MARRIAGE (SAME SEX COUPLES) BILL
Public Bill Committee, 14 February 2013.
Examination of Witnesses
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
We will now hear oral evidence from the Religious Society of Friends and the general assembly of Unitarian and Free Christian Churches. For the record, please introduce yourselves to the Committee.
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
Welcome.
Before I call the first Member to ask a question, I again want to remind all Members that questions should be limited to matters within the scope of the Bill and that we must stick strictly to the timing in the programme order agreed by the Committee. I hope that I will not have to interrupt mid-sentence, but I will do so if need be.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
If this legislation passes, is it the intention of your organisations to offer same-sex marriages, and if so, why it is important for you to be able to do that?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
If you have celebrants who are not willing to conduct the marriages, how would you handle that?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
And are you confident that the protections in the legislation will work in terms of ensuring that you are able to offer these celebrations without challenge and equally, in the case of the Unitarians, that individuals can refuse to conduct them if they wish?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Can I just explore the Quaker position a bit, Mr Bartlet? I am not as familiar with it as perhaps I should be, particularly as I have a group of Quaker constituents who are persistent in writing to me on a regular basis about all manner of things. You said that you do not marry people; members of the Quaker Church are only witnesses. That was set down by George Fox in 1669. I gather that what he said exactly was that
“Friends cannot consent that they should join them together: for we marry none; it is the Lord’s work, and we are but witnesses.”
Can you explain to me the process that happened, so that in 2009 you became in favour of being witnesses at same-sex marriages?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Can I just follow that up? I fully appreciate that; what I am trying to get my head around is what really changed. I am particularly keen to investigate what changed between 2004, when civil partnerships came in, and now, that we need to go on to full-blown same-sex marriage. Was there unanimity in 2009? Is it possible that at your yearly meeting in the future you may reverse that decision? Are there a number of your celebrants who disagree with that situation and who may refuse to participate in these ceremonies in their Friends meeting houses?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
So you think it will happen in all premises of the Quakers around the country if this becomes law.
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
I have three Quaker meeting houses in Bristol West and a Unitarian church, so I very much look forward to same-sex weddings taking place in all four of those locations later this year. Do either of you favour the extension of the right to marry loving couples to other organisations such as humanists?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
From the information we have, it seems as though—it says here—there are about 23,000 Quakers across Great Britain. I just wondered how many Unitarians there were and whether you have assessed how many weddings are likely to take place in the foreseeable future in your meeting houses and churches.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
I think you may have answered my question, Mr McAuley, but I wanted to ask whether it is currently the case for both of you, and will be the case with same-sex marriages, that you do not have to be a Quaker or Unitarian to have the ceremony on your premises.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Some of the other religious organisations we have heard from that are opposed to the Bill base their opposition on their approach to Scripture and doctrine. How has your approach to Scripture and doctrine led you to a different conclusion?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Mr Bartlet, may I come back to you with a couple of points? How many members do the Quakers have at the moment?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
That will do; do not worry. The 23,000 figure is fine. What I am interested in is that your name, along with the Unitarians and the liberal Jews, has been prayed in aid an awful lot by the Government and the proponents of the Bill. On my rough calculation, your combined congregation amounts to 38,000 people. What is your relationship with, and what is the Quaker view of—in my experience of dealing with the Quakers, it is slightly different from that of other religions—the Government, the role of Government, and how beholden you are to Government?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I do not dispute that. I am trying to get at why you need the Government to legislate that marriage can now be a different thing—between same-sex couples. What is to stop your particular faith, which is a bit different from other faiths we have had here, performing the ceremony—I want to follow on by asking about that—and saying that these two same-sex persons are now Quaker-married, regardless of how the Government would view it, because you do not believe that the Government should trump your view of what marriage is, as you are only witnesses to it, because it is something that God gives those two people? So why do they need to be married in the eyes of the Government?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I do not want to hog the questions, although we could have this fascinating debate all day. I do not think that you have answered my point as to why you still need marriage to change in the law for you to be able to marry same-sex couples under Quaker ceremony.
The other point that I want to ask you about quickly is on when you say that it is down to the two people who decide to get married and you are just witnesses to it. Can they tailor-make their ceremony? I have not been to a Quaker wedding, so I do not know how it works, but could they effectively say, “We want our Quaker wedding ceremony not to have any mention of God in it”?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
That answers my question then.
Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne)
Thank you very much for that full answer. An aspect of the Bill that I am particularly interested in is the protection it gives the Church of England, in that it has essentially been ring-fenced. I wanted to know what you thought about that special protection for the established Church.
Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne)
How watertight do you think the quadruple lock is?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
I want to put the same question to both your organisations. I believe you referred to having about 10,000 Unitarians at this time. Is that correct?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
And for the Quakers it was about 23,000. I do not want to take anything away from your Churches, and your opinion is obviously important to the Committee, but you are small, minority Churches, and I just want to put matters into perspective. First, in relation to 10 or 20 years ago, would you say that your numbers have fallen greatly? Secondly, as organisations, although I am sure that you have been able to have blessing ceremonies for same-sex relationships over the past number of years, if, inadvertently, you supported legislation that made things difficult for large Churches with millions of followers across the whole United Kingdom, would you feel that what you were doing here today would be wrong?
