MARRIAGE (SAME SEX COUPLES) BILL
Public Bill Committee, 12 February 2013.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
A warm welcome to everybody. Before we get under way in earnest, I have a few preliminary announcements. Most importantly, hon. Members may, if they wish, remove their jackets during Committee sittings, and I will be doing that shortly. In fact, if Tim could take that jumper off, it would do us all a favour. Will hon. Members ensure that all mobile phones, pagers and so on are turned off or switched to silent mode during Committee sittings?
As a general rule, I and my fellow Chair do not intend to call starred amendments, which are those that have not been tabled with adequate notice. The required notice period in Public Bill Committees is three working days, and amendments should therefore be tabled by the rise of the House on Monday for consideration on Thursday, and by the rise of the House on Thursday for consideration on Tuesday.
Not everyone is familiar with the process of taking oral evidence in Committee, so it may help if I briefly explain how we will proceed. The Committee will first be asked to consider the programme motion, which is on the amendment paper that should be in front of all Members, on which debate is limited to half an hour. We will then proceed to a motion to report written evidence and then a motion to permit the Committee to deliberate in private in advance of the oral evidence sessions, which I hope that we can take formally. Assuming that the second of those motions is agreed to, the Committee will then move into private session. Once the Committee has deliberated, the witnesses and members of the public will be invited back into the room and our oral evidence session will begin. If the Committee agrees to the programme motion, the Committee will hear oral evidence this morning.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Copies of memorandums that the Committee receives will be made available in the Committee Room.
Written evidence reported to the House
MB 01 Lord Pannick QC
Examination of Witnesses
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you for agreeing to come in a bit early; we are going to be very kind and let you go at 8.55 am so that you can hasten away to what I am sure will be an important Cabinet meeting.
Before we ask a series of questions, I understand you might want to make a few opening comments, but would you first introduce yourselves for the record.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Would either of you like to make an opening statement?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Does the Secretary of State for Education wish to add anything to that?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much.
Before I call the first Member to ask a question, I remind all Members that questions should be limited to matters within the scope of the Bill and that we must stick strictly to the timings in the programme order that the Committee has agreed. I hope I will not have to interrupt Members mid-sentence, but will not hesitate to do so if need be.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
A happy Shrove Tuesday—pancakes for all.
I think that the Bill is slightly more complicated than it needs to be, but perhaps that is because of the anxieties to which the Secretary of State just referred. Will she explain why she has not consulted on extending civil partnerships to heterosexual couples? I do not mean brothers and sisters and everybody else, but just heterosexual couples.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
That makes me feel as if my civil partnership is not the gold standard, and I gently suggest that the Secretary of State might want to rethink the way she talks about that matter.
Getting down to the nitty-gritty, the Government have included a small provision in relation to adultery. Will the Secretary of State explain why they have put anything about that in the Bill at all, as previously statute law has not referred to adultery? Is she happy with the bizarre anomaly whereby a gay man cannot commit adultery with another man, but can with a woman?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
How many people cite adultery for divorce now? You may not be able to provide the precise numbers, but the numbers and the proportion would be helpful for the Committee.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Massively fewer or slightly fewer?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Yes.
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Clause 1 provides for what is lawful in terms of access to marriage. How would the Secretary of State define marriage in terms of its meaning and purpose?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Is that the meaning and purpose that is the foundation of the Bill?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
In this Bill.
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
I am not one to read the Daily Mail too much, but it made reference to e-mails going between the Equalities Office and the Department for Education that talked about to the implications of same-sex marriage on schools’ legal responsibility to teach marriage. Apparently an e-mail from the Equalities Office warned of the possibility of walking into a minefield on this. How have both Departments considered the impact on schools in relation to the Bill?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Does that include John Bowers QC as well?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
But what about John Bowers QC? He said that schools could lawfully discipline a teacher who refused to teach materials endorsing same-sex marriage.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Maria Miller, given that a lot of my heterosexual friends seem to think that concepts of consummation and adultery are themselves rather antiquated, did you consider modernising the general marriage law in this Bill, given the problems over such issues that you may well encounter as it passes through Parliament?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
The Culture Secretary just said that she thought that the definition of a marriage was the ability of two people to come together and commit together for life. Why is that not already catered for under civil partnerships? She said that the Government were not content with the current situation. At what stage did they become discontent, and why?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
It was about your definition of marriage as the ability of two people to come together and commit together in public for life. Why can they not do that already under civil partnerships and, going back to the first question, at what stage did that change? Just mentioning “A Contract for Equalities,” which apparently came out three days before the election and of which I think most Conservative MPs were blissfully unaware, let alone the public at large, does not answer the question of at what stage and why the present Government have become discontent with the nature of marriage. I want to know what happened between this Government and the previous Government—in 2004, they were saying that civil partnerships absolutely achieved what we all agreed we needed to achieve, but then something apparently happened three days before the election, and more recently, for this legislation to be introduced. Under your definition of marriage, there was no need for it.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I am not entirely sure that that answers my question about what happened three days before the election and now. However, on the question of fairness, which you have come back to several times as a justification for the legislation, how is it fair that a same-sex couple who happen to be Anglicans and church attenders, who have been in a stable relationship for many years and might have had a civil partnership, will not be able to get married in a church?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
It is what we are doing with the Church of England in this legislation.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
My first question is for the Secretary of State for Education. I want to pursue a little more the protections for teachers, because a lot of public anxiety has been expressed. My understanding is that teachers are required to teach about the nature and importance of marriage. I think that that is the Education Act provision. If they are teaching about the nature and importance of marriage, and this Bill is passed and becomes an Act, as I hope that it will, implicitly they will have to acknowledge that same-sex marriage is valid, whether that is contrary to their religious beliefs or not. What protection is there for a teacher—as described by the Secretary of State a moment ago—who says, “I will teach you that this is very important, but I do not believe it”?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I am concerned that while a school may have a policy and a teacher may be required to follow it, there is no Ofsted inspection of PHSE, so we will not know, or be able to validate, the way in which schools approach this. Is there any concern in the Department about what teachers may be doing and saying in schools and how we can know what is going on?
