← Back to Westminster Hall Debates
Humanist Marriages
27 January 2022
Lead MP
Crispin Blunt
Reigate
Con
Responding Minister
Tom Pursglove
Tags
Northern IrelandLocal Government
Word Count: 13226
Other Contributors: 6
At a Glance
Crispin Blunt raised concerns about humanist marriages in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key Requests to Government:
Blunt urged the government to lay a statutory instrument bringing about legal recognition for marriages conducted by Humanists UK celebrants. He suggested that this need only be an interim measure until the Law Commission review completes in July, and he emphasized the economic benefits of enhancing freedom of choice for couples and boosting the wedding industry.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Crispin Blunt expressed concern about the lack of legal recognition for humanist marriages in England and Wales, despite similar recognition in Scotland, Northern Ireland, Jersey, and Guernsey. He highlighted that around 1,400 couples have a humanist wedding each year but must also have a civil marriage separately to gain legal recognition, adding a financial burden. Local authorities make it difficult for people to access cheaper ceremonies, restricting attendance and locations, causing distressing questions from loved ones about which is their real marriage or when their wedding anniversary is.
Andrew Slaughter
Lab
Hammersmith and Chiswick
Andrew Slaughter praised the hon. Member for Reigate for bringing forward this debate, highlighting the support from his colleagues in emphasizing the logic and fairness of legal recognition for humanist marriages. He cited previous debates where Labour supported amendments to extend legal recognition to humanist marriages but noted that nine years have passed without action by the Government despite clear evidence of public support and ongoing consultations. Expressed gratitude for the Minister's sentiments but argued that waiting until the Law Commission's report is too long. Proposed an interim provision allowing humanist weddings in approved premises to enable thousands of couples to marry sooner. Suggested that statutory instruments could be rushed through in less than eight months, indicating a four-month timeline as possible.
Ben Lake
PC
Ceredigion Preseli
Expressed frustration that Wales, with its history of humanist figures like Nye Bevan and Rhodri Morgan, has not seen progress sooner on legal recognition for humanist marriages despite the Welsh Government's support.
Congratulations Crispin Blunt on securing this debate. He is making some excellent points, and mentions a constituent Dawn Davies who is frustrated with the timescales discussed.
Jeff Smith
Lab
Manchester Withington
Jeff Smith, a vice-chair of the all-party parliamentary humanist group, declared his interest and discussed the UN Special Rapporteur's survey on marriage laws around the world. He highlighted that England and Wales only recognise religious and civil marriages but not humanist marriages, which is seen as discriminatory according to Dr Ahmed Shaheed. Smith also cited the High Court judgment from 2008 stating that legal recognition of humanist marriages is necessary and criticised the Government's inaction despite this legally binding case law. Asked about allowing humanist marriages in approved premises as an interim solution.
Nia Griffith
Lab
Llanelli
Congratulated Crispin Blunt for securing the debate. Emphasised that the Government's argument for waiting for wholesale marriage reform is undermined by their own precedents and suggested finding an appropriate legislative vehicle to implement change. Cited examples from Scotland, Ireland, and Northern Ireland where legal recognition was granted earlier. Argued against treating humanist ceremonies as second-class and highlighted the importance of updating laws to reflect societal changes.
Rachel Hopkins
Lab
Luton South and South Bedfordshire
Ms Hopkins highlighted the lack of legal recognition for humanist marriages in England and Wales, stressing that it is discriminatory. She shared examples from celebrants about the unique experiences and importance of these ceremonies to couples. She also pointed out problems with local authorities not offering same-day civil ceremonies or restricting what can happen during them. It was very good. Acknowledged the Minister's statistics but pointed out that many humanists may have chosen a civil ceremony because it was their only option, not their preference for a humanist wedding.
Government Response
Tom Pursglove
Government Response
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Huq. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Reigate (Crispin Blunt) for securing this debate and his tireless campaigning on humanist marriage. The Government supports marriage as an important institution, aiming to encourage stability and commitment in family life. Recognizing the strength of feeling among Members and constituents, we must consider carefully any changes to marriage law, including those proposed by Humanists UK for 1,050 ceremonies annually compared to 186,614 civil marriages and 48,181 religious weddings in 2018. The Law Commission is conducting a review expected to report in July 2022, considering options such as greater flexibility on ceremony form and location and allowing non-religious belief organisations like humanists to conduct legally binding weddings. We will await the Law Commission's recommendations before legislating for humanist marriage to ensure comprehensive reform and prevent disparity among groups. Since July 2021, couples can have civil marriage proceedings in open-air venues, a temporary measure during the pandemic that has supported the wedding sector; this week, we closed our consultation on outdoor marriages and civil partnerships and plan to make these changes permanent through spring legislation. Humanists can currently get married by their chosen celebrant on approved premises with the presence of a superintendent registrar or registrar. Changing this would require an affirmative statutory instrument taking around eight months. I will carefully consider humanist marriage provision when the Law Commission provides its recommendations.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About Westminster Hall Debates
Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.