Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Deputy Chairperson (Ms Forsythe): Are members agreed that Hansard report the session?

The Deputy Chairperson (Ms Forsythe): Hansard is not present but will produce a transcript from the recording.

I refer members to page 126 of the meeting pack for the Clerk's memo, which outlines the responses received to the Committee's call for evidence via the Citizen Space survey. Twenty-two responses were received from independent celebrants and humanist organisations, including Humanists Northern Ireland, Humanists UK, the Humanist Society Scotland and the Humanist Association of Ireland. The questionnaire consisted of 18 questions, 14 of which related to the content and clauses of the Bill. A breakdown of comments on each clause and answers to the questions asked in the survey has been provided for members' consideration today.

In summary, the results of the Citizen Space questionnaire indicated high levels of support for the main provisions of the Bill, including allowing belief bodies to conduct marriages, extending temporary authorisation arrangements and raising the minimum age for marriage and civil partnership to 18. Most questions returned clear majorities in favour, with particularly strong support for recognising non-religious belief marriages and increasing the minimum age. The responses to a smaller number of questions, particularly those relating to eligibility requirements and definitions of religious or belief bodies, showed more mixed views, with some respondents expressing uncertainty or calling for further clarity.

Overall, the questionnaire findings indicate respondents' general support for the Bill's policy aims while highlighting their expectation that the legislation will provide strong safeguards, clearer definitions and effective oversight of organisations that are authorised to solemnise marriages.

I invite Fiona, the Bill's scrutineer, to give a brief summary of the issues.

The Senior Assistant Assembly Clerk: I do not want to go through the Clerk's memo again, so I will draw out the key themes that came from the survey. As we know, the Citizen Space questionnaire ran for six weeks from 1 May to 12 June. It covered the main provisions of the Bill, including the recognition of belief marriage, the treatment of belief bodies under marriage law and the proposal to raise the minimum age for marriage and civil partnership from 16 to 18. Overall, the responses showed broad support for the main policy intentions of the Bill. There was particularly strong support for allowing belief groups to register people to perform marriages and for extending the temporary authorisation arrangements to belief bodies. There was also support for raising the minimum age for marriage and civil partnership to 18.

The key response figures are, essentially, as follows: on the belief marriage provisions, 20 respondents agreed that belief groups should be allowed to register people to perform marriages; the same number supported the temporary permission for belief groups to perform marriages; 18 respondents agreed that references to religious bodies and religious marriages should be expanded to include belief bodies and belief marriages; and 19 agreed that belief bodies should be treated the same as religious bodies under marriage law.

The most mixed response was on the proposed definition of "a religious or belief body". Eleven respondents agreed that the definition should allow for different forms of organisation. Five disagreed, four were unsure and two did not answer. Therefore, members may wish to explore that area further, particularly with regard to clarity, safeguards and the eligibility criteria.

On Part 2, there was clear support for raising the minimum age for marriage from 16 to 18. Again, the same was reflected on civil partnership. I will highlight the fact that, on the criminal offence, 16 respondents supported it, one respondent was unsure and two did not answer, but no respondents disagreed with that provision.

We also asked for additional comments. All the main themes from additional comments relate to Part 1. Humanist organisations, including Humanists Northern Ireland, Humanists UK, the Humanist Society Scotland and the Humanist Association of Ireland all gave their feedback and very much supported putting belief marriage on a statutory footing. However, a significant theme was that the Bill could be strengthened with regard to belief bodies. They suggested particular safeguards, including substantial and active membership; a minimum period of continuous operation; charitable and non-profit status; clear governance arrangements; written procedures; training officiants; continuing professional support; and complaints and disciplinary procedures. Several respondents raised concerns that, without those safeguards, commercial celebrant businesses could present themselves as belief bodies when their main intention is really just to conduct marriages. They referred to the Republic of Ireland model and raised concerns about the operation of the Scottish system.

There was also feedback from independent celebrants who argued that the Bill should allow for them to be considered in the provisions. They suggested that not all belief marriages are relevant for all couples with mixed faiths or spiritual beliefs. One went so far as to state that that simply replaces one form of discrimination with another, as it does not provide fairness or equality for individuals who have a mixture of beliefs. The Give Couples Choice Movement argues that addressing that now would save having to revisit it at a later stage. It is concerned that there would be another legal case similar to Smyth v the General Register Office if individuals are not given equality in the law when it comes to independent celebrants.

In summary, the main issues are the definition and regulation of belief bodies, which is a concern; the standards expected of authorised celebrants; the risk of commercialisation; and the position of independent celebrants.

The Deputy Chairperson (Ms Forsythe): Thank you very much, Fiona. A lot of work went into that, so thanks to all involved with the Citizen Space survey and the analysis of it. It is useful to have all that information. We really appreciate it.

Do members have any comments or questions? No. It is good to have the detail in the pack.

The Committee Clerk: It conveys what the Committee considered in its previous discussions to be the main issues coming out of the Bill.

The Deputy Chairperson (Ms Forsythe): There is nothing that is new or that we have not already picked up.

The Committee Clerk: No. It consolidates all that.

The Deputy Chairperson (Ms Forsythe): We have scheduled for further discussion every issue that has been raised. What is the date for Consideration Stage? I cannot remember. Is it in November?

The Committee Clerk: We finish Committee Stage on 13 November. Ideally, that is a deadline, not a target. We have scheduled oral evidence from the humanists, and we will see where we go from there. We have received a lot of written evidence from the main Churches and others. As you said, the Citizen Space questionnaire raised the issues that we expected it to. It will come down to Committee scrutiny of the criteria in the regulations that qualify organisations to perform marriages.

When it comes to independent celebrants, there is a trickier question. A lot of them are individuals who make a living from being celebrants, celebrating weddings and officiating at people's funerals and so on. It will be for the Department to navigate that.

The Committee is aware that the regulations will be laid under the draft affirmative procedure, which means that the regulations that are laid can be rewritten —

The Deputy Chairperson (Ms Forsythe): OK. Thank you.

The Committee Clerk: — and it will be the House that decides.

The Deputy Chairperson (Ms Forsythe): OK. Do members agree to consider as part of Committee Stage scrutiny the issues raised in response to the questionnaire?

The Deputy Chairperson (Ms Forsythe): We have no follow-up actions, because everything that has been raised will be covered in further evidence sessions, and we will come back to it.

There is confirmation that Departmental Solicitor's Office (DSO) officials will attend the Committee on 7 October to address the issues raised during Committee Stage. I ask for members' agreement to add that session to the forward work plan.