Lord Alli’s amendment to the Equality Bill, which allows civil partnerships to be registered on religious premises, if religious bodies wish to allow it, was approved during the Report Stage in the House of Lords on Tuesday by 95 votes to 21.
The proposed changes to the Civil Partnership Act had been significantly modified since the debate in January (News, 5 February). The scope is narrowed to England and Wales, and the existing rule that “no religious service is to be used while the civil partnership registrar is officiating at the signing of a civil partnership document” is retained.
An additional clause reads: “For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this Act places an obligation on religious organisations to host civil partnerships if they do not wish to do so.” A further clause states: “Regulations may provide that premises approved for the registration of civil partnerships may differ from those premises approved for the registration of civil marriages.”
Lord Alli stressed that the issue was one of religious freedom. “Religious freedom means letting the Quakers, the liberal Jews, and others host civil partnerships. It means accepting that the Church of England and the Catholic Church should not host civil partnerships if they do not wish to do so.”
Fine with me: I respect every religion’s rights to govern itself without state interference and to its property.
However, there are significant problems with this bill that go far away from freedom of religion. Many clergy feel they may be put in a place of having to host civil partnerships or face civil or criminal penalties.
This bill was snuck in on a midnight vote, which should tell you enough about the motives of the people pushing this. If they are willing to resort to parlimentary trickery to get their bill through, how can you trust them that any safeguards currently in the bill won’t be changed in like manner?