5. Statement by the Deputy Minister for Social Partnership: LGBTQ+ History Month

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 4:30 pm on 1 February 2022.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Joyce Watson Joyce Watson Labour 4:30, 1 February 2022

Diolch, Dirprwy Lywydd. Thank you for your statement, Minister. Your own history of promoting equality speaks for itself. Wales's LGBTQ+ community has in you the most dependable ally in Government. Your recent decision to renew the equality and inclusion funding programme is a good example of your commitment to that. This Senedd, too, can be proud of its record and status as the No. 1 workplace for LGBTQ+ employees in the country, something I know that the Commission team were determined to achieve.

LGBTQ+ history month is, of course, about celebrating achievements like those and the progress we've made as a society, as well as remembering the sacrifices and the battles that got us here today. But it's time to take stock, too, and to look at how we can make a fairer future. So, where are we today on that arc of justice? There are two big issues now: conversion practices and protections for LGBTQ+ asylum seekers. The UK Government is currently consulting on banning conversion therapy and that consultation closes this Friday. Campaigners are concerned that it could allow those who received—and I quote—'informed consent' from their victims to evade justice. We can't allow that loophole to stand; people cannot consent to abuse. It looks like Scotland will enact an immediate and total ban on these practices, and I should hope that this Senedd and the Welsh Government will call on the UK Government to ensure that the same applies here.

On asylum seekers, Minister, the written statement that you issued at the end of last year flagged your concerns about the inadequate protection it offers LGBTQ+ individuals. Despite being put through tests to prove their sexual orientation or gender identity, asylum seekers routinely see their claims rejected by the Home Office, often wrongly as it turns out, because almost half are then successfully challenged on appeal. Yet, the proposed new law would actually increase the burden of proof—