The Equality Networks Forum (ENF) Blog

[From LGBT Campigns]

The House of Lords debated several LGBT-related issues during the Report stage of the Equality Bill yesterday (02/03/10):

1. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldhansrd/text/100302-0005.htm#10030266000721

Lord Wallace of Tankerness (Liberal Democrat) proposed amendments to outlaw harassment in schools on grounds of gender reassignment and harassment in schools, services and public functions on grounds of sexual orientation. Baroness Royall (for the Government) said the amendments were unnecessary and Lord Wallace withdrew them.

2. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldhansrd/text/100302-0006.htm#10030266000722

Baroness Butler-Sloss (Crossbench) moved an amendment on behalf of Lord Mackay to give employees a right of conscientious objection on the basis of their beliefs regarding sexual orientation. She also spoke to an amendment on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church to allow religious adoption and fostering agencies to restrict their services on grounds of sexual orientation. Baroness Royall (for the Government) said both amendments were unacceptable and Baroness Butler-Sloss withdrew them but said she might bring them back at Third Reading.

3. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldhansrd/text/100302-0008.htm#10030293000110

Baroness Thornton (Government) moved an amendment to close a loophole in the exemption that allows religious officiants to refuse to solemnise a marriage on grounds of gender reassignment. The amendment was accepted without challenge.

4. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldhansrd/text/100302-0010.htm#100302106000525

Baroness Turner of Camden (Labour) moved an amendment to tighten up the wording of the exceptions to the provisions on discrimination in employment. Baroness Thornton (for the Government) said the amendment was unnecessary and Baroness Turner withdrew it.

5. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldhansrd/text/100302-0016.htm#1003037000145

Lord Alli moved an amendment to remove the ban on registering civil partnerships in religious premises in England and Wales - a reduced version of his previous amendment at the Committee stage which would also have removed the ban on religious content and would also have extended to Scotland. (Scotland was taken out because the issue is a devolved one for the Scottish Parliament to decide.) Baroness Royall (for the Government) opposed the amendment on the previously stated ground that it needed further consideration and consultation.

http://services.parliament.uk/LordsDivisionsAnalysis/session/2009_10/division/20100302/number/3

However, Lord Alli pressed the amendment to a division and won by 95 to 21 in an astonishing Government defeat on a free vote widely reported in the media today. Remarkably no member of the Government voted against the amendment and five of them (Lord Adonis, Lord Brett, Baroness Crawley, Baroness Farrington and Baroness Thornton) voted for it. In fact only a single Labour peer (Viscount Simon) voted in support of the Government’s position. Even Baroness Royall abstained in the vote, having spoken against the amendment as she was obliged to do as minister in charge of the bill.

By the way, note that the amendment does not in itself enable civil partnerships to be registered in religious premises. That will also require amendments to the Marriages and Civil Partnerships (Approved Premises) Regulations 2005. The Government are unlikely to do that until they have completed their consultation, which is most unlikely to be before the general election.

For a summary of media reports and commentary see: http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/archives/004266.html