I think you mentioned about 100 marriages over the last period of time. I would be interested to hear how many marriages have been carried out in Unitarian churches over the last number of years, and do you see those numbers decreasing?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
If a legislative change came through the Committee and was ultimately passed by the House and, by what you are saying to us today, you were inadvertently complicit in a change that had an impact on larger Churches—those with millions of followers—how would you feel about that?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
My question to you was this, Mr McAuley: how would you feel if the Bill impacted on all those other larger Churches and the millions of followers that they have, and if they felt victimised, discriminated against, annoyed, angered or displeased—whatever terminology you want to use? How would you feel about that? You have not answered that question.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
My last question was on how many marriages you have.
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
The Unitarian Church will opt in to perform same-sex marriages. Is that right?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Where a Church, whether the Unitarian Church or otherwise, has collectively opted in to perform same-sex marriages, but an individual minister does not want to conduct them, would you share the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s concern, based on its legal opinion—we will examine this later with the commission—that
“the bill in its present form could amount to the state acting unlawfully by interfering with the freedom of religious organisations…to enforce their religious doctrines within their particular organisation…the bill does not clearly provide for the freedom of religious organisations to ensure its employees or officials act in accordance with its ethos under Article 4 of the European Union Framework Directive”?
Do you share those concerns, particularly given the rich heritage of conscientious objection among the Quakers?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
More generally on conscientious objections, do you have any concerns—this is directed to the Quakers as well—that go beyond the church ceremony and into people’s workplaces, schools or the like?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Have you had a chance to look at the legal advice of Robin Allen QC, who expresses reservations
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Finally, in terms of impact assessments, have you considered any impact—certainly, positive impact—of the open doors that there will be for same-sex marriage ceremonies on your congregations? Have you given any thought to that?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
I have been.
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
You have both given some extremely illuminating evidence, explaining why your organisations—your congregations—both support same-sex marriage. You will be aware that one of the objections, or concerns, from those churches that are against same-sex marriage has been about how teachers with strong religious views will deal with the subject of marriage in the classroom once this legislation is passed. Can I ask how you believe the subject of marriage should be dealt with in the classroom, given—I am sure—your own concern for your own religious views being treated with the same sort of respect that you would hope for any others?
Helen Grant (Conservative, Maidstone and The Weald)
Can I just clarify if you are both satisfied with the opt-in procedures set out in the Bill?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
It seems that the hierarchical churches have had a more difficult process to come to changing their minds on these kinds of issues. Opinion polls seem to suggest that in the Church of England and elsewhere members of the pews support change, but the hierarchy does not. Do you ever hold your meetings in other people’s religious buildings?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Chaplaincies and the like?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
You do not hold any events in Anglican churches?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
The reason I am asking is because one of the ironies may be that we pass all this legislation and the one place where you will not be able to have a same-sex marriage is in the Palace of Westminster. I just wondered whether Quakers or Unitarians would like to have the same opportunity afforded to the Roman Catholic church of holding services in St Mary’s Undercroft?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Can I suggest you think of it now?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
I have had the pleasure of attending a number of Quaker services over the years. Truly they have been some of the most moving and beautiful services I have attended—sadly mainly funerals—but remarkable. I have not had the pleasure of going to a Unitarian service but I hope to at some point.
You raised an issue, Mr Bartlett, about complexity for non-conformist churches in Wales. Could you just explain that a little bit more? I did not quite understand.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Following on from my question about your relationship with the Government, Mr Bartlett, what would the Quakers’ view be if the Government reintroduced conscription?
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
Order. I do not think that is relevant.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Can I explain why it is?
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
No I am sorry, you cannot explain why it is. It is not relevant to the Bill.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
This is a question for Mr McAuley. If a lesbian or gay couple came to you and wanted to bring their priest who wanted to marry them, but whose own church forbade that, how would you handle that situation?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Could that priest be the authorised person?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Thank you.
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
This may have to be the last question, it is now 12.13 pm.
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Thank you, Mr Hood. It was actually on an earlier question from Mr Loughton—that was in order—on the size of congregations and whether Parliament should take note of minority viewpoints, no matter how small. Would you agree with me that actually Quakers and Unitarians have been at the forefront of holding minority opinions in their time, including setting up the world’s first anti-slavery organisation in Clifton in Bristol in my constituency in 1783, which of course was not at all a popular view at the time? Sometimes views that are held by a small number of people to start with can change the world. That is partly what your faith is about?
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
Order. I am afraid that that brings us to the end of the time allocated for the Committee to ask questions of these witnesses. I thank you on behalf of the Committee. We will now hear oral evidence from the Methodist Church and the United Reformed Church.
