Humanist marriage debate: MPs call for Government to enact recognition

MP after MP has stood up in Parliament and revealed the personal impact that the failure to legally recognise humanist marriages has had on their own lives. A powerful Westminster Hall debate today saw them share deeply personal reasons for supporting the long-overdue change in England and Wales – calling for the Government to act without delay. They included MPs who had humanist weddings without legal recognition – like Lewis Atkinson, Laura Kyrke-Smith, and Caroline Voaden. MPs who chose not to have humanist marriages because of the law – like Cat Eccles. And MPs who travelled to Scotland so they could have legal recognition – like Freddie van Mierlo and Tony Vaughan.

The debate was co-sponsored by All-Party Parliamentary Humanist Group (APPHG) members Sarah Edwards MP, Lizzi Collinge MP, and Freddie van Mierlo MP, and was backed by cross-party MPs. Humanists UK has welcomed the debate, and urged the Government to listen to MPs and lay the Order to grant legal recognition to humanist marriages.

For its part, the Government said it wishes to consider the wholesale marriage reform scheme proposed by the Law Commission. But Marriage Minister Alex Davies-Jones also said, ‘we may not yet be able to set the date [for humanist marriages] but we can certainly start planning’ – implying that this reform will be forthcoming eventually.

Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, commented:

‘Today’s debate was moving, with MPs sharing their personal stories which lay bare the human impact of the current discriminatory law.

‘While we welcome the Government’s commitment to legally recognise humanist marriages, humanist couples have been told time and time again to be patient. It is abundantly clear that there is a strong, cross-party desire to rectify this injustice and allow humanists in England and Wales the opportunity to get married in line with their beliefs. We urge the Government to listen to these voices and lay the Order to bring about this long-overdue reform.’

MPs’ personal stories

Debate co-sponsor Freddie van Mierlo MP told MPs that he and his wife travelled to Scotland to have a legally recognised humanist marriage so that their ceremony including the words spoken were meaningful and marked the special bond between him and his wife, without having to have a registry marriage and a celebration after.

Sarah Edwards MP, who also co-sponsored the debate, raised the case of her colleague and APPHG member Tony Vaughan MP who was unable to attend but agreed for her to share his story. Tony also had a humanist wedding in Scotland, partly due to the fact that his partner is Scottish, but also because they wanted the wedding to be legally recognised. They were married in the Highlands in a place of huge personal significance for them. She also raised that her mum personally experienced difficulty due to the lack of humanist marriage recognition: she had a registry wedding and only she and her brother were able to attend.

Caroline Voaden MP shared that she had a humanist wedding in a carpentry workshop, where her now husband works, as it was a setting that was meaningful to them. She described how they wrote their own vows and were able to include their children in the ceremony. She told MPs that she also had to have a separate civil wedding two days later in order to be legally wed and consequently now has two wedding days, and regrets that the occasion she remembers as her wedding wasn’t her legal wedding.

Laura Kyrke-Smith MP also spoke about her humanist wedding on a beach in Devon 11 years ago – wanting something that was a better reflection of their beliefs and values than other options. The civil marriage they had to have on another date meant extra costs, extra admin, and a looming sense that the wedding they invited everyone to wasn’t ‘real’.

Cat Eccles MP talked about her wedding last year. She explained she and her husband would have loved to have a legal humanist wedding and no hassle of organising another event. The legal marriage she had to have but didn’t want didn’t have the personal meaning in its content that the humanist wedding did.

Lewis Atkinson MP also had a humanist wedding but had to have his civil marriage two days earlier. Choosing a humanist marriage represented his and his wife’s humanist values and the commitment they wanted to make to one another. Although his marriage subsequently didn’t work out, he explained how the shared humanist values that they embarked on in married life provided an enduring basis for him and his ex-wife to co-parent together.

Other MPs have also had humanist weddings, or want to, but were unable to take part in the debate – in some cases because they are in government.

Equality arguments in favour of reform

Anneliese Dodds MP – until recently the Government Equalities Minister – said ‘When it comes to equity, I am sure she is aware that the High Court ruled five years ago that there was an issue of discrimination. The approach since then has been that we need to wait for wholesale marriage reform, but this is a very simple change. Does she agree that the Government should just take it forward, given the overwhelming case for it, and not wait for wholesale marriage reform?’

Lizzi Collinge MP, Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Humanist Group (APPHG), and co-sponsor of the debate, called on the Government to lay the Order to grant legal recognition of humanist marriages and highlighted how popular the reform would be with both the public and MPs.

