Dave Thompson MSP

The Government consultation on the Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) Bill has recently closed, and I wanted to explain my response to readers.

My position is that I see no need to re-define marriage, as I do not believe that this is an equality issue. Civil partnerships provide nearly all of the legal rights and obligations of Marriage and can easily be adjusted to make the two forms of union equal in every way, including allowing faith bodies the right to carry out and bless ceremonies, should they wish to.

While there should not be a legal difference between a Civil Partnership and a Marriage, these two unions are not identical. Essentially, it is all about the meaning of a word, marriage, a word that means the union of one man and one woman in a committed loving relationship for the procreation of children. On the other hand, Civil Partnership means the union of two people of the same sex in a committed loving relationship. These definitions are as equal as is possible, but they also highlight the difference between the two types of union.

For this reason, I do not think that the bill should be passed but it is important that if it is, certain safe guards are built into it.

I believe that re-defining marriage will lead to a limitation of freedom of speech and belief unless such freedom is enshrined in the face of the bill so there can be no doubt about the right of all to hold their own beliefs and to espouse them. I have, therefore, asked the Scottish Government to amend the bill to ensure that this crucial protection is included.

It is also essential that real safeguards are built in to the bill for those who may be caught out by unintended consequences. There is a real danger that Celebrants, Teachers, Registrars and others will fall foul of the Equality Act 2010 unless there is an opt-out on conscience grounds. I think this is eminently reasonable as it would recognise the role faith plays in the life of an individual.

This will be recognised in relation to MSP’s who will be given a free vote on grounds of conscience. Surely, if this is recognised as a matter of conscience for MSP’s it must also be a matter of conscience for others. I have, therefore, asked that the Scottish government amend the bill to ensure that there is an opt-out on conscience grounds.

Safeguards for Civil Liberties and Matters of Conscience will founder unless the Equality Act 2010 is amended by the Westminster government, so I have also asked the Scottish government to ensure that, in the event of this bill passing, it will not become law until the Westminster government has enacted appropriate changes to the Equality Act 2010.

I intend to follow the Bill as it is debated in Parliament and will push for the amendments that I feel are necessary. I have also offered to appear before the committee that is considering the bill to discuss these concerns. While I fully support equality before the law in terms of Marriages and Civil Partnerships, I do not believe that changing the definition of marriage is the correct way to achieve this, and I am concerned that the move could have many unintended consequences, which is why I intend to vote against the Bill.

I have recently written to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to press for the redevelopment of a 3G pitch in Fort William to receive funding from the next round of the Proceeds of Crime fund. The facility would be used for football and shinty, and would sit well with the moves by the Lochaber Sports Association and Highland Council to develop a new state of the art sports facility. I hope that the Scottish Government can provide at least 50% of the funding for this redevelopment, which would be a huge boost for Fort William and the wider Lochaber area.