Draft Conversion Practices Bill - published

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/draft-conversion-practices-bill

Bumping this to say that the Free Speech Union is running a petition to try to get the Conversion Practices Bill stopped Apparently Burnham is thought to be going ahead with it - but he has plenty on his plate and maybe it wouldn't take much obvious opposition to get him to give up on it.

Stick fsu conversion practices petition into a search engine and it should come up: headline is Stop the Conversion Therapy Ban.

(There doesn't seem to be a similar petition on the parliamentary petitions site. I'm not sure if that's just because nobody's developed one or if it's somehow against the rules there. I'm not up for being one of the real names on such a thing, right now, but if someone starts one, do announce it here and I'll sign!)

Done.

The petition needs many more signatures.

New article from TerfTimes, from 28 August 2026, written by LGBA:

Caring will be criminalised | TERF Times

Caring will be criminalised

The Conversion Practices Bill risks turning parents, teachers and counsellors into criminals for helping children understand that they may simply grow up to be same-sex attracted, writes LGB Alliance’s Campaigns Manager.

There is something deeply perverse about watching gay rights being used to make it harder for children to grow up gay. And that’s why, at LGB Alliance, we’re opposing the Draft Conversion Practices Bill....

The Government says parents have nothing to fear, but there is no general exemption for them, or for teachers, friends, charities and pastoral workers. Nor is the threat of criminal prosecution the Bill’s only means of enforcement. It also creates Conversion Practice Protection Orders (CPPOs). These are civil orders and do not require somebody first to have been prosecuted or convicted. Police and local authorities can apply for them; family courts can make them during existing proceedings; and urgent orders can initially be made without the accused even being present. Breach an order without reasonable excuse and you could land in prison....

This hasn't been much in the news lately, but the govt are pressing on with it? Wasn't it hoped that this was one of those things that Burnham might quietly drop? Why the need for this legislation anyway?

Burnham seems to be trying to keep all his options available, including reviving the assisted dying issue (saw something briefly in the news earlier). I don't think he's even begun to consider how many of these issues he actually wants to let go, so he's juggling all his balls at once... (sorry 😬)

He's blowing with the wind at the moment (shades of Starmer) - oh, I forgot, it's called "Labour" and "being a politician."

Well one of the things said about AB is that he is/was a more 'adept' politician than Starmer (however much of a double-edged compliment that might be), and surely one of the first rules is, don't go seeking out contentious problems when you've got plenty on your plate already.

Cynically, he probably calculates this will appease his Onmicausers when it turns out he can't make billionaires magically pay for an entire population's needs and wants.

There's no actual monetary cost to this, whereas addressing real problems like underfunded public services beyond tinkering at the edges is probably impossible now.

Surprise, surprise ... as predicted

From TerfTimes, 29 August 2026:

Stonewall haunting No.10 | TERF Times

Stonewall haunting No.10

The Government’s “best evidence available” leads straight to Stonewall and a survey claiming that one in ten LGBT adults has undergone an exorcism

There is just one click between an official government document on the conversion-therapy ban and Stonewall, the wounded giant of trans lobbying.

The keen-eyed warrior women of Transgender Trend drew attention to the connection on X. Footnote three of the Government’s Draft Equality Impact Assessment links directly to a Stonewall campaign page promoting a ban, complete with an invitation to donate....

The campaign has outlived Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, the lettuce, Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir Starmer. The draft Bill has now washed up in Andy Burnham’s in-tray.

Labour says the proposed offence is tightly drawn and will criminalise only abusive conduct intended to change somebody’s sexual orientation or transgender identity where it causes serious harm, alarm or distress. Critics fear that its elastic language could still place parents, therapists and teachers in legal jeopardy for challenging a child’s belief that he or she is transgender.... [my bold]

Thanks for the link, our government letting the activists doing their thinking for them again.

"But appeasing swivel-eyed activists in and outside parliament with criminal law is dangerous business. A campaign built on a laughable exorcism statistic ought to have given up the ghost. Instead, it looks set to haunt us all."

I couldn't agree more, but the government seem's impervious to learning any lessons.
I remember there was a comment on another thread (or possibly this one) that shared a tweet from someone who had worked out that if the exorcism figures were true, then the clergy would be performing more exorcism than marriages every year.

