Wednesday, 19 June 2013

House of Lords: Wednesday in committee on the Marriage bill


The Hansard record starts here, and later continues here. The debate continued until 12.30 am!

The more detailed list showing speakers names is over here.

The Bishop of Guildford engaged in the debate. His interventions start here. And continue, late in the evening, here.

David Pocklington has again written up the day, in Same Sex Marriage Bill – Committee, 2nd Day.

Gavin Drake reports on Monday’s debate, and related events earlier in the week, in the Church Times Bishop seeks registrar opt-out.

The committee stage completes next Monday. And there is one more amendment filed.
A Third Marshalled List of Amendments is now here.

Two dates for the Report stage have been announced: 8 and 10 July.

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Wednesday, 19 June 2013 at 10:14pm BST | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: equality legislation

Some of what the Bishop of Guildford wanted wasn't completely anti-gay. A first for a Bishop in the HoL on this debate?

Posted by: CRW on Thursday, 20 June 2013 at 8:20am BST

I agree with CRW. He is doing what the bishop of Leicester's statement said they would do, namely engage constructively. He is the first bishop whose speech acknowledges that equal marriage is going to happen, and to discuss the consequences in a humane way.

Posted by: Iain McLean on Thursday, 20 June 2013 at 11:50am BST

Their Lordships' proceedings are strangely fascinating. I wondered if they would 'go there' last night with their debates on 'consumation'. As this is a family website I cannot give Baroness Butler-Sloss' quote of the night, but it was amazing to behold. It entirely justifies my belief in ignoring the issue and doing whatever the government recommends on the issue instead of descending into inapropriate detail.

I previously dallied with the idea of a limited 'conscience clause' that guaranteed a service to same sex couples and was limited to staff employed prior to the introduction of the bill.

I'm still drawn to this idea. But I'm also very much aware that the registrars are local government employees, therefore employed by councils which I think changes things.

I think that councils are very much there as embodying the locality and ensuring the inclusion and thriving of all local communities and therefore do have a very serious and important role in not practising discrimination that is perhaps more important than perhaps for other organisations. Allowing a conscience clause, even if limited, undermines the policies and procedures of the local council in what they are trying to do at a fundamental level.

So I'm still a little torn and swaying my opinion on a day by day basis and very much listening to arguments on both sides and have some interest in seeing what the Lords decide - and how the Commons react.

Posted by: Craig Nelson on Thursday, 20 June 2013 at 7:01pm BST

"As this is a family website I cannot give Baroness Butler-Sloss' quote of the night, but it was amazing to behold."

I'm curious.

Oh, wait: I'm not. :-X

Posted by: JCF on Friday, 21 June 2013 at 4:37am BST
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.