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
Obviously lots of people wrote to us about provision of services and that area. Secretary of State, could you talk a little about how those people who perhaps hold strong Catholic views, such as the hotelier and the famous bed and breakfast owner, would be impacted by this and your expectations of them under current legislation?
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
I have one follow-up question on that and a quick question for the Secretary of State for Education. The provision for conscientious objection for people in public services and jobs is something many people wrote in about. Can you give us some idea about that?
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
Just a quick question for Mr Gove. There is still a considerable level of homophobic bullying in schools throughout the UK. You have described the difficult balancing act that teachers have to strike. Would you expect them, whatever their views of same-sex marriage, to offer appropriate support to any child who was suffering homophobic bullying?
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
Some of the evidence to the consultation urged the Government to take this opportunity to equalise pension provision for same-sex marriage couples, civil partners and widowers with benefits currently enjoyed by widows. Why have the Government not taken this opportunity to do that?
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
Thank you for that figure. I have a supplementary question. What work have the Government done to look at the impact on occupational pensions and the benefits enjoyed by people from those?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
This is a question for Maria Miller. It returns to the position of the Church of England and the Church in Wales about the duty to marry parishioners who wish to get married, either in their local parish church or in a nearby parish church. Why did you not consider removing this obstacle from the other end, so to speak, by removing that common-law right of people to marry in a parish church if they wish to?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Would not removing that common-law duty actually remove the major problem with this Bill, as seen by a lot of religious organisations? They feel that they need protection under the Bill, but the only reason they need protection is because of that common-law expectation in the first place.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
If I were a Church of England priest and I had a gay or lesbian couple in my congregation, under this legislation I would not be allowed to marry them in my church. Would I be allowed to officiate at a ceremony at a Quaker meeting house, or one of the other churches that will offer marriage?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Let us move forward a year to the celebration of LGBT History Month. There is a teacher who quite rightly would stick to the law and say that same-sex marriage exists, but wants to put forward her view that she does not in good conscience believe that it is equivalent to traditional marriage. Will she be fully protected in asserting that view? As LGBT History Month will go across the curriculum and teach children about the value of same-sex marriage, will parents have the opportunity to withdraw their children, not just from sex education, but also from other classes?
Michael Gove (Conservative, Surrey Heath)
The first thing is that again the article 9 rights of any individual are not affected by this legislation. Any individual has perfect liberty of conscience and freedom of expression. The question would arise if any teacher on any subject chose to go beyond the bounds of what we would consider to be reasonable behaviour for that teacher. If a teacher in the course of history or any other subject were to advance a view that was unbalanced, and which might lead any member of the class to think that they were subject to inappropriate teaching or any parent to think that they were subject to inappropriate teaching, of course there would be an opportunity for that parent or that individual to raise the issue with the teacher or the school. However, I have to say that I cannot see what the concern is here. By definition, if you express a view on any issue reasonably and explain what your position is, there is no problem. If you express an unreasonable view on any issue or abuse the opportunity to be in charge of young minds, that could become a question for the school leader. The desire to suggest that the Bill changes the position of teachers perplexes me.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Secretary of State for Culture, I want to ask about anomalies. We will end up with a lot of anomalies if the Bill is enacted exactly as drafted. An issue that we came close to just now is that a religious same-sex couple can have religious symbols at the hotel where their civil partnership is celebrated, but a heterosexual couple getting married using exactly the same venue and the same registrar will not be allowed to use religious symbols. For that matter, a same-sex marriage will not be allowed to use religious symbols. Are we not in danger of creating an awful lot of anomalies?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Maybe he cannot at this point, but we may come back to that.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
That is wrong. The Roman Catholic Church allows—
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
We have seven minutes left.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Let me ask one quick question to each witness. The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport said on Second Reading that she intends to see Northern Ireland brought into the remit of the Bill. How does she intend to do that, given the current situation with devolution and the recent vote in Northern Ireland?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
So how are you going to achieve that?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I would like to return to the pensions issue. I was contacted by a trans couple who are pleased that the Bill will allow them to remain married—they are married currently—after one member of the couple changes their gender. However, after making that transition and becoming a same-sex married couple, one partner will lose their pension rights. Has consideration been given to that anomaly? Is the decision that that couple faces not rather unfair?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
The Education Secretary keeps referring to inappropriate teaching being a trigger for action being taken against a teacher who had a problem teaching about same-sex marriage. Recent cases in the ECHR referred to a registrar and a Relate counsellor who felt it would be inappropriate and that they would be unable to carry on in that work. That was not upheld and they were effectively sacked. If a teacher in a Catholic school, for example, said that he or she was unable to take an RE lesson—because you do not have to be an RE teacher—or a sex and relationship education lesson unless he or she could refer to same-sex marriage as, for example, a “pretend marriage”, would that be inappropriate teaching? What would be the repercussions?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Let’s not have a conversation.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
