The following report appeared in today’s ‘Belfast Newsletter’, Friday 6th December.
In it, the ‘Christian Institute’ indicates the dangers that will arise from the legislation which the Alliance Party deputy leader, Eoin Tennyson revealed his proposals on Thursday.
Tennyson professes openly that he is a sodomite!
Here is the report by Philip Bradfield.
Alliance Party proposals to criminalise conversion therapy could see parents jailed for up to seven years “when they discourage their child from gender transition or sexual experimentation” a Christian charity has warned.
Anyone convicted is also liable to a fine of up to £5,000.
Alliance Deputy leader Eoin Tennyson revealed his proposals on Thursday, saying he was frustrated by delays at Stormont and Westminster to outlaw the practice.
Mr Tennyson proposes two new criminal offences – engaging in conversion practice and removing a person from NI for conversion practice.
He proposes that convictions must m eet four tests;- provision of a service; intent to change someone’s orientation or gender identity; targeted at an individual; harm must be caused.
The only defence would be that the accused’s conduct “was reasonable in the circumstances”.
Anyone convicted would face up to seven years in jail and / or a fine of up to £5000.
See his proposals in full HERE
But James Kennedy, NI Policy Officer with the Christian Institute, now says the Scottish Government gave up on similar legislation this year due to risk of legal challenge, asking Westminster to legislate instead.
He said Alliance has published a flow chart for the bill almost identical to Scottish proposals.
Mr Kennedy said: “Thankfully, abusive practices are already outlawed in Northern Ireland. Christians oppose verbal and physical abuse.”
He added: “Mr Tennyson has copied the threshold from the Scottish plans. The broad definition of ‘harm’ would mean a parent could be prosecuted when they discourage their child from gender transition or sexual experimentation. Even saying ‘you might regret it’ could be seen as causing fear and thus be illegal.
“It is no surprise the Scottish Government were swift to abandon the plans out of fear they would face judicial review. With parents facing seven-year jail sentences, and pastors unable to pray with church members or encourage repentance.”
He said the Stormont Department for Communities paid the Rainbow Project to provide it with case studies, but the academics drafted in “quickly ran out of interview subjects” and “not one case they reported suggested there is a need to change the law”.
He noted the following reactions were given to the Scottish proposals:
A Telegraph headline said: “Parents who refuse children gender change face seven years in jail in Scotland”.
The Law Society of Scotland warned that it would criminalise “praying with anyone about their sexual ethics or sexual behaviour, or offering counselling on such issues”.
Aidan O’Neill KC told The Christian Institute the proposals contravened the European Convention on Human Rights on four grounds.
The Catholic Church said the plans could create “a chilling effect and may criminalize advice or opinion given in good faith” while the Free Church of Scotland said: “Sweeping new provisions have been drafted that could criminalise conversations and other interactions that are lawful and legitimate in a free society”.
An Alliance Party spokesman responded: “This proposed Bill is intended to deal with only the most serious, coercive and harmful behaviour. It would not prohibit expression of religious views or norms. Nor would it infringe on parental rights and responsibilities already established in law.
“In defining coercive behaviour, the proposal leans heavily on definitions which already operate in Northern Ireland under domestic abuse law. However, this is a consultation process and we welcome all views and responses people wish to submit.”
The Rainbow Project has also been invited to comment.
TORY AND LABOUR PLANS FOR CONVERSION THERAPY
A ban on conversion therapy, which aims to suppress or change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity, was first promised in 2018, by former Conservative prime minister Theresa May.
It was later downgraded under Boris Johnson’s leadership not to include transgender people, but the Conservative government under Rishi Sunak said in January 2023 that it would ban conversion therapy for “everyone”, including transgender people.
This did not come to pass, with the Tories saying legislation around such practices “is a very complex issue, with existing criminal law already offering robust protections”.
In July, announcing that work will begin on a ban, Sir Keir Starmer said it was “a promise that has lingered in the lobby of good intentions for far too long”.
Former Conservative health secretary Victoria Atkins previously warned that this could be “ripe territory for the law of unintended consequences”, with concerns around the potential for criminalising people who are trying to support those with “gender distress”.
The new Labour Government has said its Bill, for England and Wales, “must not cover legitimate psychological support, treatment, or non-directive counselling” and “must also respect the important role that teachers, religious leaders, parents and carers can have in supporting those exploring their sexual orientation or gender identity”.
It said the Bill will propose new offences covering practices not captured by existing legislation.
It said: “The Government wants to ensure that the criminal law offers protection from these abusive practices, while also preserving the freedom for people, and those supporting them, to explore their sexual orientation and gender identity.
“This will mean those providing medical care and support are in no way impacted by this Bill.”
Labour referred to research by LGBT+ anti-abuse charity Galop in 2022 which said trans people are “significantly more likely to be subjected to conversion practices”.
The Government has insisted there is cross-party and cross-society consensus to see conversion practices banned, and pledged to “work closely with everyone and bring everyone with us” in developing legislation.
News of the draft Bill was welcomed by LGBTQ+ campaigning organisation Stonewall, which said: “Each day that these abusive practices remain legal, our communities are put at risk”.
Noting the six-year wait since a ban was first promised, the organisation called on Labour to “urgently publish a comprehensive Bill to ban these abhorrent practices once and for all”.
But LGB Alliance, a charity formed in recent years to support the rights of same-sex attracted people, voiced concerns about whether, in the case of those questioning their gender, any new legislation “would make it illegal for a therapist to ask a young person to consider why they want to change their body”.
Dr Roman Raczka, president-elect of the British Psychological Society, said any new legislation “must be very clear that it will not prevent ethical forms of therapy, which are non-directive and non-judgmental” when it comes to people wanting help in exploring their sexual orientation or gender identity.
He added: “The Government must make an explicit distinction between so called ‘conversion therapy’ and normal ethical practice.”
Conservative MP Sir Julian Lewis suggested “well-intentioned” laws could result in punishing “thought crime”.
The MP for New Forest East said he wanted to leave a question “hanging in the air”, telling the Commons: “Anybody who votes for this change needs to be able to answer this point – what is it that you’re proposing to outlaw that isn’t already forbidden under existing laws?
“The danger with well-intentioned laws of this nature is that you can end up in a situation where what you’re really talking about is thought crime, and 75 years after George Orwell’s 1984 was published – or maybe it’s 76 years now, technically speaking – we need to be wary of that.”
Sir Julian said he disagreed with a constituent who is “fanatically opposed” to abortion and wants to “pray internally” while standing on the pavement near an abortion clinic.
But the MP added: “He’s in a position where, if he’s asked by the police what he is doing, if he says, ‘I’m thinking about my shopping list’ or ‘I’m thinking about some other domestic issue’, he’s fine, but if he actually admits he is praying in relation to the abortion issue he could end up being accused of committing an offence.
“Be careful before you go down that road too far.”