2 Lord Birt debates involving the Ministry of Justice

Humanist Marriages

Lord Birt Excerpts
Monday 2nd December 2024

(2 weeks, 6 days ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede Portrait Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, we will assess marriage in the round, including humanist weddings, and we will announce when we do that in due course. I agree with the general point which my noble friend has made.

Lord Birt Portrait Lord Birt (CB)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, just under 20 years ago, Scotland legalised humanist marriage. Remarkably, data from the National Records of Scotland show that more Scots now choose a humanist wedding than those who marry in all other religions combined—that is, the Church of Scotland, the Roman Catholic Church and all other religions and faiths. On present trends, humanist weddings in Scotland will soon overtake civil ceremonies as Scotland’s first choice. How can we any longer deny the humanist option to those who want to wed in England?

Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede Portrait Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the noble Lord for that question. Scotland was able to accommodate humanist weddings within its existing legislative framework for weddings because it operates an officiant-based model, whereby regulation of weddings takes place via the officiant. In contrast, in England and Wales, we have a buildings-based scheme. It is in that difference that Scotland was able to make this accommodation, and that factor will be taken into account in the review to which I have already referred.

Assisted Dying Bill [HL]

Lord Birt Excerpts
Friday 18th July 2014

(10 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Birt Portrait Lord Birt (CB)
- Hansard - -

In a free, secular society, my Lords, the presumption should be that adults are free to do what they wish, subject only to not impinging on the rights of others.

I can see no reason at all for denying individuals the right to manage their own imminent, irreversible and prospectively painful, wretched or deeply distressing death—in their own interest, and in the interests of the loved ones that they will shortly leave behind.

A civilised society must offer, too, expert advice and support to ensure that the individuals who have made that choice can reach the last and gravest of life’s milestones with dignity and certainty. One part of that advice and support must be to ensure that the individual’s decision is freely reached, without pressure from others; and that it is considered and settled. Of course, honest medical professionals, working voluntarily in these difficult and challenging circumstances, must have legal protection as well as obligation.

This carefully constructed Bill meets all these needs. It vitally extends our freedoms and it has my unqualified support.