As a recent survey has shown, there are many teachers who hold to the view that they did not agree with same-sex marriage. If a teacher was perfectly happy to teach religious education or sexual relationship education, but would not be able to include teaching about same-sex marriage without explaining his or her view—the conscience that you have referred to—that it was not a real marriage, a pretend marriage for example, on that basis would she or he be allowed to take that lesson or not?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
That is not the question.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
How much will it cost to convert a civil partnership to a marriage?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Do you have an approximate idea?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Colleagues, we have more or less reached the time that we said we would allow our Secretary of State to go. Thank you for your evidence. We wish you well in making wise decisions this morning at Cabinet and thank you for seeing us today.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Good morning. Thank you for coming to give evidence before us today. Would you kindly introduce yourselves for the record?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Would you like to make a brief working statement, or shall we go straight to questions?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Is homosexuality curable?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
That might not be within the scope of the Bill, but let’s have a very brief response and then we will come back to the debate.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Another question on the Bill?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Mr Streeter, without your cynicism, it does strike to the matter of the Bill and in particular the Church of England, because the Book of Common Prayer of 1662 lays down three reasons for marriage. First of all, procreation, which does not apply to many who get married because they either have no intention or no ability to have children, and we do not consider theirs not to be proper marriages. Secondly, to prevent fornication—[ Interruption. ] It was written in the language of 1662 and for a particular understanding. The third reason was for mutual society. The bit I do not understand about the Church of England’s position is why—and that is reaffirmed in the 1928 prayer book, not passed by Parliament, but passed by the Church of England—if you do not believe homosexuality is a moral disorder or you do not believe it is incurable, why you would be opposed to homosexual couples being able to have that mutual society?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
But do you understand why people would then think if the Church of England had campaigned aggressively or assertively or voluntarily for civil partnerships, then you might have a bit more to say on this subject?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Coming back to this common-law duty to marry, as I understand it, a parishioner could turn up at a parish church and one of your vicars in Norfolk would marry them if they were divorced—indeed if both parties were divorced—or even if they were atheists and not even professing Christians. Is that the case? If they are atheists, they do not have to prove they are adherents of the Church of England?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
So a vicar in one of your parishes would marry a double-divorced couple who could be atheists but would deny that right to committed Christians?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
May I ask the question I posed to Maria Miller about what would happen to a priest who wanted to give pastoral support to a gay or lesbian couple in his or her parish, and wanted, but was not allowed, to officiate at a ceremony at a Quaker meeting house?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Or anywhere else.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
If either of the two other witnesses want to chip in at any time, please feel free to do so.
Stephen Gilbert (Liberal Democrat, St Austell and Newquay)
One quick question and then a main question. Do you accept that there are other views within the Church, with vicars in different parishes in different places, and that the Church of England does not have one stable view across the country shared by every member?
Stephen Gilbert (Liberal Democrat, St Austell and Newquay)
On to my main point which is about humility. I was very lucky to go to a Church of England primary school, and one of the lessons that struck me there was about humility and questioning whether you might be wrong even in the strongly held views that you have. It strikes me that if the Government are wrong in introducing this Bill, then the worst that will happen upon the death of a married couple is that God will not recognise that marriages. It strikes me that if you are wrong, the worst that will happen is that people will perpetuate a discrimination that, on their death, God says is unjust. Have you ever considered the possibility that you might be wrong?
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
If this Bill is passed, same-sex couples will have the choice of a marriage or a civil partnership; heterosexual couples will just have marriage. Do you believe civil partnerships should be extended to heterosexual couples?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I must declare an interest as the son of Church of England vicar who would certainly agree that there is a variation of views across the entire Church. I have two points to raise. Ben Bradshaw raised a really important one, which I want to extend. I have a vicar in my own constituency who, I am sure, would like this to happen. If after this legislation goes through, a Church of England licensed vicar performs a wedding of a same-sex couple on licensed premises, be it Quaker or otherwise, within that parish, will that marriage be illegal after it has happened? Does it therefore effectively have to be annulled by the Church? How exactly will it happen?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
But on civil premises—if they did it in an hotel?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
At what point does it become a non-marriage? All of this could happen. A Church of England vicar could go to an hotel. There could be an organist and all the trappings of what might have happened in the Church. He performs the ceremony, and the couple say that they are married, what happens then?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I just want to know at what point does it become a non-marriage. It is performed by a Church of England vicar. The couple could say that they were married by a Church of England vicar, even if it were on civil hotel premises with all the trappings. What makes it a non-marriage?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
The Archbishop of Canterbury was widely reported after his installation as restating the Church’s official position, but given the lack of unanimity and the variegation in the Church to which you have referred, how do you feel that he and indeed other bishops will approach the issue in the years to come within the Church, and what scope is there for a change in position in due course if that were to be the wish of the bodies of the Church of England?