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
For the record, could you introduce yourselves to the Committee?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Could both of you just clarify whether that is for England or England and Wales?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
What is wrong with Northern Ireland?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
That sounded a bit like one-upmanship—you were listing more places. Do you want to lay out the formal position of your two Churches?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
May I reply to that and come to the URC in a moment? It sounds quite fudgy, if you do not mind my saying so, but perhaps that is deliberate. I see from the smile on your face that it is deliberate. So you kind of want to like gay people, but you do not want to marry them?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
A bit like alcohol.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Withdraw that.
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
Order.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
But do you think homosexuality is a moral disorder?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Would you bless same-sex unions?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
What about elsewhere?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
May I put the same questions to the URC?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
I congratulate you on using the word “ontologically”. You are the first, of all the religious people we have had before us, to use that word. Not even the Catholics got that in. Mansfield college chapel has Cicero and Dante and all sorts of people on its walls. It seems odd that a denomination that has that breadth of theological and soteriological attitude would not want to have the same attitude towards LGBT marriage.
Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne)
A general question: what role do you think a Government have or Parliament has in defining marriage, which for your Churches is a sacred ritual? I wanted to get some impression of that.
Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne)
Clearly, with respect to this legislation, there is a tension, is there not, between the state, and how the state defines marriage, and the religious denominations that we have? This is manifested in the quadruple lock, which is a phrase that I have never heard of before, but which clearly has been designed for this Bill. How secure do you think the quadruple lock is? From my point of view as a Member of Parliament, it seemed odd that, if we were going down this route of equality, we should be ring-fencing and protecting the Church of England. What do you think about that?
Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne)
My rather cloudy conclusion—I followed most of what you said, but not everything—is that you do not feel that the quadruple lock, as provided in the Bill, is necessarily as watertight as it could be.
Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne)
You left the Church of England to one side, but just for the interest of the Committee, what is your personal view about the protection for the Church of England?
Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne)
I would like that very much.
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
Can you make a written reply?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
Gentlemen, thank you for coming along. I am keen to hear comments from both of you. In relation to the Methodist Church, have you had from your congregation concerns from teachers and registrars, for instance, on how they feel about the so-called quadruple lock?
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
Order. Mr Shannon, I am sorry to interrupt, but Members up here are saying that they cannot hear you. If you ask your questions through the microphone, we will all hear you.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
Can I ask a question in relation to teachers and registrars? You have people in your Methodist Church organisation who will clearly have opinions on how the quadruple lock ensures that they are not impacted in their jobs. We have heard evidence individually and collectively indicating that many teachers have concerns. Have those concerns been expressed to the congregations of the Churches that you are in? You say that you do not have direction over the Methodist Church in Northern Ireland, but have you talked to that Church to gauge its opinion?
My question to you, Dr Pearce, is on what I have read in the background information, which refers to the polity advisory group. You mentioned the Baptist Union and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Do you have direct contact with those two Churches? When you come here to express your opinion, are you expressing an opinion on behalf of those Churches, too? I hope that was a wee bit clearer, Mr Hood.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
You mentioned teachers in school preparing people for life. If teachers had a genuine religious conviction and opinion that prevented them from conveying perhaps the full teaching—the full indication—of what same-sex marriage wanted, do you feel that guidelines should be set down for teachers so that teachers with religious convictions would not be impacted inadvertently or wrongly by any legislation coming through?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Can I ask you both briefly what your two Churches’ attitudes towards homophobia are? Do you think that homophobia is a big problem in this country?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
May I ask a follow up and then perhaps hear Dr Pearce’s view on that? Do you think the Bill will do anything to address the problem of homophobia?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
My take on all this is that we still have a problem with homophobia in society and that is what needs addressing. I am asking whether the Bill can add to that.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I am not sure whether either of your institutions marries people in premises other than your own, such as armed forces chapels or chaplaincies. If the legislation passes, all denominations using a particular building would need to agree that any one can hold same-sex marriages in those premises. As you may not decide to offer same-sex marriages, do you envisage that you would want to prevent others from using the premises to do so where you also use those premises to conduct marriages?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
So you would not want to control the behaviour of other institutions in premises such as armed forces’ chapels and, therefore, that would effectively require you to give consent to others conducting same-sex marriages on those premises if they wanted to?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Sure, yes. That is a different question. For the Unitarians?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Yes, sorry. That was the end of the previous session.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I am grateful for that answer.
Simon Kirby (Conservative, Brighton, Kemptown)
I have two questions about protections, which we have discussed previously. Do you agree with Lord Pannick that it would be difficult to craft improvements to protections currently contained in the Bill? Secondly, do you agree that for both the Church of England and the Church in Wales, there is a need for a different route to opt in in the Bill because of their obligations under common law and, in the case of the Church of England, canon law?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
To follow on from the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Stretford and Urmston earlier about sharing, how many examples are there across the country in terms of sharing between Methodists, the United Reformed Church and the Church of England in some cases, whether that is in military chapels or, indeed, in church buildings? I have seen quite a few, but I would like an idea of the scale.
