Tasmanian Liberals to Grant Conscience Vote on Conversion Practices Ban, Minister to Vote No

Police Minister Felix Ellis posted on social media that the Liberals would have a conscience vote on the Greens' bill, adding, "And I'll be voting no." He argued the measure would prevent doctors, psychologists, counsellors and parents from taking a "careful, cautious approach with a distressed young person rather than pushing straight for a medical gender transition."

Backbench Liberal MP Michael Ferguson also issued a statement saying he would vote against the bill, citing "serious concerns" it would "control what Tasmanians can and can't say about sex, gender and transgender issues." Attorney-General Guy Barnett has previously raised similar concerns about the legislation.

The bill includes a number of exceptions, including for health practitioners providing services in good faith, parents, public debate and expressions through prayer.

Tasmanian Greens deputy leader Vica Bayley called Mr Ellis's statements "misleading," emphasising that the bill is designed to end conversion practices — "harmful and sometimes deadly practices" that he said still occur in Tasmania. Bayley noted the proposal is "directly in line with what other states have legislated" and explicitly protects medical care, counselling and parenting.

"Our proposal to end conversion practices isn't radical," Bayley said. "The conversion practices this bill aims to stop are acts that intentionally try to change, suppress or eradicate the sexual identity or gender of a person."

Under the bill, conversion practices do not include health services provided in good faith and in accordance with professional standards, among other exemptions.

Analysis

Why This Matters

The conscience vote means Liberal MPs are free from party discipline, making the outcome uncertain and potentially cross-party.
If passed, Tasmania would join other Australian states that have already banned conversion practices, providing legal protection for LGBTQ+ individuals.
The debate highlights ongoing tensions between religious freedom, parental rights, and the protection of vulnerable young people.

Background

Conversion practices, sometimes referred to as "conversion therapy," aim to change or suppress a person's sexual orientation or gender identity. Several Australian states and territories have already enacted bans, with varying exceptions. The Tasmanian Greens' bill proposes a similar framework, but has drawn opposition from some Liberals who argue it could restrict legitimate medical and parental discretion. The bill is scheduled for debate later this year.

Key Perspectives

Supporters of the ban (Greens, LGBTQ+ advocates): Argue that conversion practices cause significant harm and that the bill specifically exempts ordinary medical care, counselling, parenting and prayer. They say it is not radical and simply codifies protections already in place elsewhere. Opponents (Ellis, Ferguson, some Liberals): Fear the bill could criminalise cautious, non-affirming approaches to gender dysphoria in young people, and restrict speech about sex and gender. They emphasise parental rights and clinical freedom. Medical and religious communities: The bill's exemptions for health practitioners and prayer attempt to address their concerns, but the debate continues over where the line between legitimate care and conversion practice should be drawn.

What to Watch

The precise timing of the debate and vote in the Tasmanian parliament.
How individual Liberal MPs vote — the conscience vote means party loyalty does not bind them.
Any amendments that may be introduced to narrow or broaden the bill's scope.

Analysis

Why This Matters

Background

Key Perspectives

What to Watch

Sources