Sam Carling MP highlighted that the lack of legally recognised humanist marriages is an LGBT issue. He stated that LGBT people are significantly more likely to identify as non-religious and that most religious groups still don’t allow same-sex marriages which means they are left with fewer choices. He explained that every year since 2013, more same-sex couples have chosen to have a humanist wedding – without legal recognition – than have had religious same-sex marriages with legal recognition in England and Wales.

Fellow APPHG member Andrew Cooper MP also rebutted arguments from the Government against piecemeal reform. He listed eight piecemeal reforms that have happened in the meantime: first, in 2021 the law was changed to allow civil marriages outdoors. Second, the system of registering marriages was moved to be electronic. Third, mothers’ names have been added to marriage certificates. Fourth, opposite-sex civil partnerships have been introduced, along with new possibilities for conversions between marriage and civil partnership. Fifth, no-fault divorce was introduced in 2022. Sixth, in 2023 the marriage age was raised to 18. Seventh, weddings for whole life prisoners were banned just last August. And all the while, more and more religious groups are happily registering themselves to do marriages for the first time – including some religions that are younger than this whole campaign.

Other MPs also spoke in favour, including former APPHG Chair Rachel Hopkins, Ruth Cadbury, Peter Dowd, and Bambos Charalambous.

Frontbench responses

Luke Taylor MP for the Liberal Democrat frontbench set out that ‘The Liberal Democrats are proud of our clear and consistent commitment to legal recognition for humanist marriages’ – explaining its long history of work on the issue. He asked Labour to outline a timetable for legal recognition, and to explain why more time is needed.’

Shadow Justice Minister Dr Kieran Mullan MP said he had ‘some concerns about the Law Commission’s proposals’ saying that ‘the recommendations go beyond giving humanist wedding ceremonies legal status, and they would create a free-market… approach… such a move could undermine the solemn nature of marriage.’ He said that ‘every year that passes rightly creates further pressure, as the balance tips closer to those arguing that having specific measures to support humanist marriage ceremonies is the fairer approach. Let us not forget that Scotland and Northern Ireland already legally recognise humanist marriages.’ He explained that ‘the Opposition are positively predisposed to the introduction of humanist marriage ceremonies… We are increasingly sympathetic to the need for specific measures to allow humanist marriages to take place, given the ongoing delays. A number of Conservative Members who support these measures wished to attend this debate.’

Responding to the debate, Marriage Minister Alex Davies-Jones said that the ‘strength of feeling and frustration around legally recognising humanist weddings is very clear to me from this debate.’ She said she does ‘appreciate that this change has been ongoing on for a long time.’ However she said ‘I am against any piecemeal reform here. If we are to do this, we need to do it properly and together, so that it is succinct.’ She said the Government felt it could not ignore the Law Commission review. But she said ‘the Government are actively considering the matter of humanist weddings… my officials are working on this at pace, and that an update on the Government’s position on weddings law reform will be coming very soon… we may not yet be able to set the date, but we can certainly start planning.’

About humanist marriages

Humanist weddings are non-religious wedding ceremonies that are fully customised to match the deepest-held values and beliefs of the couple getting married. They are conducted by a humanist celebrant, someone guaranteed to share their beliefs. In consultation with the couple the celebrant produces a completely bespoke script. The ceremony also occurs in whatever location is most meaningful for the couple. Humanists UK has more than 300 trained and accredited wedding celebrants.

Humanist marriages gained legal recognition in Scotland in 2005 and since 2022 more humanist weddings have been conducted each year than religious marriages of all kinds combined. They also gained legal recognition in the Republic of Ireland in 2012; in Northern Ireland in 2018, following a Court of Appeal ruling that concluded that a failure to do so would be a breach of human rights; in Jersey in 2019; and in Guernsey in 2021.

In England and Wales, however, humanist couples must have an unwanted additional civil ceremony for their marriage to be legally recognised. A change in law has been under constant Government review since 2013. The Marriage Act gave the Government the power to enact legal recognition of humanist marriages by Order – which would take as little time as 90 minutes in each the House of Commons and House of Lords. But in the years since, the Government has not done this. Instead the matter has been reviewed three times, most recently by the Law Commission, which published its report in July 2022. The previous Government did not issue its response before the General Election was called.

Labour supported legal recognition of humanist marriages by Order since 2014 while in opposition. But now in power, the new government has said it needs more time to set out a position and consider the measure in light of the Law Commission review.