Marriage Law Reform in England and Wales

The reform of marriage law in England and Wales seems finally to be on the agenda. Last month I met with the Law Commission to discuss the reform of marriage law and contribute to a national scoping study. The Law Commission is a statutory independent body created by the Law Commissions Act 1965 to keep the law under review and to recommend reform where it is needed. The aim of the Commission is to ensure that the law is fair, modern, simple and effective. For many years there has been no appetite for reforming marriage law; it has been put in the “too difficult” box.

Changes have, of course, been made over the years, not least the introduction of same sex marriage, but marriage is still fundamentally governed by the Marriage Act 1949, as amended. On this occasion it seems likely that further work will be requested from the Law Commission with a consultation paper leading to final proposals and perhaps draft legislation

The scoping study is therefore an important first stage in the process of reform of the law governing how and where people can marry in England and Wales. Their work does not cover Scotland as marriage is a responsibility of the Scottish Parliament. They wish to consider what issues exist within the current law, and possible avenues for reform. They were asked to undertake the work by the Government following the Government’s consultation on allowing the solemnization of marriage by non-religious belief bodies. This arose out of support in Parliament for such a change in the law when the issue was raised during consideration of the legislation on same-sex marriage. The Law Commission’s work is, however, wider than that of the consultation.

As part of the scoping study, they were interested to hear from different faith groups as to their experiences of the current law, any concerns they would like to raise, and any possible reforms they would like to see and that’s why they approached the General Assembly.  So off I went to the Home Office.

It was made clear that they would not be making recommendations for reform at this stage but that they wished to explore issues such as:
• who should have the authority to solemnize marriages,
• where marriages should be able to take place,
• what forms marriages should be able to take,
• what is required by way of prior notice and subsequent registration, and
• how the law deals with ceremonies that fail to comply with some or all of the legal requirements.

The work will not include who can be married, so there will be no consideration of changing the age of consent or the restrictions on marrying within prohibited degrees; the question of whether or not religious groups should be obliged to solemnize marriages of same sex couples nor of the rights or responsibilities which marriage imparts, such as the financial entitlements of surviving spouses or the consequences of divorce.

Aside from consideration of same-sex marriage there has not been any substantive recent discussion on possible marriage reform at the General Assembly Annual Meetings. I managed in the limited timescale available to ask for views from Ministers and Lay People in Charge. There was a remarkable (for Unitarians!) unanimity of views, particularly on moving towards a celebrant rather than a building based system, as in Scotland and indeed Ireland.

When I met the Law Commission I was able to explain the distinctive nature of Unitarian and Free Christian marriage belief and practice emphasising its diversity. In many ways the religious/non-religious boundary central to the current law is not helpful to our approach which seeks to make the wishes of the couple central to the marriage ceremony within our inclusive framework. There is also a need for greater simplicity in the administrative processes which would help authorised persons.

The Commission plan to produce a paper at the end of the year with their findings. At the latter stages, of course, the General Assembly will have more opportunities to make a more formal response.

To many Unitarians and Free Christians our involvement in the solemnization of marriage is an important contribution to our local communities, offering a service to all rather than simply to our membership. It is something I am sure we value and wish to maintain.

That we were invited to join in discussions on the future of marriage law affecting England and Wales is another endorsement of our position as a small yet influential faith group often leading the way on social change. This is, of course, an important role that the General Assembly plays on behalf of local congregations. I look forward to seeing this issue progressing to legislation.

Guest Blog on ResPublica Think Tank Website on Marriage

Being approached to submit a guest blog on someone else's site is something new for me. I  was therefore pleased to write a viewpoint for the ResPublica think tank website on marriage. I gave it the title "One Unitarian View of Marriage". I stress the word "One"; Unitarians will hold a myriad of views of marriage.

ResPublica have launched a strategic consultation on marriage:

• the meaning and purpose of marriage
• the relationship between the state, culture and religious institutions
• the role of marriage in the family and the wider community

I have also submitted written evidence to the consultation. Unitarians have been at the forefront of the debate on equal marriage; however, it is good to see the discussion widened to issues regarding societal structures.