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
Is it just the buildings that are shared, or is anything else shared? I have been to one of those locations and seen literally the same congregation turning up but having a slightly different service or a different minister each time.
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
How would the decision-making process work when more is shared than just the building? If one congregation wanted to opt-in that happened to be more dominated, say, by the URC, how would those opt-in arrangements work? Would there have to be agreement among them, or could it be vetoed if, say, the Methodist Church did not agree to go ahead with same-sex marriage but URC members did? How would that work?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
Could you share some further information on how those decision-making processes work for the marriage of divorcees, for example?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
What number of members do you have?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
In terms of the buildings, just to take it a stage further in a different direction: say, down the line, the conferences decide they want to opt in to same-sex marriages; and knowing that your buildings are well used by a variety of organisations and Christians of different denominations; knowing, also, that there are those that use the premises for weddings, and that those denominations also will continue to hold a traditional view of marriage; would that impact on their continued involvement in your buildings, if, down the line, you come to a view that you uphold same-sex marriage? Also, any other organisations and charities that will use your buildings—say, for example, a marriage guidance charity that similarly upholds a traditional view of marriage: will that affect their continued involvement?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Have you sought legal opinion in relation to your earlier reservations concerning clause 2? I was very interested to hear your concerns in relation to the issue of compelling Ministers to participate in same-sex marriages. Have you sought your own legal opinion as a Church?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
But it is also the opinion of Robin Allen QC on behalf of the EHRC.
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
It may be interesting for you to discuss with them some of your concerns on clause 2, in relation to concerns on religious freedom.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Mr Powell, we heard from your Anglican colleagues that they are actively reviewing their whole theology of human sexuality, under the review under Sir Joseph Pilling, and that there may be changes in their approach to civil partnerships. Is the Methodist Church undergoing a similarly active review, or is that in prospect?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
So your position is under review?
Jimmy Hood (Labour, Lanark and Hamilton East)
Order. That brings us to the end of the time allotted for the Committee to ask questions of our witnesses. I thank Rev. Powell and Dr Pearce on behalf of the Committee.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
We begin our proceedings in our final evidence session. We welcome our first set of witnesses. Thank you for being with us this afternoon and being prepared to give evidence. I ask you to introduce yourselves for the record and then we will move straight on to questions.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much. The first question is from Chris Bryant.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Are the provisions in relation to pensions in the Bill fair?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
How many people do you think that applies to? Obviously, some occupational pensions have a more generous provision than the law requires them to have.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Does anyone else wish to comment on pensions at this stage?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
May I follow this argument about pensions a little further? Would the change in the legislation that you are seeking provide for state pensions or only occupational pensions?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Would that be both public sector and private sector occupational pensions?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I do not think the Equality Act 2010 specifies that. I do not think it says specifically that it is private sector occupational pension scheme providers, does it?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I note what you say, and therefore I assume that you do not see this as especially burdensome on private occupational pension providers, not so much in terms of cost—although you might want to comment on the likely cost to them—but in terms of the management of their pension schemes.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
The submission we have had from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which I think is good and makes some interesting points, raises some concerns about the legal position for a minister in a Church that opts in but who does not want to conduct same-sex marriages. The submission states:
“However, our legal opinion suggests the bill in its present form could amount to the state acting unlawfully by interfering with the freedom of religious organisations...to enforce their religious doctrines within their particular organisation.”
Can you elaborate on that and what it would take to remedy that in the Bill, if it can be remedied?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Do you think that the legislation should clearly enable the organisation to discipline that individual? This brings in the bigger argument: in order to comply with the law, should a whole organisation— I am mostly talking about non-religious organisations; I realise you are talking about ministers—have to employ only people who are compliant and in favour of same-sex marriage? Or do you think we should, in your personal view, enable flexibility so that as long as an organisation offers that service, it does not require every single person employed by or affiliated to that organisation to go along with it? Do you think that is a sustainable situation, or should everybody have to comply, and therefore the organisation would have the power to discipline, backed up by the law?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
So you favour 100% conformity by every member?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I understand that. Conversely, then, we had cases in the European Court of Human Rights involving civil partnerships and a registrar who said that he or she—I cannot remember which—could not perform those ceremonies. You are not in favour of flexibility: if that authority had said, “We will accommodate her, and we will have six registrars who will do everybody and one who will only do some,” that would not be permissible, as far as you are concerned, and she should have been forced to do all or nothing, along with everybody else.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
Thank you for coming along. I have a couple of questions for clarification. Recently, the Roman Catholic adoption agencies have made a clear stand on their concerns about adoption and about how the law will constrain and restrict them with regard to things that they feel, biblically and religiously, they cannot do. I would like your opinion on that.
