All 1 Debates between David Burrowes and Tom Harris

Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill

Debate between David Burrowes and Tom Harris
Monday 20th May 2013

(11 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
David Burrowes Portrait Mr Burrowes
- Hansard - -

I welcome that intervention. I am merely seeking, with the support of other hon. Members, to provide a conscientious objection clause that would not necessarily have any detrimental effect on the Bill. This is not unprecedented. For example, section 4 of the Abortion Act 1967 allows individuals with a conscientious objection to abstain from participating in abortions. Section 38 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990—the right hon. Gentleman will remember the debate on that—allows any person conscientiously to object to participation in work involving the treatment and development of human embryos. Paragraph 2(3) of the relevant national health service regulations allows medical staff to refrain from providing contraceptive services. Atheist teachers are not required to conduct collective services or to teach religious education. Those are just a few of the conscientious objection clauses that are already enshrined in law and do not seek to go against the principle of the legislation concerned. What is appropriate for GPs and teachers should also be appropriate for registrars.

The new clauses would strike a proper balance between the right of marriage and the right of conscience. If the Bill is passed, they should not in any way hinder the ability of same sex-couples to marry. As a precondition, an appropriate number of registrars should be available. That is a reasonable proposal.

New clause 3 is even more reasonable. It is a transitional measure similar to a provision in the Netherlands, which has led the charge in legalising same-sex marriage.

Tom Harris Portrait Mr Tom Harris (Glasgow South) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

David Burrowes Portrait Mr Burrowes
- Hansard - -

I am afraid not, because I want to make progress to allow other hon. Members to speak.

Dutch registrars who were already employed before the legislation was passed are able to exercise their conscience and object. If it is good enough for those Dutch registrars, it is good enough for UK registrars. During the Bill Committee, one hon. Member suggested that people should realise that the writing is on the wall for their employment and that they should jolly well recognise that they will have to stick to the law and not exercise their own conscience, or get out now while they have the chance. That is disgraceful and amounts to serving people with a notice to quit. It means that this will be not just a marriage Bill, but an unfair dismissal Bill.