*Check Against Delivery*

BARONESS GLENYS THORNTON SHADOW EQUALITIES MINISTER, HOUSE OF LORDS SAME SEX MARRIAGE BILL SECOND READING SPEECH Tuesday 3rd June, 2013 It is an honour to give the Opposition winding speech on this second reading debate in the YLH and I am not envious of the task of NL the M in her task of answering the substantial and passionate debate we have had in the last two days. My NF Bns Royall outlined most eloquently in her opening remarks the reasons why Labour is supporting this Bill and the Government but like in the Commons there will be a free vote. I am not going to repeat her remarks

I always think international comparisons are helpful when we are contemplating something new. Last month this House supported making caste discrimination part of our legislative equality framework. In doing this and persuading the Government and the Commons that it was the right thing to do we were blazing an international trail of which we should be proud. Today we are not being so adventurous because we are proposing that the UK will soon join those countries that have now signed same sex marriage into law. Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Netherlands, Portugal, Norway, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, Uruguay. And now France!

Congratulations to Vincent Autin and Bruno Boileau for their marriage last week. It was of course historic for being the first same sex marriage to take place in France following Hollande signing the legislation into law. But first and foremost it was a momentous day for this couple, who on that day made a loving and lifelong commitment to one another before their friends and family. The objections to the bill to bring same sex marriage onto the statute books seem to fall into two or three catogories. First there are NLs who are uncertain that freedom of religion will be respected by this Bill. To them I would say that the Government has built huge safeguards into the Bill which it is widely agreed will do the job. The Most Rev primate and Rt Rev prelates who have spoken have woven brilliant theology and arguments against the principle of same sex marriage but as Bns Neuberger, NF Bns Mallalieu and many others have said the states concept of marriage has been ever-evolving, and has long-since diverged from religious teaching. And indeed they have not managed to unpick the locks so to speak. Whilst the lawyers always can find something to disagree about, I would encourage those NLs to read back the speeches of NL Pannick and MNF Bns Kennedy of the Shaws, who have explained strongest assurances the legal security provided by this bill. Some concerns were raised by NLs about the position of teachers and faith schools in reconciling their own views of marriage with the new reality. My party is absolutely confident that the current law achieves the right balance between securing the right of faith schools to educate pupils in a way that is sensitive to both the law of the land and also to students some of whom may be gay or have parents of the same sex. I
2

may never use these words again, but we agree with the evidence Michael Gove gave to the scrutiny committee stage in the commons. However it is right that these issues will be tested and scrutinised by this House during Committee stage. Then there are those who say that this is in some ways anti-democratic. Not in manifestos, no green paper and lets rubbish the consultation as well. And why is this not a private members bill. And so on. And MLs I think we have to look at the strength of feeling in favour of this Bill in the Commons, it is remarkable that the majorities at Second and Third Reading were so large. It may serve the opponents to suggest that some kind of secret whip was applied, but Ipersonally know that some MPs thought very hard indeed and had serious discussions with constituents before deciding how to vote. It is in many ways very personal pieces of legislation about which people have strong emotional views.

Rarely as parliamentarians do we have the opportunity to reaffirm the equal respect we have for our fellow citizens regardless of their sexuality, and equal respect we have for their long term and loving relationships by the actions we take and the votes that we cast.

As my NF Bns Royall said at the beginning, polling shows that the majority of the public support same sex marriage, and this support rises dramatically when you ask young people. As many NLs have said during this debate (Jenkin of Roding, Courtown, Shrewsbury) we are not just legislating for ourselves, we are legislating for the next generation and this generation feel very differently about this issue that some of us do.

Of course we have also had our share of scaremongering. And scaremongering to further an argument in which you passionately believe is a legitimate debating ploy - But NL are wise and experienced enough to recognise scaremongering when they see it. I think that we can safely say that the NL Lord Tebbit won the award for this one. In one short and sharp intervention which managed to provice a scare for almost everything including compulsory promotion of homosexual marriage and artificial insemination of the heir to the throne. However the NL Lord dear did quite well in the old scaremongering field for example when he said that some 800 amendments might be required I checked if this were true and I am pleased to reassure the House that this seems not to be the case, the noble lord seems to have confused the fact there there are indeed 8000 references to marriage within the total library of legislation, with the need to amend them all Noot so, it is clear from discussion with the drafters of the bill and reading the bill, that clause 11 and Schedule 4 deal with more than adequately with his concerns. And I am sure other such claims and worries will be answered during the course of consideration Finally there are NLs who feel uncomfortable with what they see as a departure from traditional marriage. I do not doubt that this is how they might feel, but I would ask that they might reflect on those feelings a little deeper. Is it habit and familiarity which makes change uncomfortable and unsettling? The NL the Minister herself noted we all move at different paces when faced with change1 however, as NL Deben so eloquently put it: major social changes do not happen when the marjority have aligned
1

We all have the right to move at different paces when faced with change

themselves. Major social changes have almost always happened when a minority have stood up for what they believe to be right and put it to the public, and in the end have proved that they are right. Unfortunately, some who profess to believe in equal rights for everyone regardless of gender, race and sexual orientation, find it difficult to fully escape those prejudices ingrained over the many years when homosexuality was said to be an abomination at worst or at least something to be very quiet and discrete about because it borders on shameful. To these noble Lords who are finding the idea of same sex marriage a difficult idea to come to terms with, I would make a plea. It is to listen to your heart and indulge your generosity of spirit. I think to hear the deeply personal speeches of the NLBrowne, Smith, MNFs Lords Alli and Collins, Black of Brentwood and noble lady Bns Barker and indeed the NL Carlile and not be moved and would be very hard hearted indeed not to support same sex marriage. It is the personal testimonies not just of those NLs who haves faced discrimination and struggles because of their own same sex relationships, but of all those NLs that have spoken of the love and strength they have found through their partners, civil partners, husbands and wives that should secure our resolve to reject Lord Dears amendment today and proceed with this bill and I speak of NFs Royall, Brooke of Alverthorpe, Young of Norwood Green and many others) Marriage is for many the glue the super glue even (Bns Mallalieu) that binds their relationship together and gives them the strength to face lifes challenges. To have the opportunity to extend this privilege to all couples who want to make that commitment is something that we must now
5

embrace, and celebrate as a means to a stronger and more loving society. I look forward to passing this bill today and to getting on with Committee stage where I hope we will make progress on some of the issues raised by my colleagues in another place, including pension rights, transgender couples (on which MNF Gould spoke so passionately) and humanist marriages which we are keen to see introduced. Urge NLs to vote against NL Dears amendment and to send this Bill to its next stage. ENDS