Marriages and Civil Partnerships (Approved Premises) (Amendment) Regulations 2011

Debate between Lord Dannatt and Baroness Verma
Thursday 15th December 2011

(12 years, 11 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Dannatt Portrait Lord Dannatt
- Hansard - -

My Lords—

Baroness Verma Portrait Baroness Verma
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, if the noble Lord, Lord Carlile, could speak, we could then hear from the Labour Benches.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Dannatt Portrait Lord Dannatt
- Hansard - -

My Lords—

Baroness Verma Portrait Baroness Verma
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, we will hear from the noble Lord, Lord Collins, and then from the noble Lord, Lord Dannatt.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Cormack Portrait Lord Cormack
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords—

Baroness Verma Portrait Baroness Verma
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, perhaps the noble Lord, Lord Dannatt, could speak first and then my noble friend Lord Cormack.

Lord Dannatt Portrait Lord Dannatt
- Hansard - -

My Lords, had I spoken earlier in this debate, I would have made a lengthy speech, much of which has been overtaken by the course of events, which would have been in support of the noble Baroness, Lady O’Cathain. I maintain my support for her today.

Much legal opinion has been expressed on both sides of the argument and a fair consensus would appear to have emerged, but I am left with a residual feeling of ambiguity. Ambiguity can give rise to unintended consequences, and it is unintended consequences that I am worried about. Those consequences arise from regulations that are not crystal clear and have worried a lot of ordinary decent people up and down this country, who have filled noble Lords’ postbags and mine in the past few days.

The noble Lord, Lord Henley, circulated his letter, which we received yesterday, in which he states—and we have heard it repeated already today—that,

“if a successful legal challenge were ever brought, I would like to provide reassurance that the Government would immediately review the relevant legislation”.

If we think that there is some doubt or ambiguity in this case, and if we think that ambiguity could lead to unintended consequences, there is an obligation on the Minister to activate that sentence in the last paragraph of his letter and, for the avoidance of doubt, to make it crystal clear—an expression that we have heard many times in this Chamber today—to people up and down the country, whoever they are, that they have nothing to fear from these regulations. Until I hear a commitment to the avoidance of doubt, I maintain my support for the noble Baroness, Lady O’Cathain.