Lords support bill to replace collective worship with inclusive assemblies

A Bill to replace mandatory daily Christian collective worship in schools in England without a religious character with inclusive assemblies has passed its second reading today in the House of Lords. The Education (Assemblies) Bill – tabled by Vice-Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Humanist Group (APPHG) Baroness Burt of Solihull – is being supported by Humanists UK, who welcomed the debate and passage.

If enacted, the Bill would remove the requirement of daily collective Christian worship from schools in England without a religious character. Instead, these schools would be required to provide inclusive assemblies that promote ‘the spiritual, moral, social and cultural education of pupils regardless of religion or belief’. Staff and pupils could voluntarily arrange collective worship if they wished, but pupils, and their parents, would have the right to choose whether to attend.

The Bill had previously been introduced in 2021 when it passed through the House of Lords but ran out of time to be debated in the House of Commons. Mandatory collective worship either forces children to be a part of Christian worship against their or their parents’ beliefs – a denial of their fundamental freedoms – or to be excluded from assemblies and left to sit by themselves in corridors.

Peers were divided on the Bill however, with five Lords speaking in favour and five against. Government Education Minister Baroness Smith and the Shadow Education Minister Baroness Barran both stated they would not be supporting a change to collective worship. Without government support it would be difficult for the Bill to become law.

The Bill now passes to Committee Stage in the House of Lords, where it can be amended by peers. This would then be followed by Report Stage and Third Reading before passing to the House of Commons, where it would require government time on the order books to reach Third Reading again.

Children’s rights

Opening the debate, Baroness Burt laid out the principles of the Bill. She pointed out it doesn’t affect schools with a religious character and their ability to carry out collective worship, although it would require them to provide a meaningful alternative for those who withdraw. Baroness Burt highlighted the change in religious identity in Britain since compulsory Christian collective worship in schools was introduced in 1944. Today,  68% of 18-25 year olds say they are non-religious, while just 18% say they are Christian (any denomination). Baroness Burt also raised the UN Children’s Rights Committee, which called in 2023 for a reform of the collective worship law. She focused on the need for inclusion, as collective Christian worship requires children whose parents don’t want them to take part in these religious activities to be excluded from this part of school life.

APPHG member Lord Watson of Invergowrie, a Labour peer, supported the Bill, arguing it was inappropriate to have compulsory Christian worship when the Census 2021 showed that for the first time Christianity is a minority belief in England.

Baroness Meacher, a Crossbench peer, endorsed the Bill arguing that mandatory Christian assemblies exclude a large proportion of students, and that assemblies should encourage students from all backgrounds to embrace universal human values of generosity, kindness, and neighbourliness.

Lord Davies of Brixton, a Labour peer, argued that inclusive assemblies would reflect the diversity and inclusivity of modern British society, rather than pointlessly excluding pupils who don’t want to engage in Christian worship.

Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle, a Green peer, supported the Bill, arguing time out of the curriculum to focus on ethical and environmental issues would be a benefit for pupils. She reiterated that the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child had argued mandatory collective Christian worship undermines children’s right to freedom of religion or belief.

What defenders said

Unsurprisingly, the Bishop of Chelmsford defended collective worship as ‘vital’ for school life and religious literacy, and for giving students the possibility to ’encounter the divine’. She even argued that reflecting on the meaning and purpose of life was the exclusive province of spirituality. 

Lord Weir of Ballyholme, a DUP peer, argued that the Bill was unnecessary as parents can already withdraw their children from collective worship. He argued that the Bill would make humanist assemblies compulsory with no right of withdrawal. Amusingly, but inaccurately, he claimed it might lead to ’banning’ of singing hymns, performing nativity plays, and carols such as ‘Away in a Manger’. This is in no sense true, but revealing as to the priorities and concerns of peers who defend compulsory Christian worship – for which the UK remains a global anomaly. 

Baroness Barran, Shadow Minister for Education, maintained the Conservative Party’s opposition to the Bill from when it was first introduced four years ago. She argued that in a changing society children must be taught from a common core of values, and Judeo-Christian principles underpin British culture, have withstood the test of time and that we should not unravel that shared sense of who we are as a community.

Government response 

The Government’s Lords Spokesperson for Education, Baroness Smith of Malvern, stated that it would not support the bill. She argued that despite Britain’s increasingly diverse religious landscape, Christianity remains the principal religion of the country, and ‘regardless’ of fewer people describing themselves as practising Christians, the UK Government sees a benefit in acts of collective worship. 

Responding to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child’s  position that children under 16 not being able to withdraw themselves from collective worship without parental permission may contravene their right to freedom of religion and belief, she said the Government instead upholds that 16 is an appropriate age at which children be given the independent right to remove themselves from mandatory Christian worship as it is in line with other rights given at 16 including medical decisions and the age of consent.

However, it is worth noting that the UN explicitly said that this approach was not compatible with children’s rights treaties the UK is party to.

Humanists UK Director of Public Affairs and Policy Richy Thompson commented:

‘We are delighted to see Baroness Burt’s inclusive assemblies bill pass second reading, however it is a shame to hear the Government defending the anomaly of mandatory Christian collective worship for children. It is highly anomalous that the UK is the only sovereign nation in the world to force pupils to perform mandatory daily Christian worship. The Government is setting itself against the diversity of the UK, and undermining children’s rights to not be subjected to religious practices they do not believe in. This would be a significant step forward for freedom of religion and belief, and for inclusive education.