Stuart Andrew (Conservative, Pudsey)
A recurring area of concern for my constituents has been the threat of legal challenge. Are you satisfied that the quadruple lock is sufficient?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
If a member of a married heterosexual couple undergoes gender reassignment, under this legislation they would not be required to annul their marriage, but would remain married as a same-sex couple. How will the Church regard that same-sex marriage?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
If they had had a church wedding as a heterosexual couple and that marriage continues but one member of the couple changes gender, will the marriage continue in the eyes of the Church?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
The marriage will continue, but the clergy will not have to do anything.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I suspect that the couple may think about their status in the eyes of the Church.
Hugh Robertson (Conservative, Faversham and Mid Kent)
I think you have answered this question in response to Mr Andrew, but just to be absolutely clear, even accepting your unease about some of the general principles behind the Bill, are you satisfied with the protections provided in the Bill to the Church? If you are, which is what I think you said in answer to Mr Andrew, I take it from that that you would be resistant to any attempts to unpick those protections during the Bill’s passage.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Just going back to Chris Bryant’s question, do you not accept, Bishop Graham, that the Church of England’s opposition—not yours, because you have an honourable position on this—to this has been blunted by its failure to welcome, support and celebrate civil partnerships?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Coming back to the duty of the Church of England to marry whoever wishes to be married in a parish church, would the Church actually like that duty to be removed?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Why not?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
That was a very long answer to what was meant to be a brief question.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
It was interesting, Mr Williams—we will come back to you if there is time.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
It is rather charming, Mr McGregor, that you think that Anglican clergy only ever perform services according to the rites of the Church of England. I have been to All Saints, Margaret street for the installation of a new vicar or curate that has been performed in the middle of a service of benediction, which is not a rite of the Church of England and, effectively, contradicts the 39 Articles.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Indeed, and long may it be so. I hope that the Church will remain a Church and not a sect, and that is why I hope that you will continue to want to have the requirement that you perform marriages and so on. I suppose my point is really that, as a former priest in the Church of England, I hope that the Church will one day be able to change its mind more completely on this matter. When asked whether the Roman Catholic Church would ever have women priests, Cardinal Martini said, “Not in this millennium,” but that was in 1999.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
And he is not around to be Pope any more. He is shaken, not stirred. I just wonder when you think the Church of England might change its mind. This is material to the Bill because we might think that all you have to lose is your locks.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
It is not very private.
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
There has been a lot of correspondence about adultery and consummation. I am interested in how you feel about the fact that there is no plan to redefine that in the ambit of the Bill. Also, a question that has suddenly occurred to me is: if in a heterosexual marriage people commit adultery or are unfaithful with somebody of the same sex as themselves, is that currently covered by the definition? In other words, is there already an inconsistency that if a woman was unfaithful to her husband with another woman, does that already not qualify as adultery?
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
So there is already an inconsistency.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
It sounds as though Mr Fittall’s long drawn-out process, as he describes, for the Church of England is unlikely to happen in this millennium either. Contrary to what the Culture Secretary said earlier, the Church of England has a unique position in the Bill in effectively being able to discriminate against marrying same-sex couples. If this law goes through, do you think that it will harm the image of the Church of England that it will uniquely be able to discriminate, as laid out in law?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I understand that, but that is not my point. I do not dispute that. What do you think the effect on the image of the Church of England will be? The uniqueness of the position is as you have described. It would be a very long drawn-out process for the Church of England to be able to change its position, other than being able to opt in as some other Churches would much more simply be able to do. Do you think that this law, if it goes through, with the Church of England in the position of automatically not being able to include same-sex marriage couples, will be damaging to the image of the Church of England in the public consciousness?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Some other faiths will conduct same-sex marriages as a result of the legislation. What advice will you give teachers in Church of England schools on how they teach about the importance and nature of marriage?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Mr Fittall, I must correct you on the opinion polling and refer you to the very helpful document prepared for the Committee by the House of Commons Library, which shows that all of the opinion polls, except those with very leading questions commissioned by the Christian Institute, show clear majorities, including majorities of people of faith, in support of equal marriage. You raised the spectre of successful litigation, but how many divorced people have successfully forced the Church of England in the courts to remarry them in their parish church against the wishes of their local priest?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
For the record, that does not bear on the litigation as described by the questioner.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
I apologise for being late. I came straight off the plane, and I am sorry that I could not be here on time. My apologies to the deputation, too.
The opinion polls I have clearly endorse the comments made earlier in opposition to the Bill. My question on the quadruple lock is probably for Rev. Alexander McGregor. Are you reassured as a Church and as an organisation about the quadruple lock? Do you feel it gives you the necessary legal security? Does it give security and job support to those teachers who might feel ill at ease with discussing the matter? I want to hear your opinions on that.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much. We covered those subjects earlier, Mr Shannon, and Hansard will help you on that.
Thank you very much indeed to this set of witnesses, to Bishop James and his colleagues. Your evidence is much appreciated and very helpful. Thank you once again.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Colleagues, we have a lot to get through, so we will make progress.