Also FYI, from UKCP (UK Council for Psychotherapy)

Thanks to @Imnobody4

https://www.pcpb.org.uk/consultation-opens-into-conversion-practices-and-gsrd-guidelines/

Consultation opens into conversion practices and GSRD guidelines
A 12-week consultation has opened on work to define conversion practices and set out good practice principles for psychological professionals working with gender, sexuality and relationship diversity (GSRD).

The work is being carried out by the Partnership of Counselling and Psychotherapy Bodies (PCPB), the British Psychological Society (BPS) and the Association of Child Psychotherapists (ACP) and is led by an independent development team. All participating organisations are clear in their opposition to conversion practices.

The consultation opens on Tuesday 25 August 2026 and closes at midday on Tuesday 17 November 2026.

There is concern about how this consultation is being conducted:

https://x.com/i/status/2093715470847197559

The thing is the bill as it stands is a problem for both sex realists and the gender lobby. Arguably it could criminalise both giving useful advice to gender distressed teens and the affirmative advice as well. If you look at the way the TAs talk about it they hate that it doesn't explicitly outlaw anyone that says sex is real and they are paranoid it will be used against them.

It is potentially a bill that will satisfy no-one. Burnham might think that is a safe option, but it really won't be.

So we might see amendments to make it more safe and too make it worse be proposed. Long way to go yet.

In case this has not been posted here already, thanks to @AimsAndObjectives

One to watch: Ban Conversion Practices Coalition

Ban Conversion Practices was created in July 2020 calling on the UK Government to commit to a full legislative ban.

https://www.banconversionpractices.com/about

This webpage has a list of their coalition members, including Amnesty International (natch).

It’s OK To Be Gay. Say no to a Bill that makes conversations about sexuality harder.

Tuesday 1 September 2026 | Houses of Parliament, London
The Government’s Draft Conversion Practices Bill is being presented as a law that will protect lesbian, gay and bisexual people. We believe it could do the opposite.

It could make parents afraid to ask questions, therapists afraid to explore same-sex attraction and young people less likely to hear: You might be gay. And that is absolutely ok.

On Tuesday 1 September, LGB Alliance supporters from across the country will come to Parliament to meet their MPs and explain why this Bill must be rejected.

We need you there.
Join the Lobby Day

Full statement https://lgballiance.org.uk/conversion-practices/

Just posting as a point of information.

It would be interesting to know if the LBGA have as much access to the MP's as the organisations on the Ban Conversion Therapy list, I should imagine Amnesty International have an all areas pass to the corridors of power.
Do we know how many other organisations are on the say NO side?

A few have been noted within this thread, but as far as I know, there's been no "coalition" established yet. I imagine there will be at some point, but they'd better step on it!

ed.sp.

Just read back the thread, and didn't see this posted yet. This is some of the background to the production of the report that fed "evidence" to those who were drafting the Bill. Note how it was done, the timeline, and who was involved. In a normal universe, this is called "marking your own homework" and "grifting."
……………………
from Sex Matters: https://sex-matters.org/posts/publications/conversion-therapy-still-not-illegal-or-still-not-happening/

[excerpt]
Galop released its research report on the same day as the government published the draft bill. Galop described its report as revealing the “stark reality of modern day conversion practices” and providing “clear evidence that conversion practices are a widespread and ongoing issue across the UK”.
^^
The report is based on anonymised case notes of clients of Galop’s advocacy and support services in England and Wales between November 2022 and November 2025. This was the period when the £360,000 conversion-therapy helpline was operating. The Welsh government also provided £30,000 a year to Galop to provide support for victims of conversion therapy in Wales.
^^
The report was separately funded by UK Research and Innovation, which allocates public money for research, through Leeds University. The principal investigator, Professor Ilias Trispiotis, is on the steering group of the Ban Conversion Practices coalition.
^^
Unsurprisingly the report backs the coalition’s recommendations for a new criminal law. It also calls for the government to provide statutory funding for specialist LGBT+ support services, including helplines.
[my bold. Galop is a member of the Ban Conversion Practices Coalition]
…………………

It's a total grift: inventing evidence, skewing data, in order to create "problems" that need to be solved, so you can set up a business to solve these "problems" and you can bid for money to keep your business going.

