The House of Lords Report stage of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill was completed on 10 July. Their Lordships considered Amendments 84 to 136 from the Marshalled List, here, here and here, and unlike most of the earlier considerations of the Bill, the debate did not extend beyond midnight.
As with our summaries of the earlier debates, this post provides an outline to the decisions taken with links to the associated debate in order that readers may follow-up issues that are of particular interest.
We posted a summary of the 1st Day of the Report stage here. The Third Reading of Bill in the House of Lords is scheduled for 15 July.
Amendment 84, Lord Alli
The proposed change to Schedule 4 relates to pension entitlement, to remedy is “the only point in the Bill [which treats] same-sex couples who get married prejudicially when compared with opposite-sex couples.
Amendment 84 withdrawn.
Amendment 85, Lord Armstrong of Ilminster
This sought to introduce legal definitions relating to marriage into the Bill
Amendment 85 withdrawn
Amendment 86, Baroness Stowell of Beeston
This, and other government Amendments in this group, were proposed to clarify aspects concerning men and women who are transgender.
Amendment 86 agreed
Amendments 87 to 89, Baroness Stowell of Beeston
Amendments 87 to 89 agreed
Amendment 90, Baroness Stowell of Beeston
Amendment 90 agreed
Amendments 91 and 92
Amendments 91 and 92 agreed
Amendment 93, Lord Wallace of Tankerness
Government Amendments 93 and 128 to 132 amend provisions in the Bill relating to marriage in consulates and on Armed Forces bases overseas to exclude their effect in relation to Northern Ireland. Clause 13 repeals the Foreign Marriage Act 1892 which applies UK-wide. Schedule 6 makes provision to replace that regime of consular and Armed Forces marriages overseas with a new regime providing for marriages of both opposite-sex and same-sex couples in consulates and on Armed Forces bases.
Amendment 93 agreed
Amendment 94, Baroness Deech
This seeks to “[seize] this opportunity, which has presented itself in no other Bill or foreseeable Bill, to extend the hand of equality and a glimmer of hope of support to the thousands—mostly women; this could be a gender issue—of people who are siblings and have lived together for many years. . . . . also to help carers, who are often but not always family members, where the younger people have cared for the older ones for many years, but who then find themselves in a bad situation when the older ones die”
Division on Amendment 94
Contents 89; Not-Contents 267.
Amendment 94 disagreed.
Amendment 95, The Lord Bishop of Leicester
“This amendment would ensure that there is no conflict between the guidance issued by the Secretary of State on the teaching of sex and relationships education, which includes teaching on the importance of marriage, and the obligation of schools of a religious character to teach in accordance with their trusts. It will ensure that while such schools will continue to have guidance issued by the Secretary of State about the teaching of marriage as it will be defined by the Bill, it does not prevent them, within the context of sex and relationships education, in the words of the amendment, also from, “teaching the tenets of the relevant religion or religious denomination concerning marriage and its importance for family life and the bringing up of children”.
Amendment 95 withdrawn
Amendment 95A, The Earl of Listowel
This amendment was moved “to obtain a statement from the Government of their assessment of the impact of same-sex parenting on child development”.
Amendment 95A withdrawn
Amendment 96, Lord Singh of Wimbledon
This sought to introduce a requirement for a referendum o same-sex marriage, since “no attempt whatever was made to consult the electorate before the last election, or through Green or White Papers, on the proposed redefinition of marriage, which millions see as an essential building block of society. Respect for the electorate demands their explicit consent for this major social change.”
Amendment 96 withdrawn
Amendments 97 to 105
Amendment 106, Baroness Stowell of Beeston
Amendment 106 agreed.
Amendments 107 and 107A
Amendments 108 to 111, Baroness Stowell of Beeston
Amendments 108 to 111 agreed.
This had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.
Amendments 113 to 118, Baroness Stowell of Beeston
Amendments 113 to 118 agreed.
Amendments 119 to 123
These had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.
Amendment 123A, Baroness Northover
This government Amendment addresses concerns raised by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee in its fourth report of the Session, and aspects of Amendment 123 which was withdrawn. Amendment 123A states explicitly that sub-delegation may occur only where the Secretary of State considers that it is necessary in connection with the administrative functions of the Registrar-General, superintendent registrars and registrars under Clause 9, concerning conversion of civil partnerships to marriages, and Amendment 90, concerning marriage by belief organisations.
Amendment 123A agreed.
This had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List
Amendment 125, Baroness Stowell of Beeston
This clarifies that ““superintendent registrar” means a superintendent registrar of births, deaths and marriages.”
Amendment 125 agreed.
Amendments 126 to 133, Baroness Stowell of Beeston
Amendments 126 to 133 agreed
Amendment 134 not moved.
Amendment 135, Baroness Stowell of Beeston
To change to “To make provision for the marriage of same sex couples in England and Wales, about gender change by married persons and civil partners, about consular functions in relation to marriage, for the marriage of armed forces personnel overseas, and for permitting marriages according to the usages of belief organisations to be solemnized on the authority of certificates of a superintendent registrar.”
Amendment 135 agreed.
House adjourned at 11.13 pm.