Draft Conversion Practices Bill

Baroness Thornton Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I had hoped that the noble Baroness would have listened to my response to the Front Benches. To be clear, we have identified gaps in existing law where we cannot prosecute offences properly. The legislation on domestic abuse and coercive control, for example, is designed for someone who has a relationship with an intimate partner and would not capture the offence committed by someone they did not know. There are many other examples that I think the pre-legislative scrutiny will be able to identify.

We should not forget the point I made about the other offences that we have introduced, where people could have argued that existing law would capture them. Upskirting and non-fatal strangulation are two good examples, because they highlighted offences that were being committed and could have been prosecuted, but the victims were not prepared to identify or could not identify properly that it was an offence. That is an important element of why this Bill is so important.

[Baroness Thornton (Lab)]

My Lords, can I say how much I welcome this draft Bill and the pre-legislative scrutiny that will take place? His Majesty’s loyal Opposition have to sort out their lines on this, because as late as 2023 their Government confirmed their intention to publish a trans-inclusive draft Bill and set out time for scrutiny.

I know that the noble Baroness, Lady Cash, feels strongly about some of these issues. I had to smile, though, because she is probably an utterly brilliant lawyer, but we are not a court of law. My question to my noble friend the Minister is: would he agree that the next step is to ensure that the draft is carefully considered during pre-legislative scrutiny, so that we can be sure that it will protect all those who are vulnerable to abuse, while not criminalising important exploratory conversations about people’s sexuality or gender identity?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for her question. She is absolutely right, and that is why the pre-legislative scrutiny will be important. We are very clear that the Government will not dictate how people raise their children. Our measures are not intended to infringe parents’ rights to bring up their children in line with their beliefs and values. We are clear that the ban must be, as my noble friend pointed out, targeted and balanced, so as not to impinge on legitimate healthcare workers who may be giving advice.

I was at the Spanish embassy last night and I was very pleased that Spain has adopted similar legislation. It has passed it, and there is similar legislation in other European countries. We can learn from their experience. I also met the ambassador when I was in Copenhagen at the IDAHOT+ conference to talk about the experience in Iceland, which has also adopted similar legislation. So there are plenty of examples where, in pre-legislative scrutiny, we can understand some of these issues and how they have been adapted.