Other written evidence
All-Party Parliamentary Humanist Group
1. The All Party Parliamentary Humanist Group
(APPHG) brings together MPs and Peers from across the Parties
and some with no Party affiliation. It does not take a position
on Lords Reform as such but the issue of the position of the Church
of England Bishops sitting in the House as of right is one that
the Group has considered for some time. At the Group's AGM in
2010 it agreed that one of its priorities was to examine this
issue further and make representations to the Joint Committee.
In November 2010 the chair of the APPHG, the Rt. Hon. Lord Warner
of Brockley, wrote to the Rt. Hon. Nick Clegg to detail some concerns
the APPHG has with Bishops in the House of Lords. In light of
the White Paper and Draft Bill which, regrettably, include proposals
to retain reserved places for Bishops in the House of Lords, the
APPHG would like to reiterate its position in this submission
for the consideration of the Joint Committee.
2. The White Paper and Draft Bill make a number
of specific proposals regarding how many places for Bishops should
be retained in a reformed House of Lords, and on what basis. The
APPHG does not consider that there should be any reserved places
for Church of England Bishops—or any other religious representatives—in
a reformed chamber and therefore limits this submission to setting
out just two arguments for not retaining the privileged and automatic
right for Bishops to sit and vote in the House of Lords. These
are about equality and fairness to other religion and belief systems;
and about the establishment of the Church of England.
3. In any reformed House of Lords—elected
or part elected and part appointed—there are no grounds
for reserving a set number of places for Church of England Bishops,
even at a reduced number as the White Paper and Draft Bill propose.
This privileged position would undermine the legitimacy of the
reform by reserving a set number of places for one branch of one
religion, all of whom would be men. This would be discriminatory
in terms of religion and gender.
4. This is not to say that no Bishops in the
Church of England should have a place in reformed chamber but
this would have to be done on a basis that was equal to others
and using the same transparent criteria. For example, should a
reformed chamber only be partially elected—as the White
Paper and Draft Bill propose—there is no reason why Bishops
should have a privileged place in an appointments process compared
with other religious leaders or representatives or indeed anybody
else. The candidature would be dealt with on the same basis as
any other appointed candidate.
5. The issue of Bishops sitting in the House
of Lords is quite separate from that of the established status
of the Church of England. Bishops sit in the House of Lords by
virtue of the 1878 Bishoprics Act. The establishment of the Church
of England rests upon Parliament's power over its legislation
and the Sovereign's requirement as its Supreme Governor to be
in communion with it. These are two quite separate issues as was
made clear in the 1999 report by the Cabinet Office, Modernising
Parliament. Reforming the House of Lords. Whether or not the
Bishops sit in the House of Lords does not affect whether there
could or should be an established Church of England.
6. The APPHG would be happy to provide any further
information or clarification as the Joint Committee requires.
October 2011
| 
