The National Party’s vote against the conversion therapy bill is “odd” considering how Parliament works when it considers legislation, a law professor says.
Last week, the Conversion Practices Prohibition Legislation Bill , which aimed to ban the practice, passed its first reading in Parliament. All parties voted for the Bill except for National .
National’s Simon Bridges said the party was concerned about the alleged risk that it would criminalise parents telling their son or daughter "taihoa, before you go on puberty blockers or other hormone treatment, wait till you're 18”.
Victoria University’s Eddie Clark told Breakfast that it was “quite difficult” for parents to end up committing a crime if they weren’t sure about aspects like puberty blockers and didn’t immediately provide them.
He said this was because of the way the Bill is currently written, which “narrowly” defines conversion therapy practices as an active act that causes harm to a person by trying to change or suppress their sexual orientation or gender identity.
What the Bill didn’t do was “quash the ability to have respectful decisions about that [topic]”, Clark said.
He said a few tweaks to the Bill’s wording could make this point clearer, and that was what the select committee process was for.
“I’ll note that ACT has similar concerns [to the National Party about the Bill]. But, they said, we want to send it to select committee to see if it can be fixed,” Clark said.
“It seems a little odd to me that National didn’t take the same approach.”
Clark didn’t agree that parents should be excluded entirely from the legislation.
“The sad fact is, for kids, most often if they're referred to conversion therapy, it is by their parents.
“So, a carve out for all parental behaviour here [in the Bill] would not combat the bad results that everyone agrees are bad,” he said.
On Thursday, Bridges accused the Government of “arbitrarily limit[ing] debate” about the conversion practices bill.
The National MP made the claims as the bill was debated at its first reading.
“Labour members [of the Justice Select Committee] voted against putting the Conversion Therapy Practices Prohibition Bill through the usual six week public submission process," he said.
"Railroading conventional democratic pathways for bills, Labour has opted to shorten the submissions period by over a third to under four weeks.
“This issue has proven to be contentious and now Labour is seeking to restrict the ability of those with concerns about the Bill to engage in the legislative process.”
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, appearing on Breakfast on Monday, said Bridges’ claim wasn’t true.
Ardern said it was up to select committee to decide on its own timeframes.
“Four weeks is not that unusual. People have four weeks to make submissions and then the select committee will be hearing from those who wish to be heard to submit in person for an extra four weeks.”
She said the select committee had also indicated they would make efforts to ensure everyone who wants to be heard will be.
Jacinda Ardern says she wants National to come to the select committee table and work with the Government.
How does Parliament pass laws?
Before a law is passed in Parliament, it goes through five stages .
The first reading sees MPs vote on the intent, not the details, of a proposed piece of legislation. This is called a Bill.
While debating a proposed ban, Verall said the practice "is not therapy; it is hate".
Bills are then taken to a select committee, where the public and experts on the topic give their suggestions for amendments. It’s then taken back to the House for MPs to vote on the suggestions in the second reading.
MPs then make final tweaks and amendments in Committee Stage, before it goes to the third and final reading for a last vote.
SHARE ME