(10 years, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberThe hon. Lady is right that the Government have invested considerably in ensuring that schoolchildren can visit battlefields, and of course that programme should be open to all children, although it is for schools to decide who exactly is involved. I am sure we would be interested to know more about the problems experienced and to try and resolve them, working with our colleagues in the Department for Education.
Will the Minister consider providing resources to expand or continue the sort of work that occurred at Pheasant Wood near Fromelles in France in order to locate and identify the war dead?
I know that there is continuing work, particularly in the north of France, to identify individuals who might not even to date be buried in recognised graves. I am sure that that will continue until there is no longer a need for it.
(11 years, 9 months ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend will know that there is already no legal requirement for consummation. Our provisions will mean that adultery stays as it is and that couples will have the opportunity to cite unreasonable behaviour, as do many already. The issues that he raises are dealt with very well in that way.
As I was saying, there is no single view on equal marriage from religious organisations. I also know that some colleagues in the House feel that they cannot agree with the Bill for principled religious reasons, and I entirely respect that stance. I do not think that it is the role of the Government to tell people what to believe, but I do think that Parliament and the state have a responsibility to treat people fairly.
Will the Minister take this early opportunity to confirm that the opponents of the Bill, including many hundreds of my constituents, are not homophobic, not bigots and not barking?
(11 years, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberI could not agree more with my hon. Friend, who I think has articulated the position absolutely correctly. That is the Government’s position.
Yesterday I asked the Minister about polygamy, and she was unable to answer my concerns. Is she aware of the campaigns now taking place in Canada to legalise polygamy, since marriage was redefined there in 2005?
I think I did answer my hon. Friend’s question yesterday by saying that marriage in this country is between two people.
(11 years, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
As my hon. Friend will know, for more than 180 years there have been two different ways to enter into marriage—one through a religious ceremony, the other through a civil ceremony—so the role of religious organisations in marriage is there indelibly. To ensure that those views absolutely continue to be centre stage, I am working on safeguarding the freedom to continue to view marriage in a different way in different religious institutions, but that in no way means that we have to stop individuals in same-sex relationships being able to be married as well.
Many Members have expressed the sentiment that marriage is at the centre of religious life—amen to all that—but have the Government considered introducing other forms of marriage, such as polygamy, and if not, when can minorities who believe in such a practice expect their own consultation?
I think the law is pretty clear on this. Marriage is between two people, which means that what my hon. Friend talks about would not be possible.