who do not. The expert panel report was published four years ago. It includes a range of practical recommendations across health, education, safety and employment that would improve the lives of LGBT people. Instead of making progress on those issues, the Communities Minister has refused to meet LGBT organisations since taking up office over a year ago. That speaks, from where I am standing, to a wider disregard or disrespect for sections of our community. I ask the Minister to reflect on that. For my part, however, I am proud of the fact that Alliance is taking forward measures where it has the power to do so. In the absence of action from the Communities Minister, I have recently completed a consultation on proposals to end so-called conversion practices, which are cruel and archaic, send a message to LGBT people that they are ill and in need of a cure or that their identity can and should be changed, and, we know, are deeply damaging to those subjected to them. I am also proud of the fact that my colleague Naomi Long is committing to —.
Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.
788 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: 0.13 (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 (0.69).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.80).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
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 | 0.12 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.06 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.11 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.69 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.13 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.20 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.80 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| 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 12:23 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.