Draft Conversion Practices Bill

Lord Bishop of Leicester Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord and I appreciate his comments. I meant what I said: there is cross-party consensus and a consensus across this House on stopping this abuse, and he is absolutely right. The United Kingdom has long championed the rights of LGBT+ people at home and abroad, and we proudly uphold one of the most expansive legislative frameworks in the world—and I want to make it clear that that has been delivered by both Labour and Conservative Governments.

However, I also remind the House that this is part of the work to fulfil the commitments set out in the Government’s manifesto on advancing rights and protections to LGBT people. Therefore, as well as this legislation banning conversion practices, noble Lords will know that we have equalised hate-crime laws, established a scheme to address the historical wrongs against LGBT veterans, and improved healthcare services for LGBT individuals. Additionally, we are collaborating with international allies to strengthen our position as a global leader. One of the important things is that we set standards which are important for other countries to see because, with some of the abuse and the legislative changes that we are now seeing, we are facing more countries that have criminalised homosexuality than there were two years ago. So we are going the wrong way, and we need to set a positive tone here.

[The Lord Bishop of Leicester]

My Lords, I welcome the intentions behind the draft Bill. Indeed, in 2017, the General Synod of the Church of England passed a Motion, in fact by a large majority, which called on the Government to outlaw conversion therapy. However, I want to mention today that I have a number of concerns about the drafting of the Bill, and indeed particular concerns about the lack of clarity on the difference between harmful conversion practices and perfectly acceptable practices of pastoral care and indeed prayer, which is much needed for those who are in difficulty. If this difference is not crystal-clear within the legislation, it will potentially have a very significant negative impact on what I believe is legitimate spiritual care offered by faith groups. So, alongside the vital importance of consulting with LGBT+ people, can the Minister tell me what consultations have taken place with religious groups, and is he open to further conversations about how appropriate spiritual care can be guarded within this legislation?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the right reverend Prelate. The important thing here is that the consultations have been going on for some time, as have the debates on this legislation, as the noble Lord, Lord Hayward, pointed out. However, we remain committed to that level of consultation. The Government have no intention of interfering with people’s right to religious belief and expression. We are not seeking to prevent people living a life that aligns with their religious or cultural values. This is not about telling people that they cannot hold certain views. We are targeting clear instances of abuse here, and we are very clear about sending a message that LGBT+ people deserve to be safe from harm.

An offence occurs only if someone seeks to change a person’s identity through abusive conversion practices that result in harm. A religious leader teaching their faith’s views on LGBT+ matters should not be affected by this draft Bill. The principle that the right reverend Prelate raises with regard to counselling and advice is covered by what I said about parental responsibility and medical advice. These things are absolutely covered in the Bill, but we will address these questions in the pre-legislative scrutiny.