Welcome to our next set of witnesses. Thank you very much for being here with us this morning. Could you kindly introduce yourselves for the record?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you. Unless you want to make an opening statement, we will go straight to the questions. Are you happy with that, Archbishop?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Nitty-gritty is good.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Is homosexuality incurable or curable?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
But the 29-page paper you submitted to us makes an argument, essentially, that it is a moral disorder and that therefore same-sex marriage will undermine society. I would have thought that it goes to the very heart of the matter whether you believe that homosexuality is curable or not.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Tall people and short people are different. That does not necessarily mean that you should only have tall people marrying short people or fat people marrying thin people. Difference is neither here nor there, I would have thought.
In olden teaching, it was that homosexuality was a choice; it was something that somebody had voluntarily chosen to adopt. Then I could understand why you would say, “All right, we believe that no homosexuals should be allowed to enter into relationships.” If you no longer believe that it is curable or that it is a matter of choice, it seems to me fundamentally cruel to deny lifelong companionship to two people just because they are of the same gender.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Were you in favour of it then?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
It is a reasonable assumption that same-sex marriage will become the law of the land sometime later this year. What will be the guidance that the Catholic Education Service gives to Catholic schools to teach children about marriage in this new context?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Specifically, will children attending Catholic schools be told that people—possibly parents of children in the class—are committing a sin if they enter into a same-sex civil marriage?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Archbishop, you have just acknowledged that the Roman Catholic Church opposes civil partnerships, as indeed you have opposed every reform that has brought equality to lesbian and gay people in this country for the last 20 years. Why should we believe that your opposition to this is about marriage, rather than about your disapproval of lesbian and gay relationships?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
But wouldn’t your opposition to this on the basis of marriage be more credible, and carry more authority, if you had been supportive of civil partnerships and all the other reforms that have benefited lesbian and gay people in this country?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Sorry, that was not my question. You talked about treating gay and lesbian people with respect, but you have opposed the Supply of Goods and Services Act, and you have opposed legislation that has provided equality, not for relationships, but for lesbian and gay people as individuals.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
You have. Did you support the equal age of consent?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
We are here today to talk about this particular Bill. I think this is important, and that the answers have been given.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
May I ask you the same question I asked the representatives of the Church of England? If an opposite-sex couple marry in a Catholic church and subsequently one member of that couple undergoes gender reassignment, do they remain married in the eyes of the Catholic Church? Under this law, they will in the eyes of the law.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
They would be a same-sex couple at that point.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
So you do not accept the reassignment of gender?
Simon Kirby (Conservative, Brighton, Kemptown)
Parliament redefined marriage about 177 years ago in 1836. Was it right to do so, and if so, why is it not right to do so today?
Simon Kirby (Conservative, Brighton, Kemptown)
I think you will find that it is the Act that gave Catholics the right to marry in their own church.
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
The list of countries that already have same-sex marriage includes not only societies that we might think of as typically being very progressive, such as Scandinavia, the Netherlands or Belgium, but Spain and Mexico, which have significant Catholic populations. What is your assessment of how same-sex marriage has operated in those countries, and can you identify any problems in those countries with how the law has operated?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
Thank you very much for coming along, gentlemen. I support wholeheartedly your assertion that marriage should be between one man and one woman. I respect that. Archbishop, you clearly stated that marriage is between a man and a woman, as the Bible teaches. Do you feel that the majority of your Church supports that?
May I ask you a further question? If the legal definition of marriage changes, the law will require that children learn about gay marriage as part of sex education. Do you feel that there should be an exemption for Roman Catholic schools and for faith schools?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
My second question was about the teaching. If the legal definition of marriage in law is changed, children will be required to learn about gay marriage as part of sex education. Do you feel that there should be an exemption for Roman Catholic or faith schools?
Stuart Andrew (Conservative, Pudsey)
May I ask you the same question I asked the representatives of the Church of England? Are you satisfied that the quadruple lock in the Bill will prevent a successful legal challenge that would compel religious organisations to conduct same-sex marriages?
Stuart Andrew (Conservative, Pudsey)
Why?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
Despite what you have just said, I remain significantly unconvinced. My fundamental concern goes back to the fundamental principles of the Bill. The Bill is laid out as a permissive measure to allow for civil marriage and for those religious organisations that want to conduct marriages to do so—it is not mandatory, it is not forcing you to do it, so why is the Church, the Catholic Church in particular, spending so much time worrying about it? That is a question that a lot of people would ask. It is a question that a lot of people ask me: “Why are you spending so much time worrying about it? It doesn’t affect you.”
Stephen Gilbert (Liberal Democrat, St Austell and Newquay)
Where has there been successful legal challenge in European countries that have same-sex marriage so far?
Stephen Gilbert (Liberal Democrat, St Austell and Newquay)
Ten years in Catholic Spain.
Stephen Gilbert (Liberal Democrat, St Austell and Newquay)
So the answer is that, in the 10 years that Spain has had same-sex marriage, and other countries in Europe have had same-sex marriage, there has not been a successful legal case suing the Catholic Church to offer same-sex marriage. On the domestic issue, to pick up Professor McCrudden’s point, has the Catholic Church in the United Kingdom ever been forced to offer marriage to divorcees against its will by a domestic legal action?
