A RECENT Westminster Hall debate mustered a significant number of parliamentary Humanists last week, all there to challenge the Government regarding its delay in permitting legal marriages by Humanists across England and Wales.
They argue that the law could be changed immediately to allow Humanist marriages, which would be a first step towards overall, and much-needed, reform.
Humanists, a belief system made up of non-religious people relying on scientific methods to understand the universe, have a heavy presence in Parliament, with an in-house, ‘All-party Parliamentary Humanist Group’ and a secretariat provided by Humanists UK directly.
It is of the AOIC’s opinion that piecemeal reform of the marriage system in England and Wales, giving only Humanist celebrants the right to marry couples, will continue to discriminate against the thousands of UK couples not subscribing to religions, like Humanism, or the hundreds of couples who are interfaith and seeking more personalised ceremonies.
Taking place on Thursday, June 12, and secured by MP Sarah Edwards (Tamworth), MP Lizzi Collinge (Morecambe and Lunesdale), and MP Freddie van Mierlo (Henley and Thame), 16 MPs took to the floor with several ambiguous statements, confusing a number of civil and Humanist celebrant facts throughout the session.
MP Sarah Edwards (Tamworth) began with the subject of qualifications, stating: “Humanists UK trains and accredits celebrants …”
Unlike many other religions, Humanists UK does not pay for the training of its celebrants but offers bespoke training for a four-figure fee for the five days the charity requires for them to undertake marriage ceremonies. More than 80 per cent of the Association of Independent Celebrants’ (AOIC) members have paid thousands of pounds for accredited or one-to-one training, most clocking up a minimum of 387-hours of study for accredited ‘Namings & Couples’ qualifications. The remainder have years of experience, arguing the point that independent celebrants are equally if not better placed to conduct legal marriages.
MP Ruth Cadbury (Brentford & Isleworth) somewhat confusingly stated: “I fully support the Humanist Society’s position to allow a couple to be married by a celebrant who shares the couple’s values and beliefs, one that works in Scotland, Northern Ireland and many other jurisdictions across the world.”
“I would have some concerns if the law was opened up to any non-religious belief organisations. There needs to be solemnity and dignity in the process. I would also have some concern about the potential for celebrants to sell their services as a commercial transaction, so there are some aspects of the Law Commission proposals that concern me.”
A trip to the non-religious Humanists’ website would confirm to Ms Cadbury that the Humanist celebrants she fully supports already charge between £450 – £1500 per ceremony, which is a similar amount to their counterparts, independent celebrants, and therefore a commercial transaction.
The Law Commission’s recommendations for reform (2022) suggest independent celebrants should also be permitted to conduct legal ceremonies, something MP Lizzi Collinge of Morecambe & Lunesdale said would “turn weddings into a Las Vegas-style free for all, which is something that would be unprecedented in Europe”. Given that the Jersey government, in Europe, has successfully implemented an officiant-based system – with some building restrictions – since 2018, without a gawdy, glitzy transformation of St Helier, it could be argued that Ms Collinge’s statement is quite incorrect.
Following a declaration as a Humanist, MP for Sutton and Cheam, Luke Taylor, surprised the AOIC by standing in support of marriages by independent celebrants: “I take advantage of this opportunity to personally call for the right to recognise any marriage conducted by a registered officiant for all other groups, as I enjoyed in my marriage, because there is no reason why a Humanist should have rights that any other group is denied.”
MP Sarah Edwards quoted during the debate that Melanie Field, former Chief Strategy and Policy Officer at the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said she “sees no legal barrier, no disadvantage to other groups, no reason that the Government cannot act …”.
AOIC CEO Simon finished: “By allowing only Humanist marriages, it is wholly unfair that thousands of couples will not be able to have the marriage they want and deserve, and subsequently there is indeed a disadvantage.
“The AOIC agrees with the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, Alex Davies-Jones, who rejected piecemeal reform, stating that the issues needed to be considered very carefully and ‘that it would not be responsible for the Government to ignore the Law Commission’s report’.
“There were many gaping holes and puns a-plenty during the debate in Westminster, and we would welcome the opportunity to further discuss the issue of wedding law reform with Government ministers, which we will be pursuing in the coming weeks.”
For a full transcript of the debate, visit https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-06-12/debates/88BADD43-303D-4964-8431-B8CE6CC8CBFF/HumanistMarriage