Mr Allen, I think you mentioned giving some advice to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. I had a meeting with that body back in early December, speaking with its members at some length. I would be keen to get your opinion, because obviously the Northern Ireland Assembly took a decision not to agree to same-sex marriage. What is your opinion today? I asked for its opinion and would like to get yours.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
That is fair enough. I have already heard its opinion, so I was keen to see whether your opinion was similar, but you are not going to tell me that.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission is well known for intervening in cases where Christians and people with religious beliefs are taken to task on an issue, whatever it might be, whether it be foster care, provision of services in B and Bs, and so on. How many times have you supported a claim brought by a traditional Christian, and how many cases have you pursued against traditional Christians?
Siobhain McDonagh (Labour, Mitcham and Morden)
That is life.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
I asked for the numbers. Perhaps if you do not have the details today, you could reply with the numbers of those traditional Christians that you have supported and those that you have not. It is in Hansard that the request has been made.
I asked you a question about Catholic adoption agencies and their concerns about how the measure will legally change their position in relation to adoption. Can you give us some reassurance on that?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
People have very real concerns.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
If a foster couple belonged to a faith organisation that had opposed the legislation and they expressed their own opposition to same-sex marriages as being legitimate and, as a result, a local authority no longer used them as foster carers, would you support the foster carers? Would there be a case to be made in support of them?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
That is my point. I entirely agree that the paramount consideration must be what is best for the child. I assume that the actual answer to my question is, yes, you would defend them. Can you define the threshold at which it becomes detrimental for the child to be in the care of parents who hold those views? Clearly, if they were to express those views by being malicious towards gay people generally, or, if the child turned out to be gay, they were prejudicial to the child, that would not be in the interest of the child.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Tim, this is a marriage Bill.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
But the point about parents holding the view that same-sex marriage is not legitimate is germane to this debate, which is about the principle. If people hold that view, at what point does it have serious repercussions on their ability to look after a child, even though they may be brilliant foster carers?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you. We are going back to the Bill with Chris Bryant.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
That seems like quite a challenge. Can I just ask the Co-op, because you are obviously an employer, what your answer to the question about pensions is, and what do you already provide to your staff?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
But survivor benefits would be exactly the same for whoever you nominate, regardless of whether they are your wife, or whoever else you nominate?
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
Which is exactly the same as the parliamentary pension, in fact.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
May I ask your views on the implications of the Bill for transgender people?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Do you think there is any need to reintroduce the fast-track procedure for gender recognition?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I asked if you felt there was any need for or any advantage to reintroducing a fast-track procedure for gender recognition, which used to exist under the Gender Recognition Act?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
Your organisation has in the past, I think, funded training for the British Humanist Association on religious freedom, which obviously would have an impact upon the redefinition of marriage and where we are in this debate today. Could you give us some indication of how you came to support that organisation and perhaps why not directly religious organisations?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
ECHR funded training for the British Humanist Association on religious freedom. I wonder how that gives you balance and fair play for other organisations and how they see that?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
Can we get those figures, Mr Streeter, and listen to how the £10 million was spent? Just a breakdown of the organisations that benefited?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
I am sure if Mr Wadham would like to send us those numbers that would be very helpful. Other than that, thank you very much indeed for coming today and giving us your evidence. It has been most helpful.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much indeed, Mr Hayman and Mr Parr, for coming and giving evidence today. If you would like to introduce yourselves for the record, then we will leap straight in with some questions for you.
Chris Bryant (Labour, Rhondda)
I always get my h’s and my s’s the wrong way round in the stuff that you do, which you are in favour of and I am very favour of—sex and relationship education and all the rest of it. Do you have any problems with the Bill in terms of what teachers will or will not be able to teach? Does it make life more difficult or easier for them, or does it not make any difference at all?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Mr Streeter, I do not think that we have had a submission from Schools OUT, so it might be useful if you, Mr Parr, said who you are, who you represent and what your basic points are.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Is it a charity?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Thank you. That is helpful. Can I ask a representative from the PSHE Association something? On your note, which I thought was a good note, I absolutely agreed that this is a really difficult subject and that the Government need to do more to ensure that we have proper and good-quality sex and relationship education, because it is a bit of a lottery at the moment, as we know. In your note, you make the point that PSHE, and SRE within that, is a subject often taught by non-specialist teachers and that it is particularly challenging for them to deal with it.