Stephen Gilbert (Liberal Democrat, St Austell and Newquay)
Is no.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
I was going to ask Siobhain McDonagh to ask her question now, but Stephen Doughty is giving me such grief, he must come in right now.
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
Thank you, Mr Streeter, it is on this point in particular.
I wonder what you made of the noble Lord Pannick’s evidence to the Committee. He said very clearly:
“For the European Court of Human Rights to compel a religious body or its adherents to conduct a religious marriage of a same sex couple would require a legal miracle much greater than the parting of the Red Sea”.
He gave a clear position there, and I wonder what you made of his arguments.
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
No, he refers to the legal position here and—
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Did you say you submitted this evidence to the Committee last night?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Excellent. We obviously need to study that carefully.
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
Your Grace, I am sorry, but I cannot let the comment go that Catholics who support gay marriage or gay people, or oppose the Church’s teaching on abortion or divorce, would probably leave the Church. I think all those things, and I am never going to leave the Church. I am a practising Catholic, and I have to say to you that there are vast numbers of people, certainly in parishes all round south London, who share my particular view.
I am concerned that you have presented today a view of the Church to many people who will not be cognisant of the Catholic Church that is different from how it operates. Catholic schools have always been able to explain their view on abortion, divorce and all sorts of things at the same time as carrying out their responsibilities to young people in teaching sex education and in moral teachings. There is no dilemma about that. We all understand it, but it has been done with kindness and courtesy. What disappoints me is the way that we are falling into legalese to show the Church in a very unkind and uncaring way.
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
I have a lot of sympathy with the previous point, having been brought up as a Catholic.
Society has moved on in its attitudes to the level of discrimination we accept in the provision of services and so on. Obviously a lot of people have expressed concerns to MPs that people will not be allowed to exercise their consciences, as they see it. What are your comments about that? What would you expect of someone who provides a public service? The example has been given of a Catholic hotelier who already does civil partnerships. Would you expect them to accept the law of the land? Generally, what is your view about whether people in that position should reflect society’s new norms about discrimination?
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
Reversing a question that is often put to us, what would be your view if a Catholic who takes your view on this applied for and got a job as, say, a public registrar after the legislation was passed and then said, “It’s against my conscience”?
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
To clarify, I am asking whether you regard it as reasonable for somebody to knowingly seek a conflict with a job they are applying for.
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
Or into any similar position.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you. We have three questions left; Ben Bradshaw, Jonathan Reynolds and then Chris Bryant.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Archbishop, you referred earlier to marriage being an institution that went back millennia, exclusively between a man and a woman. Have you studied the tradition of same-sex unions going back millennia, including those conducted by the early Church?
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
One of the themes that seems to be coming out of the evidence sessions that we have held this morning, has been how we will address some of the anomalies that might be created by the Bill. Therefore, what would be your view on any amendments that changed the legal definition of adultery or non-consummation of a marriage as grounds for divorce? Accordingly, what would be your view on any amendment that extended civil partnerships to heterosexual couples?
Helen Grant (Conservative, Maidstone and The Weald)
Archbishop Smith, in relation to the transgender provisions in the Bill and to pick up a point made earlier by the hon. Member for Stretford and Urmston, you indicated that the person changing gender would be legally married but questioned whether it would be possible to do that. Can you tell me whether that person and that couple would still be treated as part of the Catholic community and welcomed with dignity and respect?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
But your point earlier was that you would none the less welcome them with respect and dignity.
Desmond Swayne (Conservative, New Forest West)
I was interested to hear you state explicitly earlier that marriage is always between a man and a woman, and just now, you answered the right hon. Member for Exeter. I can certainly recall being taught at school that three Roman emperors married other men, but why did the Theodosian penal code of 340 AD explicitly ban same-sex marriage on pain of death if it had not been happening at all?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
It is a brilliant question, but it has nothing to do with the Bill.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
I am sorry, but I am afraid I disagree with how you are chairing this, Mr Streeter.
Bishop, it seems slightly odd that you have been asked about adultery but said that the Church has no position on adultery, and you have no view on the historic teaching of the patristic fathers. In your evidence, you personally said that you have moral objections to the Bill, but you have not yet articulated them. Would you like to do so?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
So as a moral argument, then, the marriage of the Prince of Wales while his wife’s partner is still alive—both of them being divorcees—is immoral?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
So it is immoral?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much, Archbishop, and your team, for your answers. That concludes our session for now. We are very grateful to you for coming, and we appreciate your answers.
We will suspend the hearing for 10 minutes for a pit-stop. We will start again at 10.29 sharp.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
We resume our deliberations by welcoming another set of expert witnesses. I invite you to introduce yourselves for the record.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you. With your permission, we will move straight to our questions.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much indeed.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
They are not just expert witnesses, they are Welsh expert witnesses, which makes them far more expert. I merely point out that in 1885, Mabon, the first Labour MP for the Rhondda—in fact, there have only ever been Labour MPs—argued for the disestablishment of the Church in Wales, but he recognised that we should still have the important legislation that has been provided for.
