|
MP's back Civil Partnerships |
|
|
|
 Tabled by Conservative backbenchers Edward Leigh, Christopher Chope and
Gerald Howarth, the amendment claimed that the bill on offer would
create injustices for such people, despite being designed to end
discrimination against same-sex couples.
However, a majority of Labour and Lib Dem MPs, as well as major gay
rights groups, law associations and care organisations claimed the
amendment was an attempt to derail the bill and a protest against the
legal recognition of same-sex relationships.x
Gay Tory MP Alan Duncan noted the feeling of "haunting inevitability"
when debating the amendment, but said the new amendments would still
"wreck the Bill by creating partnerships within an existing family
which, in their confused and contradictory interrelationship, are
utterly unworkable".
Minister for Equality and Women, Jacqui Smith told MPs that the amendment would create legal nonsense.
"Civil partnership has not been designed as a legal relationship for people who are related to each other," she said.
"It is a new legal relationship for same-sex couples so that they can
have the legal recognition that they cannot currently get."
Labour MP Angela Eagle was keen to point out what she felt the true motives for the amendment were.
"It is invidious and divisive, but totally predictable that [Leigh] is
trying to use this inappropriate legislative vehicle, first, to prove
his so-called point about gay marriage, and, secondly, to wreck the
bill," she said.
She added that the "spinster sister" issue was an important one, but one that should not have appeared in this bill.
Opponents to the bill were typically vociferous.
Denying that she thought homosexuality was "an anathema and an
abomination", Conservative Ann Widdecombe said she did think
"homosexual acts are wrongful".
She also called for the government to be honest and admit the bill was creating "gay marriage".
The bill will now return to the House of Lords next week, where it is
hoped that supporters will mobilise and ensure it is passed before the
end of this parliamentary session.
Source: Gay.com UK. Ben Townley
Gay Tory MP Alan Duncan noted the feeling of "haunting inevitability"
when debating the amendment, but said the new amendments would still
"wreck the Bill by creating partnerships within an existing family
which, in their confused and contradictory interrelationship, are
utterly unworkable".
Minister for Equality and Women, Jacqui Smith told MPs that the amendment would create legal nonsense.
"Civil partnership has not been designed as a legal relationship for people who are related to each other," she said.
"It is a new legal relationship for same-sex couples so that they can
have the legal recognition that they cannot currently get."
Labour MP Angela Eagle was keen to point out what she felt the true motives for the amendment were.
"It is invidious and divisive, but totally predictable that [Leigh] is
trying to use this inappropriate legislative vehicle, first, to prove
his so-called point about gay marriage, and, secondly, to wreck the
bill," she said.
She added that the "spinster sister" issue was an important one, but one that should not have appeared in this bill.
Opponents to the bill were typically vociferous.
Denying that she thought homosexuality was "an anathema and an
abomination", Conservative Ann Widdecombe said she did think
"homosexual acts are wrongful".
She also called for the government to be honest and admit the bill was creating "gay marriage".
The bill will now return to the House of Lords next week, where it is
hoped that supporters will mobilise and ensure it is passed before the
end of this parliamentary session.
Source: Gay.com UK. Ben Townley |
Help / Support Groups