Personally, I think we should have many more specialist teachers doing it, but we do not. It may be Mrs Miggins who is a geography teacher—I always quote that—who has a couple of free periods on a Thursday afternoon and so is in charge of SRE for this term. How do we deal with those teachers who find themselves teaching SRE, whether they want to or not, who have strong objections to what the Bill will do? It is not just about teaching facts and what the law says. They will be challenged for their view. Although you say it is good practice to try to keep opinions out of it—I do not disagree with that—inevitably they will come into it, so what happens in those circumstances?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
You used the phrase “may be some way” that they could do a—
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Tim, we will come back to you in a second. Plenty of other colleagues want to speak.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
To what degree, if at all, do you think that this legislation could impact on homophobic bullying in schools?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
The piece of written evidence from the PSHE Association was very good. It refers to the age-appropriateness of teaching certain aspects of sex and relationship education. What is currently the age at which marriage and family life is taught to children?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
That covers the biology of it. I was more asking about the family structure and household structure, but I did not quite get a clear answer. For instance, would you expect year 6 children to understand that children may have two dads, two mothers and that family life is complicated?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
So what we are doing here need not necessarily change current practice in schools? Is that what you are getting at?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
Following on from comments earlier about the impact on children in schools of passing this legislation, I want to ask a more general question about the wider debate around the Bill in the media, Parliament and elsewhere. The vast majority of the debate, certainly in Parliament and in this Committee, has been conducted with great courtesy, even between opponents and proponents, but that has not always been the case. Indeed, I think that some of the very strong statements made by organisations can have quite a damaging effect. Can you tell us a bit about how you have seen that impact individual children in classes you or your organisation has worked with?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
What do you think the impact is on individual children of some of the more strident opinions that have been put forward?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
Mr Parr, you commented that people can have opinions and at the same time be protected. I am sure you are aware of the recent poll that indicates that some 40,000 teachers would have difficulties with this redefinition of marriage and how it would affect them in their teaching in schools. They would have some difficulty—indeed, probably great difficulty—over how they can be involved in the training and the teaching and with how that will affect their conscience.
Ever-mindful of that—this is a substantial number of teachers—if the Bill should see its conclusion on Third Reading in the Houses of Parliament, if that is where it ends up, how would you address the issue of those with very clear religious beliefs who have a conscience in relation to this matter? Do you see a criteria or guideline being set down under which teachers may say, “Yes, there is such a thing as same-sex marriage,” and that being as far as it goes, or do you see it going beyond that? Be ever-mindful of those people who have a conscience, whom I referred to earlier.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
That is the poll that has come out on it.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
We have had Church groups here this morning representing 5,000 or 10,000 people out of millions of people, so do not tell us about statistics and numbers.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
I am aware of the facts of the case, and I am well aware of the issues. The issue that I am trying to get out of the gentleman is, how does he see protection for those people who have a different point of view from his?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I will pick up from where I was cut off on that point earlier.
I entirely agree with what Mr Hayman has said: some way, sensibly, should be found to accommodate teachers who have a problem. We are potentially talking about 40,000 teachers, which is rather more than the combined membership of the three religions that we had earlier. It is 10% of all teachers, according to a poll, and however accurate that is, it is a substantial number of teachers.
How do we do it? That is the problem. When we asked the Secretary of State for Education about this, he completely ducked the question and just kept referring to “inappropriate teaching”. Would you support, absolutely, protection under the law for a teacher who declined to be the Mrs Miggins seconded to do SRE as part of PSHE on a Thursday afternoon because he or she felt that his or her view might come into conflict? If he or she said, “Can I not do that?” but the school said “No, you must,” would you support the teacher who wanted to opt out, rather than risk saying something that might be deemed, in the language of the Secretary of State, to be “inappropriate teaching”, whatever that means?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
But we are not talking about fact, necessarily; subjectivity is involved. In sex and relationship education, the sex bit is quite a lot about fact, but the relationship bit is a lot about subjectivity. A counsellor at Relate said, “I have a problem doing civil partnerships. I think that person was wrong. Therefore, can’t we accommodate?” The law said, “No,” and that person lost their job. The same could apply to the teacher here. It is likely to apply to more people, because there are more people who have a problem with same-sex marriage than who now have a problem with civil partnerships. How do we protect that teacher with this law?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
It is an important point.
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
It is just over seven years since I persuaded my then colleagues on the Education Committee to do a really good report on bullying, and particularly homophobic bullying, which led to Stonewall and the previous Government—just to say something nice about Mr Balls—taking the issue on and putting some good guidance in place for how to deal with homophobic bullying in every state school. There were problems around the country with parents saying, “I do not want my children to know about this,” even though it was an anti-bullying policy. Over time, I have seen that largely disappear in my constituency in Bristol. Is it your experience as a PSHE teacher that there is less resistance to discussing homosexuality openly in school now?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Just to clarify, I was not asking about the prevalence of homophobic bullying, but rather the resistance from parents and others to the teaching, whether through citizenship, PSHE or drama—you mentioned the “FIT” play earlier. Is there now less resistance to this being a core part of the curriculum?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Which was two years after the Education Committee.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Well done. The final question is from Tim Loughton.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I am sorry if Mr Bradshaw does not want me to go into this, but it is an important point for teachers for whom it will be an issue. I entirely agree with everything the speakers said that was in order about the need to have better-quality teaching of diversity. I absolutely agree with all of that. We are really bad at it at the moment and need to be much better.