When the first version of the Bill was published there seemed to be a briefing that the Bill would make it virtually impossible for the Church in Wales ever to change its mind on the matter, and it seems as if you want to keep the door at least a little bit open.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
The Churches opposed the abolition of slavery in the early 19th century and then moved on. When do you think the Church in Wales might perform its first same-sex marriage?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Mr Bryant gave you his context. I was brought up in Abercynon in south Wales and went to Moriah English Baptist Church; which means, for the benefit of others, that services were conducted predominantly in English rather than that the people who attended them were English. At that point there were many chapels in all south Wales villages, but sadly that is no longer the case. In many cases, ironically, the Church in Wales building is the only operational religious premises in each village; in Abercynon, that would be St Donat’s. How many marriages in Wales are now conducted in Church in Wales churches?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
As a proportion of all marriages?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
To get a like-for-like comparison with what the Church of England said earlier, is that first marriages or all marriages?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
You mentioned clause 8. I wanted to test with you whether you feel that the clause is strong enough. There is a risk inherent in it, I guess, that a Lord Chancellor could refuse to issue the order even if the Church changed its mind. Do you think the clause is sufficient or does it need to be amended or strengthened in any way?
Helen Grant (Conservative, Maidstone and The Weald)
With the exception of the “may” or “shall” question, are you quite satisfied with the procedure set out in clause 8? If those issues were dealt with, are you quite happy that the clause would allow the Church in Wales to conduct same-sex marriages if it chose to do so in the future?
Helen Grant (Conservative, Maidstone and The Weald)
Yes, it does. Thank you.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Under the legislation, same-sex couples will have the choice of marriage or civil partnership, but for opposite-sex couples, only marriage. This morning, the Secretary of State said that marriage is the gold standard. Does the Church in Wales agree?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
With the Secretary of State—not necessarily with me.
Stephen Gilbert (Liberal Democrat, St Austell and Newquay)
Can I take you back to the point that you were just talking about, which is protection for people who may take a different view? If we think about people who work for the Church in Wales, do you think that the Bill as it stands offers them sufficient protections that they will not be compelled to do something that they are strongly not happy with?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Bishop, do you think that the clarity of the Churches’ message on marriage—yours, the Anglicans, and the Roman Catholics we heard from earlier—has been blunted by their opposition to civil partnerships? What is your Church’s position on civil partnerships?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
But do you allow them in church? Do you have them in church yet?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Is that your intention, or are you waiting for the Pilling report as well?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
The Pilling report. Are you involved in the Pilling report that was referred to earlier?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Is it being discussed?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
You mentioned that the Church affirms itself to loving relationships and that is good news. Can you tell me and the Committee what the opinions of your parishioners are in relation to same-sex marriage and the redefinition of marriage? Are your parishioners unhappy with the proposed changes, or do they feel that they should go through? As somebody who does not come from Wales, I am keen to hear your opinion in relation to that.
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
As one of the parishioners, I think I can say that I am in favour of it, but obviously I fully respect that the Church has to come to its own decision in due course, and that will require a great deal of thought and prayer and reflection. It seems from the comments that you have all made that you see the Bill overall as a permissive and protective piece of legislation that is not compelling you or the Church to do anything that you would not wish to do. Do you feel that some of the other organisations that submitted evidence or have spoken today may be taking slightly the wrong tack?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
But would I be correct in characterising your position as seeing the Bill as a permissive Bill that has the right protections?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Mr Shirley, do you want to come in there?
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
I envy your inbox with only the three e-mails.
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
I have been quite surprised by the level of concentration on inconsistencies or apparent inconsistencies around the definition of adultery and consummation. A lot of people corresponding with me seem very bothered about these issues. Do you have any comment to make about that?
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
That answers the question, thank you.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
I am very happy with that answer.
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
In the interests of consistency, I would like to ask a question that has been asked of previous witnesses this morning. On the issue of the possibility that civil partnerships could be extended to heterosexual couples, there seemed to be no objections from either the Catholic bishops or the Church of England. Is there a view that you would like to express?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
I was wondering about your e-mail. I had 1,700 people who contacted me who are against the redefinition of marriage and only 17 for. People have taken their time to express that viewpoint and I wish to express that here. Has the Church looked at all at the quadruple lock and have you sought legal opinion on whether it is substantial enough? If so, do you feel that it protects the Church from either domestic or European court decisions that may go against it?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
I have a technical question. As much as I love the Church in Wales, I had not come across the governing body of the Church in Wales.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
I do not even have to go to Synod either.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Another bishop earlier today thought that blogging was a private matter.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
The Bill explicitly refers to the governing body, and I am not sure that the governing body is referred to anywhere else in statute. You have just changed the number of people who attend. As politicians, we are used to counting the vote, and we know who is on our side and who is not—we have whipping arrangements and all the rest of it. If you were internally allowed to change your rules, the Lord Chancellor might want to say, “Hang on, I don’t think you have gone through the process properly.” My question is how is the governing body—its statute and all the rest of it—governed? I do not think it is in statute law, is it?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Does that mean a two-thirds majority in all three houses?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
You cannot change the number of members of the houses.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
We have two questions left for this set of witnesses. David Burrowes and finally, Kate Green.
