Every imported question, contribution and motion, with its classification. Unflagged, uncertain and not-yet-analysed records are all included so the analysis can be checked independently.
The Member is right. Part of the issue around the draconian legislation leads me to clause 9, where the Bill says that, in pursuit of those offences — I want to develop the point about the way in which this will be prosecuted — there is: "No right to claim trial by jury". That is fairly draconian legislation.
I thank the Member for giving way. Whilst the Bill sponsor stated that this was about coercion, in his earlier utterances, he said that it was about not just coercion but suppression. Clause 1 is all about suppression, not coercion: It states: "suppressing the sexual orientation or gender identity". Of course, that…
I thank the Member for his contribution. However, in my reading of the Bill, which I have spent many hours doing over the past weeks and days, I do not think that any of those things are particularly clear, set out or evident from what is actually in the Bill. In many ways, the Bill is quite draconian in its attitude…
I thank the Member for giving way. Again, this is where I think that, at times, common ground in the debate is lost in the heat of media commentary. I agree. People should be free to express views, to seek to influence others and to seek to persuade others. The problem that the Bill seeks to remedy is where people are…
Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. The issue that is before us today is sensitive and emotive. Like you, I hope that the Bill can be discussed with genuine respect and, indeed, kindness. However, where I do disagree —. It is important that eminent KCs have described this legislation as being poorly defined and…
I thank the Member for that. It is really important to put on the record that, where children are harmed in a way that is so distressing, in that they are showing signs of physical or mental harm, that it takes intervention from outside the family home, such as from their education setting or social services, they…
I thank the Member for giving way. I appreciate that it is important for him to have set out from where that definition comes, but I am trying to get to the nub of the question. If the parent believes that they are acting out of love, but the child believes that they are acting in a way that is causing them…
I reiterate the point that, first, all the tests would have to be met: intent; coercive behaviour against a victim; and harm. I have outlined how the harm test is higher and not lower than existing offences of domestic abuse and of cruelty to a child. The definition of "psychological harm" that includes "fear, alarm…
I thank the Member for giving way on that particular point. He has set out that, in a test of reasonableness, a parent could be seen to act from love, compassion and care towards their child. However, when it comes to the particular words in the Bill, such as "coercive behaviour", which was mentioned by the Minister,…
I thank the Member for giving way today. I have two points on reasonableness. It is a tried-and-tested method that has been used in criminal law for years, longer than all of us have been in the Chamber. It is not a new concept; it is something that every person who studies law is taught from their very first day, and…
He is conflating coaching and instructing from the first offence with coercive control as per the second offence. They are two separate things, and they are dealt with very differently. As with domestic abuse, there is a reasonable person test. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that a legitimate exercise in parental…
Thank you. The leader of the Opposition has inadvertently stumbled across one of the key flaws of the Bill. To conflate coercive control in a domestic abuse scenario with coercive control in this scenario is a fatal flaw in the Bill. It is quite appropriate that nobody is allowed to give their spouse instructions…
That is precisely why we have taken the approach of having two separate offences. It is so that the framework on coercive control provides some comfort, is clear and deals with the precedent that has already been set in law. I will give way to Mr Burrows briefly.
I want to make this point, and then I may take some interventions before I conclude. The use of the word "therapy" is essential because, when looking at coaching, instructing, counselling or a purported treatment, a court would have to be satisfied that that was conversion therapy — that it was therapeutic in nature.…
I think that I have dealt with that point on a number of occasions, but I am willing to repeat it because it is really important. There are two offences. The first deals with the more formal provision of therapy, such as someone claiming to have specific knowledge or a specific skill or ability or someone providing…