Sounds like Stonewall, doesn't it? Galop and Stonewall and the Government.

I think there's a lot of collaboration between groups that's quite effective and finally some (likely limited) access to political policy makers. The challenge is that this is a multi headed monster that's being fought. Trans extremism is embedded in universities, the civil service, the NHS, numerous schools, the unions etc. Sex Matters seems to quite effectively cross issues as does the Free Speech Union & the LGB Alliance at times.

I'm not arguing against a coalition but just pointing out that trans extremism has been massively funded and enabled by the State for over a decade. That level of funding just isn't available to women's rights and child safeguarding groups or those aimed at supporting families being broken by all this.

What is so encouraging is that all these groups with different focusses are being remarkably effective. They've ensured that the days of murky deals removing rights behind closed doors are no longer. They have access to the media. And have been remarkably successful at exposing issues into the open for public scrutiny - very different to the old Denton Report days.

GALOP: Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Anti-Violence and Policing Group
https://www.galop.org.uk/about

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/02969307

Registered company: Company number 02969307

Companies House page has the list of directors. A few of them have/had other roles in medical/quasi-medical companies.

ed. to remove the random "Tel No"

Yes, agreed. It would be encouraging, however, to know that the number of TRAS lobbying in Whitehall is matched by the number of lobbyists for common sense and the rights of women, parents, teachers, and religious leaders, et al.

I'm glad Sex Matters at least seems to have their measure, as does James Esses.

Background on

The principal investigator, Professor Ilias Trispiotis, is on the steering group of the Ban Conversion Practices coalition.

I also work extensively on the appropriate legal responses to so-called ‘conversion therapy’ practices. As ‘conversion therapy’ is not yet banned in the UK (or in most European jurisdictions), I have advised MPs, as well as major UK and international NGOs and charities, on the scope and importance of legislative action in this area. I have been invited to give oral evidence before the House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee on the UK Government's proposed legislation against ‘conversion therapy’ (evidence session here). I have also given oral evidence to the New Zealand Parliament Justice Committee on the Conversion Practices Prohibition Legislation Bill.

My bold, so he's got an in with the Waste of Space Committee.

First

https://www.banconversionpractices.com/resources

All major UK medical organisations signed a Memorandum of Understanding condemning the use of conversion practices in all its forms.
[this MOU link to this pdf is broken.]

When I looked for it on the UKCP website (https://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/search/?searchTerm=conversion )

I found this (no date):

Second

https://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/news/ukcp-update-on-conversion-therapy/

UKCP remains fully committed in its belief that conversion therapy seeking to change or deny a person’s sexual orientation and/or gender identity is harmful and must not be practised. However, after very careful consideration, UKCP has taken the decision to withdraw its signature from the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy in the UK v2 (MoU) and its membership of the Coalition Against Conversion Therapy.
^^
The UKCP Board of Trustees reached this decision following concerns it held regarding whether the MoU applies exclusively to adults, or if children and young people are included in its scope. UKCP has received clarification that the MoU does indeed relate to all ages. Upon investigation, it became evident that there are historical concerns held by a number of UKCP colleges that regulate psychotherapeutic work with children and young people relating to this subject, and which have yet to be addressed – hence our decision to withdraw at this time.
[my bold]

Third

https://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/news/ukcp-withdrawal-from-mou-on-conversion-therapy/

UKCP’s Board of Trustees recognises and wishes to acknowledge the strength of feeling that has arisen in response to its decision to withdraw UKCP’s signature from the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy in the UK v2 (MoU) and its membership of the Coalition Against Conversion Therapy.
We want to be quite clear that we are, and always have been, wholly against conversion therapy for any age, whether for adults or for children. This statement explains further the reasons for the withdrawal, which was taken on the basis of concerns relating to children and young people, and confirms UKCP’s firm commitment to the principle that no one should be subjected to conversion therapy, in any form.

The UKCP Board of Trustees would like to reassure all UKCP members, their clients and the LGBTQIA+ community that UKCP strongly believes that conversion therapy is harmful and must not be practised regardless of the client’s age. UKCP members must not engage in conversion therapy in any form. To do so would be harmful, unethical and a breach of our Code of Ethics.
UKCP have also published an initial statement annoucing its decision to withdraw its signature from the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy in the UK v2 (MoU) and its membership of the Coalition Against Conversion Therapy. UKCP have also published a further clarification on this decision.

