Will Westminster’s draft conversion therapy Bill apply to Scotland?

Credit: some of this was first published as a letter in The Scotsman

The ink is barely dry on Westminster's draft Conversion Practices Bill, yet Scottish LGBT groups are incandescent that it does not go far enough and are urging Scottish Ministers to introduce their own “comprehensive” legislation. One of the groups leading the call is LGBT Health and Wellbeing, the organisation in receipt of tens of thousands of pounds of Scottish Government funding to run its ‘conversion therapy’ helpline.

The SNP’s 2026 manifesto makes clear that, if Westminster does not deliver for Scotland, the Scottish Government will introduce its own legislation within the first year of this new Scottish Parliament.

While the Westminster draft Bill currently applies only to England and Wales, the Government has said it will continue to engage with the devolved Governments during pre-legislative scrutiny on the possibility of extending it to other parts of the UK. We know from the First Minister of Scotland that those discussions are already underway.

The SNP’s ban failed for good reason

Scotland’s previous attempt to legislate backfired badly. When the Scottish Government published its own draft Bill at the beginning of 2024, it provoked strong opposition from across the political spectrum. Leading Scottish lawyers shredded the proposals, warning that they would crush free speech and religious freedom. The public reaction was every bit as furious. Parents were outraged at the prospect of being criminalised for refusing to let their teenager undergo irreversible sex-change surgery, and church leaders warned that they could face jail time for expressing Christian sexual ethics in prayer and pastoral conversation. By that September, the Scottish Government had abandoned its plans, admitted that legal challenges on human rights grounds were likely, and asked Westminster to legislate for Scotland.

Activists’ objections

The claim that the Westminster draft Bill is not broad enough reveals the ambitions of those campaigning for such legislation. Under the proposed criminal offence, merely refusing to affirm someone’s claimed LGBT identity could result in police visit. It is difficult to see how it could be any more far-reaching.

Take, for example, the supposedly “very broad” healthcare exemption, which has attracted particular ire from campaigners. In reality, it is little more than a fig leaf. It would do little to prevent the chilling effect on conscientious practitioners who refuse to affirm a young person’s belief that they were born in the wrong body.

Another complaint is the omission of the word ‘suppressing’. Activists argue that the SNP cannot deliver on its pledge to end “conversion practices in all their forms” unless the term is included alongside ‘changing’ a person’s sexual orientation or transgender identity. Yet this appears to be little more than semantics, since the explanatory notes to the draft Bill make clear that ‘suppression’ is captured. The notes say that the definition “applies where the person did not have a particular outcome in mind”, including where “an individual identifies as a lesbian and a person intended to ensure they did not identify that way, although they did not intend to make them believe they had another specific sexual orientation such as heterosexual or bisexual”.

Contrary to activists’ claims, coercive behaviour, harassment, assault and sexual violence are already illegal under existing legislation. Scotland does not need a law that risks turning personal conversations, prayer and parental guidance into matters for criminal investigation.