I’m not sufficiently well read on the topic to know for sure. But if we take the article at it’s word and it passes the Commons, I am assuming the next hurdle will be the Lords? When will that be? I have read there is legal mainoeuvering to push the bill through even without Lords’ support, but do we have any idea of whether the bill will pass the Lords? And if so, when will the law go into effect? Sorry if these are silly questions
If it passes on Tuesday then it goes to a House of Commons committee for review and amendments. Once it’s out of committee it returns to the Commons for a final vote and if it passes then it’s off to the Lords. I’m not sure how long that process takes, probably a couple of months.
The Lords is a bit of a mystery. They might simply vote to pass it and send it off to the Queen for her assent in which case marriages will begin a few months later. More likely they’ll add amendments deliberately designed to delay the bill’s progress. If the Lords vote to amend then the bill goes back to the Commons so that MPs can vote to accept or reject the amendments and it can bounce back and forth a few times. Maria Miller hasn’t ruled out using the Parliament Act which allows MPs to circumvent the Lords and send the bill straight to the Queen without the Lords voting in favour,
Hopefully there’ll be a big enough majority in the Commons to make the Lords think twice about delaying the bill.
Sorry you and I described the process simultaneously! Btw, the Parliament Acts effectively take a year to use – they allow the bill to be passed without Lords support, but only if the Commons pass the bill two years in a row.
Technically can’t the parliament act only be used to pass manifesto commitments?
Nope, there’s nothing whatsoever that links manifesto commitments to the use of the Parliament Act although some opponents have suggested there is.
I think they are getting confused with the Salisbury Convention whereby the House of Lords will not oppose laws enacting manifesto commitments.
Just as an example, there was no manifesto commitment from Labour to equalise the age of consent back in 2000. The Salisbury Convention therefore didn’t apply and the government were forced to use the Parliament Act to get it through the Lords.
And as well the Government can only invoke the Parliament Act with legislation which starts off in the House of Commons – like this bill. That is why Section 28 repeal took so long as it started off in the Lords and the Government had to start all over again when they defeated it.
There are more stages in the Commons first. The Committee stage, where a committee of interested MPs debate amendments to the bill, and then the report & 3rd reading stage: more votes on amendments and a vote on the whole bill, by all MPs.
Then it goes to the Lords where there will be a 2nd reading debate, Committee stage, Report stage, and 3rd reading stage, with amendments allowed at the last three of those stages.
Then back to the Commons for MPs to decide whether they disagree with any amendments made by the Lords. If they do, the bill ping-pongs between the Commons and Lords until they agree.
Well said Ed, now try and reason with Rob Flello your shadow justice minister – If the real justice minister, Grayling, can bring himself to vote for equal marriage then there is no reason why Flello can’t !
I hate that man, his voice, his face, his policies, his inability to formulate any half reasonable idea.
But I’m glad his party will back the marriage equality act.
A person’s face and voice aren’t very good reasons for hate Policies are a different matter though
How can you support a public figure when every time you see them you want to vomit?
What a vile thing to say.
Funnily enough you’ve just described how I feel about David Cameron!
Wow! Hate. A little bit harsh, I feel.
is ‘dispise’ ok?
Not if you can spell
Gosh, how different to 1988 and section 28!
Does anyone now of a Labour MP who seems UNLIKELY to vote for the second reading? They may be incorrigible, but some may be open to persuasion.
What does the late Ralph Miliband have in common with a woman’s bra? Both raised a pair of tits.
If you want to know why Labour allowed a free vote and why this will pass with only a narrow majority rather than an overwhelming majority, it is because of the passivity and laziness of UK gays. I have never seen a worse example of apathy and diffidence. You couldn’t even be moved to organize a response the consulation or to put together an online petition to counter that of the opposition.
UK gays should really think about why they have groups like Stonewall, which do nothing useful.
Quite right, its not just the gays though, apathy and deference to authority – however corrupt, venal, petty or incompetant – is seemingly hardwired into British culture.
The british elite have been s******g us for years and most people either don’t want to make a fuss or are far more concerned about who’s on Celebrity Dancing Big Brother In The Jungle.
Rubbish. The free vote is a political convention that really labour and the lib Dems could not ignore. Even with a free vote though, that will only result in 15 MPs voting against. The votes the Commons will therefore still be landslides.
I would also argue that gay marriage, while a pleasing cherry on top, is not the most crucial big gay law reform. Decriminalisation, age of consent, section 28, repealing the hundreds of antigay criminal offences and the first step in to civil partnerships were all much bigger and more important steps and it was right that they were accompanied by full throated gay campaigning.
Not the point. The point is that weakness yields unfavourable results. We didn’t want a free vote but we got it because we weren’t prepared to do the work and expend the energy.
As for the importance of this proposal, I think you are completely blinkered. Equal marriage is essential to equal status in society. If you lack the former, you will never enjoy the latter. Marriage is an important institution and exclusion from it marks us as forever second class. Why do you think there is such massive resistance to this measure? Because it is nothing more than a pleasant-looking cherry? No, it is precisely because the proposal is so important in making us equal that it engenders such hostility. But regardless, even if you disagree, all of the other reforms you mentioned are in the past. Listing them is no argument in defense of the apathy and laziness that have marked our effort in regard to marriage.
so let me get this straight (sic): ed was part of a government that refused to introduce same sex marriage, he stood behind a leader who refused to discuss the matter and said that marriage was a christian union between a man and a woman, he was part of a government that stripped trans people of their rights, brought in anti-gay bullying legislation that left every opportunity to bully people and get away with it.
he did all this and when a tory government brings a bill to parliament on gay marrage he claims moral superiority?
oh how we all laughed.
-4? my posts seem to be unpopular these days.
ed is an opportunist, he didn’t back gay marriage when it suited him and did when it did.
if there’s one thing that can be said for callmedave (and there’s not many positive things i can think of to say to him regarding this) he’s stuck to his guns on this issue.
Don’t worry, anything against the Tory party you’ll get major thumbs up, and anything remotely anti-labour you’ll be shouted down.
I cannot stand that man, or that party. Pro-equality when it flipping suits.
Let’s hope they will vote with the govt on the programme motion…no more dealys please, whack it into a small committee and please don’t argue about the timetable and a lengthy pointless debate in the committee of the whole house!
It will be very interesting for all GLTBI people to see which MP’s vote ‘Yes’ and which vote ‘No’ Such information is very useful for personal voting intentions.
Looking at my local MP’s voting record I can safely say he will most likely vote against Gay Marriage. As for Ed Milliband; It’ll take a lot more than votig “Yes” on this to get you into power, what with him being “Cameron Lite”. Does anyone else remember when there were actual SOCIALISTS and LEFT WING people in the Labour Party? Or am I being sentimental?
Liam , you are correct about the current Labor Party, not only in Britan but similar Labor parties around the world. Most socialists and left-wingers are no longer in the Labor Party but belong to ‘Left parties and the Green parties worldwide.On many. many issues you will find that the Conservatives and the Labor parties all vote the same! I used to support Labor in Australia, but for many years now I have voted for the Greens.
Good to see Mr Miliband speaking so strongly on this issue although Labour has yet to make any concerted attempt to wrestle LGBT equality back from David Cameron who really has been making the running here. Actually, Cameron’s vision for marriage equality is looking a bit beleaguered these days and the bill the government has brought before Parliament leaves much to be desired (http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/01/25/comment-the-same-sex-marriage-bill-isnt-the-end-of-the-journey-towards-gay-rights/). I hope Labour continues to be proactive when it comes to details as the bill passes through the committee stage – there’s still everything to play for politically on this issue.