[my bold]

Clearly some very unhappy people because someone at UKCP realized they might need to put a bit more thought into what they were actually signing!

I still haven't located a copy of the original Memorandum of Understanding.

from UKCP Ethics Committee, a pretty strong statement, seems to be dated after/around April 2024:

https://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/about-ukcp/how-we-are-structured/ukcp-committees/ethics-committee/

Code of Ethics
Therapists are required to work within the 2019 Code of Ethics.
The Code sets out, in broad terms, the standards of practice to which therapists will be held accountable.

Any complaint relating to events that occurred prior to 1 October 2019 will be considered against the code which was in existence at the time (UKCP Ethical Principles and Code of Professional Conduct (2009).

Codes reflect ethical requirements and legal standards which may change over time. Therapists should note that given UKCP’s withdrawal from the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy in the UK v2., members are advised to discount the MoU as a published policy of UKCP (as referenced in point 36 of the Code) from 5 April 2024. More information about the withdrawal is available in our update on conversion therapy.
[my bold]

Finally found this: https://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/news/ukcp-update-on-conversion-therapy/

Background to the decision
At the time of signing the MoU in 2016, the understanding of the UKCP Board of Trustees was that it only related to over-18s....

In 2019, without consultation with UKCP, our Board of Trustees was informed that the MoU relates to all ages. The MoU was scheduled for a full formal review in July 2021; however, this review did not take place....

Since November 2023, in light of new and emerging evidence which has raised fresh concerns around child safety, the UKCP CEO and Chair have attempted on several occasions to engage with the Coalition Against Conversion Therapy to discuss a number of important issues and concerns including definition of terms. We have not, as yet, been able to have this dialogue. Due to our professional concerns on this issue currently remaining unaddressed, the decision was made with regret that UKCP needs to withdraw its signature from the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy in the UK v2 (MoU) and its membership of the Coalition Against Conversion Therapy.
[my bold]

That's enough about UKCP from me! But it definitely looks as though UKCP would have issues with the Draft Conversion Practices Bill as it currently stands. And that they and Coalition Against Conversion Therapy do not see eye to eye.

FOR TUESDAY 1 SEPTEMBER - THAT'S TOMORROW FOLKS!

reposting this @IwantToRetire because otherwise it might get buried under all my UKCP links! (sorry)

It’s OK To Be Gay. Say no to a Bill that makes conversations about sexuality harder.

Tuesday 1 September 2026 | Houses of Parliament, London

The Government’s Draft Conversion Practices Bill is being presented as a law that will protect lesbian, gay and bisexual people. We believe it could do the opposite.

It could make parents afraid to ask questions, therapists afraid to explore same-sex attraction and young people less likely to hear: You might be gay. And that is absolutely ok.

On Tuesday 1 September, LGB Alliance supporters from across the country will come to Parliament to meet their MPs and explain why this Bill must be rejected.
We need you there.

Join the Lobby Day
Full statement https://lgballiance.org.uk/conversion-practices/

Just posting as a point of information.

Therapists and social workers are speaking out against the Draft Conversion Practices Bill:

Safeguarding must come first
Safeguarding must come first | TERF Times

The Draft Conversion Practices Bill risks forcing social workers to enforce unevidenced beliefs rather than exercise professional judgement, writes EBSWA chair Maggie Mellon

At the Evidence-Based Social Work Alliance, we believe that policy on sex and gender must be grounded in evidence. That is why we oppose the Conversion Practices Bill, which rests on a sweeping and unevidenced assumption: that every person, including every child, possesses a “gender identity” which may differ from their sex, and that failing to affirm it can cause harm.

Yet “gender identity” is defined neither in the Bill nor elsewhere in law, and the conduct it seeks to criminalise remains unclear. Its impact assessment says abuse may include conduct that “degrades or manipulates an individual”, or controls their movements or finances, whether alone or in combination. If enacted, these vague provisions could criminalise basic professional practice....

Terf Times, 1 September 2026