Whatever my views on civil partnerships, which I absolutely support, or on same-sex marriage, I and many among those 40,000 potential teachers are worried— we will obsess about it—about why teachers will have any protection, given what happened to the Relate counsellor who was not able to have that sort of sensible accommodation? Mr Hayman may have mentioned some version of this, but a teacher should have protection and should be able to say, “I am not the right person to do this at all.” If I was in a same-sex relationship, the last person I would want to go to for guidance counselling would be someone who did not agree with same-sex relationships. I think you agree with my position that we need to make the Bill watertight, so how can we guarantee in the Bill that teachers can say, “That is not for me; I opt out,” or can purely express a view—without them haranging or harassing, which is clearly inappropriate teaching? The problem that we have is that the Secretary of State for Education did not define “inappropriate teaching”. Without new guidance from the Department, we are going to have a problem. Do you agree that those two safeguards are essential if we are to achieve what we all want?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much for your evidence this afternoon. We do appreciate it, and we are very grateful.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Good afternoon to our next two witnesses. Thank you very much for being here. We know who you are, but please introduce yourselves for the record.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Do you think it is the role of the Government and Parliament to redefine marriage in the way the Bill is doing?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Jeffrey John, I have asked every other representative of a religion this question. Some of those opposing the Bill base their opposition on their understanding of Scripture and the role of tradition in their faith. How has your understanding of Scripture and the role of tradition led you to a different conclusion?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
My understanding is that you would support the Church of England opting in to this law. Do you not think that that is a rather distant prospect, given that it does not even yet properly recognise civil partnerships?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
I am keen to get your ideas in relation to how this will affect teachers and registrars. Would you support there being sufficient protection in place to safeguard teachers who may have to teach something that they are unhappy with from a religious point of view? Would you support that in relation to registrars as well? I know the Church has a very set opinion at the moment. I would like to hear what protection you think could be put in place to ensure that teachers and registrars are protected.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
That is your opinion on teachers. Do you feel there should be similar protection for registrars in local councils in relation to marriage?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
You will have to come to Northern Ireland to learn the accent. Do you feel that registrars should have equal protection?
Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne)
This is directed at the Very Rev. Jeffrey John. We have what is called a quadruple lock so, as I understand it, if two people of the same sex who are Church of England parishioners wish to get married in the Church of England, and their priest wishes them to be married and is quite happy for them to be married in his or her church, that is impossible under the Bill, is it not? What are your thoughts about that?
Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne)
So if you had your choice, in terms of amending the Bill, you would remove the quadruple lock, would you?
Hugh Robertson (Conservative, Faversham and Mid Kent)
I have a question for Alice Arnold. You have a very high-profile civil partnership, which always seems, in all that we read about it, an incredibly happy partnership.
Hugh Robertson (Conservative, Faversham and Mid Kent)
Probably, like most partnerships, it has its moments. Can I ask a very simple question: what would the ability to get married add to your life?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
There are a couple of anomalies in the Bill in terms of the way that same-sex married couples will be treated, as opposed to opposite-sex married couples. For example, we heard earlier about the differences in pension rights that the Bill proposes. There are also differences in the significance of the consummation of a marriage. What is your view on those anomalies? Do you have concerns about them?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Let me ask Jeffrey John, one of the points that was made to us earlier in the week by some representatives of the Churches was that procreation was one of the fundamentals of marriage in the eyes of their Church. What is your view on that argument?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
So do I understand that you are saying not that you want to see civil partnerships to be no longer possible, but that you think they should be equally possible for opposite-sex and same-sex couples?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Unavailable—okay, thank you. What would you do, therefore, about people who are currently in civil partnerships?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Let me take a view shared by another individual—who speaks not on behalf of the Church of England, but on behalf of an individual in the Church of England, like yourself—who said in submission to the Committee that he is disappointed by the Marriage Bill. He says:
“Adopting this bill gives us another anachronistic law in that it allows same sex couples to marry but the laws around the consummation and dissolution of those marriages remains strictly heterosexual. It feels to me a bit like the Deed of Union in 1536 when Welsh people were ‘accepted’ as English citizens as long as they gave up their Welshness!”
He then says:
“What the equal marriage Bill doesn’t say to LGBT people”—
this is different, indeed, from what Alice Arnold said—
“is ‘you are accepted as who you are’ it says ‘you are acceptable because you conform’.”
Do you agree?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
I am simply saying what Mr Jones says. He is basically saying that there are still inequalities in the Bill and there is still a need to conform to a “hetero-normative ideal” of marriage.
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Just to go back, would you say that the concern about this anachronistic law in relation to consummation and adultery still has to be dealt with, or is it fine as the Bill says, or should we move to a point where we do not make a big deal of this in relation to marriage per se?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Alice, you mentioned earlier that you would like to marry Clare Balding, but you also admitted that you are not particularly religious. I wondered what sort of wedding you would like to have.
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
Are we invited?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Feel free not to answer. This has nothing to do with the Bill.
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
There was a serious question: would you like a humanist wedding, for instance?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
And no presents either, I suppose, if you do not have a second ceremony. Dr John mentioned the politics of the Church on several occasions. Is the Church of England’s resistance to going down this line more to do with the international dimension of trying to keep African Churches in particular on board? Is that why the Church of England is in such a tangle over its attitude to homosexuality, or is it an intra-Church of England schism?