ResPublica was founded by the theologian and political commentator Philip Blond in 2009 and is widely known for the concept of the "Big Society" and been influential with the Coalition Government. ResPublica was a runner-up in the Prospect Magazine 2012 UK Think Tank of the Year Awards.

The pamphlet "Love, Marriage and the Family - Changing Roles in society today", referred to in the blog, was published by the Department of Social Responsibility of the General Assembly following a conference at Manchester College, Oxford in 1973.

The three lectures published were:

• "The Family in a Changing Society" by Dr. Katharina Dalton
• "Sex and Human Relationships" by Rev G.L. Pruce
• "Marriage and Divorce" by Rev J. Unsworth

Whilst, of course, very much of their era they were radical for the time for a religious body and still of some interest.

If anyone would like a copy please get in touch Dmcauley@unitarian.org.uk

Love, Civil Partnerships and Marriage

I spoke on "Love, Civil Partnership and Marriage" at the GMB (General and Municipal Boilermakers) Trade Union "Shout!" fringe meeting prior to the Trades Union Council (TUC) LGBT Conference earlier this week. The General Assembly works with several trade unions as part of the Cutting Edge Consortium.

I explained the background to Unitarian support for equal rights for LGBT people arising from our historic commitment to civil and religious liberty.

I said "Love” in all its diversity cannot be limited to institutional arrangements about marriage and civil partnerships. I recognise that for many LGBT people these are not for them. But equal marriage rights does make a statement about society’s acceptance of equality for LGBT people more generally.

In 2008 Unitarians asked the Government to allow Civil Partnerships on religious premises little knowing that this would soon be raised as a real possibility. We were pleased to support Lord Alli’s amendment to the Equality Bill along with our close friends in the Quakers, Liberal Judaism and the MCC. This support according to Stonewall made a real difference. We have always been open to couples rejected elsewhere; such as mixed faith weddings and of divorcees; and for those who want to have a more personalised service. We know that many gay people of faith have wanted this every important event in their lives to be recognised in a place that is significant to them and some of our Ministers carried out same sex blessings.

As for the future Lynne Featherstone MP, Minister for Equality, has launched a opportunity to debate same sex civil marriage and to “Work with all those who have an interest in equal civil marriage and partnerships, on how legislation can develop.” (July 2011)

The history of marriage reform in this country is one of the Church of England slowly giving up its monopoly. Unitarians and other dissenters, apart from Quakers and Jews, had to marry in the CoE until 1837.

In Scotland a recent paper by the Scottish Human Rights Commission had the rather pointed title “Ending the Segregation of same sex couples and transgender people”. The SNP Government is committed to consulting on the issue and the First Minister is on record as supporting equal marriage.

As the mainstream Churches oppose civil partnerships on their premises they will undoubtedly oppose any legislation on same sex marriage. They will do this because marriage has always been central to the Church of England’s role as national Church. They and other churches (including Unitarians) carry out what are state functions in many other countries; marriage in church is not an add on to a civil ceremony; it is legally equivalent and came before civil marriage. The challenge will be that same sex civil marriage will redefine what marriage is and raise the issue of same sex religious marriage. We and the Quakers and Liberal Jews will, of course, argue for this seeking real equality.

The religion and society thinktank Ekklesia, which backs reform, has suggested that the civil and religious aspects of weddings should be separated, freeing the state to offer marriage and partnership rights to all, and enabling various religious bodies to decide independently which relationships they wish to bless without preventing others from acting differently. This may be a way forward but represents a major change to marriage law.

There was a vigorous discussion in the forty strong audience. Issues affecting trans people were raised and this is something that I had not addressed and about which I have much to learn. The relationship between gender reassignment and marriage law in complex and very different to those affecting LGB people. We also had a good debate on what should be the tactics; seek to achieve civil marriage law recognising that religious bodies will oppose change or try to achieve a permissive right for those faith bodies who wish to undertake same sex marriages or alternatively seek major marriage law reform more generally.