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Apologies if this issue has been raised this morning when I was not here, but do you see any impact on teachers in Church schools in Wales in relation to same-sex marriage?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
I am not sure. I was asking whether it will be an issue in Church schools.
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
In terms of Church members, the Church itself might occupy buildings that are not wholly owned by the Church itself. It might be under the governance or ownership of a local authority as a public building. In such circumstances, in those activities, do you see any impact on any public sector equality duty arising from the Bill?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
A succinct answer from you, Mr Anderson.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Can I turn to adultery? I am one of the atheists on the Committee, but I think I am right to say that adultery is forbidden under the ten commandments.
Given that the legislation, and indeed the position now, is that adultery can take place only between two people of opposite sex, but this will create one more anomaly in relation to same-sex marriages when the legislation is enacted, what would the attitude of the Church in Wales be if the concept of adultery were simply removed from law altogether and ceased to be seen as grounds for divorce?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
On a point of order, Mr Streeter. May we ask Rev. Davies where his church is and what time the services are?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Copy it to all members of the Committee. Thank you very much for your excellent evidence, which was both informative and entertaining.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
We now have 27 minutes of pure gold with our two final witnesses of the morning. Although you are well known, please introduce yourselves for the record.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you. The first question will be from Chris Bryant.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
I have a very simple question. Some people have alleged that the European Court of Human Rights—some people have inadvertently called it the European Court and got themselves in a terrible mess with the European Union and all the rest of it—would immediately, if the Bill goes through as is, want to determine that people could sue the Church of England, or the Roman Catholic Church or others, to force them to perform a same-sex marriage. You have written to us, and I have read that advice, but would you like to read it into the record, as it were?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
But a civil partnership would only be available to a same-sex couple. Do you think it should be extended to opposite-sex or heterosexual couples? Might there be a challenge there?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Let us go beyond the Church ceremony to people’s expression of their faith in schools, the workplace and other areas. In your wide experience of human rights and religious liberty, and in terms of the manifestation of faith issue that has been raised in recent court judgments, do you see any implications flowing from the Bill?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
What about the situation for registrars in nonconformist Churches who have received a licence to conduct marriages? Do you see any issues in the case of a local authority with an equality duty, which might seek to take away that licence from a registrar who does not want to perform same-sex marriages?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
Lord Pannick, I read your submission with great interest. I do not know if you were here earlier, but your chamber colleague, Professor McCrudden, who had not read your submission, raised a number of serious legal objections.
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
I wonder what you make of those who are attempting to use legal arguments to oppose the Bill, in particular the arguments put forward by the Catholic Church. He went into some detail, and I am not in a position to question some of it. What did you make of the arguments?
Jane Ellison (Conservative, Battersea)
Just a quick question on Mr Doughty’s point: as I understood Professor McCrudden’s argument, he thought that the nature of the Catholic Church not opting in might be challengeable as discriminatory. I think that was the broad thrust of it all. It is quite complex.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
Lord Pannick, I am intrigued by your analogy; you said that this would require a legal miracle much greater than the parting the Red Sea to allow the children of Israel to cross from Egypt. Moses, with the divine intervention of God, of course could part the Red Sea. I am ever mindful of the phrase, “Doctors differ and patients die.” Lawyers have different opinions as well, but hopefully nobody dies as a result of the decisions that lawyers make.
The Chairman is looking at me, so I want to make sure that I get a question in. I was at a meeting last week at which three human rights lawyers gave an opinion. There were questions from the floor. This was the day after the Bill’s Second Reading in the House of Commons. Two of the lawyers gave a different opinion from yours. You will be aware of Aidan O'Neill, QC; he is very eminent. He has given a different opinion as well. With respect, why should we believe your opinion, as against the opinion of all those other people who say something completely different?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I entirely agree with the distinction you make about why a religious detriment could be a defence for holding that ceremony within a church. The confusion and the grey area comes where a Church collides with a public sector, as it were. If we had time, I would want to explore two of those European Court judgments—the case of the registrar and the case of the Relate counsellor—which illustrate this. If one takes the example of a Church that uses a school or town hall for its services—as many do if they do not have their own churches. If that Church clearly advertises itself as one that does not hold same-sex marriages, what would the legal position be of the council, the school or whatever it might be, in saying: “You can no longer use those public premises for your church activities, because you do not agree with same-sex marriage under the public sector equality duty”?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Let me give an example that I raised earlier with the Education Secretary, which he did not answer: say a teacher is teaching religious education or sex education, and is challenged by a child who says, “Miss, what do you think about same-sex marriage?” and the teacher cannot say, “It’s entirely legitimate, in my view; it’s on a par with heterosexual marriage.” What would the status of that teacher be? Would he or she have a defence, or would they lay themselves open to disciplinary action by the school?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
You have both been crystal clear on religious rights to marriage. Can we return now to civil ceremonies? Do you agree that the Bill as drafted will perpetuate an anomaly, whereby opposite-sex couples are denied access to a civil partnership? Might the Bill be better if that anomaly was removed?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
We have five minutes left. The final question goes to Chris Bryant, so before that, David Burrowes.
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
To go back to the issue of schools, if a teacher were to elevate one kind of marriage over another, is that not likely to amount to indirect or direct discrimination?