MPs to introduce bill to ban so-called conversion therapy - Drafted by Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle

[IwantToRetire]

A bill will be introduced to the House of Commons which would ban all forms of so-called conversion therapy.

Backbench MPs from several parties have come together to draft the legislation after the government failed to deliver its promised ban.

The bill – seen exclusively by ITV News – seeks to “prohibit practices whose predetermined purpose is to change or suppress a person’s sexuality, or change or suppress a person to or from being transgender."

It will be tabled (introduced) in the Commons on Wednesday.

Drafted by Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle, the bill has the support of nine Conservative MPs, including the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee Caroline Nokes, Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee Alicia Kearns, and Vice Chair of Conservative backbench 1922 Committee William Wragg.

The legislation won’t be voted on until March at the earliest, when it threatens to divide the Conservative Party.

Backbench MPs can introduce bills – known as private members bills – but only a minority become law, normally requiring the support of the government to pass various parliamentary hurdles.

Full story here https://www.itv.com/news/2023-12-04/mps-to-introduce-bill-to-ban-so-called-conversion-therapy

(What is odd is only last week there was a news story about a private members Bill being presented in the House of Lords re conversion therapy - see https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4939293-a-new-bill-to-ban-conversion-therapy-will-be-debated-in-parliament-after-all)

PMBs really need govt support to pass, though, and surely the Tories won't want this hot potato before an election? Labour might, afterwards, though.

That's the worry - and mixing the T with the LGB is a big problem. Last time round it would have prevented children from accessing neutral counselling. Given LR-M's track record that is probably going to be the least of it this time round.

Dont forget the Ts got really irrate that those who pointed out there is a big difference between denying that someone might be same sex attracted, and automatically affirming someone is not the sex they are born, were listened to.

So of course they are trying to push through the same arguement that failed last time.

Haven't looked, but it might be worth comparing the wording of the two different private members bill apparently trying to secure the same aim.

Surely if the bill was to ban conversion therapy for LGB it wouldn't be controversial and should be totally supported.
Once again the T have piggybacked on this and caused delays and confusion.

My MP has been primed already for a while on what 'conversion therapy' actually means and assures me that many are perfectly wise to it. Bring on the rows. As with the Liz Truss bill. Get it all out.

And let's hear the twits rant about down with homosexuality and equality for women. Names, faces, publicity and sunlight. Bring it on.

Paul Brand abusing his position at ITV again to push his personal agenda. This should not be the main headline for today, and this is again ITV letting staff get too powerful.

Drafted by Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle

Does the Commons accept draft bills written in crayon?

I notice it’s “sexuality” (not a protected characteristic under EA2010) in LLoyd Mole’s proposal and not “sexual orientation” (a protected characteristic under EA2010). Would so called “‘MAPs” describe their interest in children as a sexuality?

😂👍

"to or from", eh? Hmm.

@theilltemperedclavecinist

"to or from", eh? Hmm.

Yeah, I spotted that. Could be a little bit subversive!

If it only applies in cases where the purpose is to change or suppress then its results might not be too draconian.

It's not the purpose of exploratory therapy to come to any preordained outcome. There could be, of course, function creep and it ends up being a catch-all.

I have little regard for the drafter of this legislation and I'm sure he'll stuff it up somehow.