Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill

[mushroom25]

Missing from the Queen's Speech -
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10043571/Queens-Speech-plain-cigarettes-snoopers-charter-gay-marriage-laws-missing.html
are the conservatives running scared of UKIP, or their own dissenting members? Or just pragmatism in the face of a very full legislative year?

[jno]

nope, it's Ukip.

[Sharingan]

UKIP

[ichkeria]

If they've got cold feet about the Same Sex Couples Bill then they've really lost the plot. Not sure that that would necessarily have been down for the next session anyway.
But gay marriage is supported by most people, it would seem. If the Tories are scared of implementing any policy likely to be opposed by one element of their core vote, they are destined for the political sidelines for some time to come. They haven't won an election outright for 21 years as it is.

[ToraToraTora]

Frankly I'd have thought it negligent if it had been in the QS. Surely there must be more important things to use parliamentary time on. I don't really care one way or another it's just not important enough to waste valuable legislature time on.

[DaisyNonna]

ichkeria, what grounds have you for saying that gay marriage is supported by most people?

[jim360]

Why is this bill more than, say, questions about "Marine Management Organisation and data accuracy"? (Which, incidentally, is happening on the same day as reporting about the bill in question).

It just seems that of all that goes on in Parliament, this is the one issue that apparently "doesn't matter". Why not?

[DaisyNonna]

Perhaps because we have never been apprised of it?

[ToraToraTora]

was that in the queens speech then jim?

[jno]

there's this, Daisynonna

http://www.attitude.co.uk/viewers/viewcontent.aspx?contentid=2487&catid=comment&cat=Politics%20&%20Comment&subcatid=general_news&subcat=General%20News&longtitle=TWO+THIRDS+SUPPORT+GAY+MARRIAGE

[FredPuli43]

Don't suppose Marine Management takes up much time; it'll go through on the nod, as it were, if only because none of the MPs understand it or are enthused enough to debate it, important though it may be.

Sounds like pragmatism, given parliamentary time. We don't want another fox-hunting bill and this one may be just as divisive , UKIP, right- wingers, or no. The existing law does everything for same sex unions, doesn't it, but doesn't create the same arguments as the word marriage ,does it?

[DaisyNonna]

What a load of spherical objects. Proves absolutely nothing. No numbers polled given, then said results were weighted. And the moon is made of green cheese.

[FredPuli43]

Just because you may not want to believe it Daisy, doesn't make the finding wrong. Whoever writes Attitude, Populus, whose poll it was, are respectable enough as pollsters

[sunny-dave]

1000 people polled by a well respected organisation ('weighting' only means adjusting so that the 1000 are representative of the population as a whole in terms of age/sex/race etc)

Detailed Results : http://www.populus.co.uk/uploads/OmGay_Rights.pdf

[DaisyNonna]

1000 people? That is ridiculous. What percentage is that of the total population entitled to vote?

[jim360]

Daisy, it's called statistical analysis and is completely justified. As long as the sample is sufficiently random, as this one undoubtedly was (Populus are good at that) then 1,000 people is entirely sufficient to gauge people's opinions to within about 7% accuracy.

[sunny-dave]

Check the standard deviation etc on the results - it's all perfectly kosher in terms of predicting the attitudes of the general population within a couple of percentage points.

[chrisgel]

Take it you're against it then Daisynonna?

[sp1814]

Don't worry everyone - the reason it wasn't in the Queen's Speech is because it's over two years old. It doesn't actually need to be in this year's speech.

Hoorah eh!

We should be okay for excellent same sex marriages in a couple of years.

[Gromit]

It is a very thin programme in The Queen's speech, which may indicate the coalition is winding down.

To be honest, I think they just want to coast along for the next two years and achieve nothing.

You cannot blame them. No one has a majority and as the election approaches the coalition partners want to be seen as wider apart than they have been for yhe ladt threee years.

I don't think dropping plain cigarette wrappers and minimum alcohol prices is a sop to UKiP. More like they cannot rwally be bothered.

[ludwig]

The reason these things aren't in the speech is because the coalition is still arguing about them. It's got f all to do with ukip.