Simon Kirby (Conservative, Brighton, Kemptown)
Dr John, following on from that, are you a lone voice in the wilderness, or are there others clearing the way in the Church of England for same-sex marriage?
Desmond Swayne (Conservative, New Forest West)
Just two brief questions for the dean. First, with respect to maintaining civil partnerships for same-sex couples, do you not accept that there might be a case where there would be a number of same-sex couples who would accept that the orthodox teaching of their Churches as currently stated is that marriage is not for them? They would therefore accept that civil partnerships are the right thing for them until the position of their orthodox Churches changed.
Secondly, taking you back to St Paul, do you consider that St Paul’s teaching might have been more informed by his experience of the public sexual indulgence, both heterosexual and homosexual, associated with temple cults and prostitution, which, in effect, amounted to a form of idolatry, and that it was that which informed his epistles, rather than individual relationships?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Your remarks might want to refer to the Bill as well.
Desmond Swayne (Conservative, New Forest West)
It was on continuing civil partnerships for those people who would accept the Church’s current teaching on marriage.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
That certainly would not be a first for the Church of England. Given what you say about, in your view, the majority of ordinary members of the Church of England and many senior clergymen and parish priests being sympathetic, and given the experience of what happened when divorcees were remarried for the first time, you say that you would not want the Church to be forced to do anything. What about a permissive regime in the Church of England that allowed individual parishes that wanted to do so?
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
Although to be fair to the Bishop of Norwich, he made it quite clear that he did not agree with the Church’s official position on civil partnerships.
Ben Bradshaw (Labour, Exeter)
May I ask a broader question? We have heard from a lot of religious representatives in the course of these two sittings. What strikes me, as a member of the Church of England and someone who would like to be married, is that these different religious representatives seem to me to believe completely different things but they all call themselves Christians. There seem to be those who, for dogmatic reasons or reasons of adherence to literal readings of Scripture, could never countenance a change. There seem to be others, however—you, the Quakers, the Liberal Jews and even the Bishop of Norwich—who are edging towards a different place. How are these positions ever going to be reconciled?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
I have two questions for the dean. Carrying on from your wish to have, perhaps, a pick-and-mix situation in the Church of England, I think logically that is absolutely right, but who would determine whether a parish could have a vicar who would conduct same-sex services? At the moment, we have this rather dodgy arrangement whereby certain dioceses are reserved for very conservative bishops, including my own, which has broken down in one or two cases. Would it be up to the parochial church council? Would it be up to the bishop? Where such appointments are in the hands of the local squire, as was indeed my father’s parish when he was a practising vicar, would it be up to the squire? Who would determine it?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
And if there is a discrepancy between the bishop and the PCC, they get the veto, do they?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
Can the bishop not remove his licence?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
My second point—before I get cut off again—was that you made the point about registrars, a completely different issue, and you said, and I entirely agree, that we should be able to make individual arrangements for registrars and not single them out. Of course, that cannot happen in law; it has been challenged in the European Court. Do you think that to achieve that we would need to change the Equality Act 2010? I think we should. Do you think that would strengthen the Bill? Would you support and campaign for that?
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
It is not backed up in law, as we have now found out.
Tim Loughton (Conservative, East Worthing and Shoreham)
So, would you like to see it backed up in law?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Just to check a point. In the light of the formal position of the Church of England that we heard on Tuesday, do you think that the current provisions in the Bill relating to the quadruple lock are sufficient? The Church’s present position is that it is not in favour of same-sex marriage. Do you think that the locks in the Bill are sufficient and adequate?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
You say that the majority of the Church of England are with you on your view. Do you have any evidence for that?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
If the Church were to accommodate your view of same-sex marriage, would that mean the church service and the vows would have to change?
David Burrowes (Conservative, Enfield, Southgate)
Would that reflect on a change in the meaning and purpose of marriage?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you. The last two questions are from Simon Kirby and Stephen Doughty gets the final question.
Simon Kirby (Conservative, Brighton, Kemptown)
My question is to Alice. You and Clare are two high-profile people. Apart from marriage bringing the two of you joy, what message would it send to younger people?
Stephen Doughty (Labour, Cardiff South and Penarth)
I could not agree with you more, Alice. I am a practising Christian but I do not believe my faith has a monopoly on marriage. There is a crucial thing that we are missing. We have got into a lot of debates about the impact on churches and religious organisations, but one of the crucial aspects of the Bill is the opening up of civil marriage to same-sex couples. As a non-religious person, reflecting on what you have heard of the debate, what do you feel when you see that going on? Do you think that bit is being lost?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Would the dean like a final comment?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much indeed to both witnesses. You have been very helpful and informative and we are very grateful to you. Thank you for coming and we wish you well.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you for being with us this afternoon. Would you kindly introduce yourselves for the record? We will then get straight down to questions.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Can you tell me what you think would be the disadvantages of allowing same-sex couples to marry?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
But is that a reason not to let people marry? I accept that there may be argument and dissent, but is that a reason for preventing same-sex marriage?