Trans law ‘could turn parents into criminals’
Equalities minister reveals concerns amid backlash over ban on conversion therapy
THE equalities minister is to write to all Tory MPS and insist that a ban on trans conversion therapy must not criminalise parents, as a backlash against the plans grew last night.
In a highly unusual move, it is understood that Kemi Badenoch intends to set out her concerns over the proposed legislation, which was announced yesterday in the Commons.
She will write that legitimate conversations between parents and trans children must not be outlawed and that freedom of religion must be protected.
Her letter reflects concern in Downing Street that Tory MPS will rebel over the introduction of the ban, which was announced as the Government vetoed separate plans to make it easier to change gender in Scotland.
Alister Jack, the Scottish Secretary, yesterday confirmed in the Commons that he would block Nicola Sturgeon’s Bill, which would allow children to change gender at the age of 16. It will be the first time Scottish legislation has been blocked since devolution.
The timing of the trans conversion therapy ban will be seen by some as an attempt to appease trans campaigners.
The UK Government has oscillated for months over whether to ban transgender as well as gay conversion therapy, but Michelle Donelan, the Culture Secretary, said yesterday that it would go ahead.
Although it was announced by Ms Donelan, Mrs Badenoch is the minister responsible for the ban. She is understood to be concerned that it will be “hard” to ensure that there are no unintended consequences from the ban and that “there is much still to work on”.
The Daily Telegraph understands that the letter intends to stress that great care must be taken when writing the Bill, with input from doctors, parents and the LGBT community.
She is set to acknowledge that the draft version of the legislation will be imperfect, with issues around what constitutes conversion therapy and how to protect faith leaders, counsellors and parents not fully resolved.
A source close to Mrs Badenoch said: “The area of gender identity is much more complex than sexual orientation... We have said we will not inadvertently criminalise parents who are trying to support children.”
Last night, No10 was locked in talks about when the letter to all Tory MPS and peers should be sent. It is highly unusual for such a letter to be sent before legislation has been published.
Campaigners and Tory MPS are concerned that the ban could inadvertently criminalise parents, teachers and doctors who question whether children really want to change their gender.
Since he took office, Rishi Sunak has given way on housing targets, onshore wind farms and online safety after backbenchers threatened to block reforms.
A source close to Mrs Badenoch told The Telegraph: “Many people do not understand how complex this area is, so we’ve committed to pre-legislative scrutiny.
“It has taken us a long time to make this announcement because we have consulted a large range of stakeholders, including the medical community.
“We want to show we are committed to doing this, but we need to build proper time for scrutiny.”
Another source said: “We do not want to do harm with this Bill to a very vulnerable group through cavalier legislation.”
Last night, Jacob Rees-mogg, a former Cabinet minister, expressed concerns, saying: “It is difficult to phrase this Bill without unintended consequences in a highly complex area.” Christian Concern, the pressure group, said the ban could criminalise prayer, and is considering legal action against any proposed legislation.
Andrea Williams, its chief executive, said the ban “will end up criminalising consensual conversations with those who genuinely want help”.
The Government has long pledged to ban conversion therapy which attempts to change the sexuality of a gay person.
Boris Johnson rejected moves to extend the ban to those who try to stop people changing their gender identity.
But in a written ministerial statement yesterday, Ms Donelan told MPS a draft Bill introducing such a ban would be published “shortly”, to allow for stringent scrutiny.
She added that “the legislation must not, through a lack of clarity, harm the growing number of children and young adults experiencing gender-related distress, through inadvertently criminalising or chilling legitimate conversations”.
Yesterday Damian Green, a former deputy prime minister and critic of plans to extend the ban to trans people, said he would wait until the draft is published to see if it allayed his concerns.
Mark Jenkinson, Tory MP for Wokingham, said: “We need to ensure that any new legislation does not have unintended consequences: from enshrining in law the nebulous concept of ‘gender identity’, to the risk of criminalising conversations between parents, teachers, medical practitioners and the young people going through a period of natural confusion who should be able to access the help and support they need.”
Kate Harris, co-founder of LGB Alliance, welcomed Ms Donelan’s “measured” announcement, saying: “Such detailed analysis is vital to ensure that key terms such as ‘gender identity’ and ‘trans’ are clearly understood, and unforeseen consequences avoided.”
THE Science Museum has dismantled a trans-inclusive display following complaints it was pushing “propaganda” and not biology.
A cabinet labelled “Boy Or Girl?” displayed quotes describing transitioning from the “wrong body” as a “hero’s journey” and labels characterised gender as something “difficult to define” that “may not match your biological sex”.
The display at the west London museum, which featured a fake penis and chest-binding equipment, has been taken down by the museum following complaints the information provided was “not science, but propaganda”.
Complaints were lodged by Baroness Nicholson, who wrote to Sir Ian Blatchford, the museum’s chairman, to argue that the display “promotes social and medical transition in a way that is not neutral”.
The Boy Or Girl? cabinet stands in the Who Am I? gallery, which covers various aspects of biological identity from genetics to facial expressions.
The now-empty display held a fake penis that could be worn under clothing as a “packer” to provide a male appearance, as well as a compression vest to flatten the chest.
Testosterone patches worn to induce bodily changes through hormone treatment were also displayed.
The exhibit also included an information panel that stated that “sex usually refers to someone’s biological characteristics”, whereas “gender is more difficult to define”. It added: “Your gender identity is your sense of yourself as male or female, or, for some people neither or both. It may not match your biological sex.”
The Daily Telegraph previously revealed that the display was deemed too conservative by some visitors, who complained that is made no direct mention of “transgender”, and the Science Museum agreed to review the display as a matter of “inclusion”.
However, Lady Nicholson said that educational material needed to be “age appropriate and evidence-based” and argued that the fake penis and chest binding exhibits were not.
The Science Museum has confirmed that the display has been taken down “as part of ongoing work to review displays across the museum to ensure they reflect current scientific research”.