This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22564023

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Too much time spent on gay marriage, says Hammond Too much time spent on gay marriage, says Hammond
(35 minutes later)
A Conservative cabinet minister has criticised the government time spent debating the issue of gay marriage.A Conservative cabinet minister has criticised the government time spent debating the issue of gay marriage.
Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said that the policy had angered many adding: "I have just never felt that this is what we should be focusing on."Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said that the policy had angered many adding: "I have just never felt that this is what we should be focusing on."
But Tory MP Nick Herbert said polls suggested most people favoured reform and losing touch with young voters would hurt the party.
The proposals for England and Wales will be debated by MPs on Monday.The proposals for England and Wales will be debated by MPs on Monday.
Ministers have said they are prepared to review whether civil partnerships should be extended to heterosexual couples but not until 2019.
The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill have split the Conservative Party but Prime Minister David Cameron and close colleagues are strongly in favour, as are Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband.The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill have split the Conservative Party but Prime Minister David Cameron and close colleagues are strongly in favour, as are Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband.
'Sense of anger''Sense of anger'
When MPs were given a "free vote" on the issue in February nearly half of all Conservative MPs opposed it.When MPs were given a "free vote" on the issue in February nearly half of all Conservative MPs opposed it.
Mr Hammond, who has been open about his opposition to gay marriage, told BBC One's Question Time: "This change does redefine marriage. For millions and millions of people who are married, the meaning of marriage changes.Mr Hammond, who has been open about his opposition to gay marriage, told BBC One's Question Time: "This change does redefine marriage. For millions and millions of people who are married, the meaning of marriage changes.
"There is a real sense of anger among many people who are married that any government thinks it has the ability to change the definition of an institution like marriage.""There is a real sense of anger among many people who are married that any government thinks it has the ability to change the definition of an institution like marriage."
He added: "I have just never felt that this is what we should be focusing on."
The introduction of civil partnerships in 2005 had dealt with the "very real disadvantage" that gay couples faced in the past, he argued. "There was no huge demand for this [gay marriage] and we didn't need to spend a lot of Parliamentary time and upset vast numbers of people in order to do this."The introduction of civil partnerships in 2005 had dealt with the "very real disadvantage" that gay couples faced in the past, he argued. "There was no huge demand for this [gay marriage] and we didn't need to spend a lot of Parliamentary time and upset vast numbers of people in order to do this."
Shadow home office minister Chris Bryant, whose civil partnership in 2010 was the first to be held in the Palace of Westminster, told Question Time he had always felt "slightly upset" when people said moves towards same-sex legislation would completely undermine marriage. Rapid change
"The government's version of the Bill that's coming forward on Monday says that homosexual couples, same-sex couples would be able to either be in a civil partnership or be married, but heterosexuals will only be able to form marriages. But Conservative Mr Herbert, a gay former minister, wrote on the ConservativeHome website: "How, precisely, would the the wedding of two people of the same sex in Weybridge change or devalue Philip Hammond's own marriage?"
"I think we should just have both for everybody. It should be exactly the same for everybody." Campaign group the Coalition for Marriage has collected more than 600,000 signatures calling for the coalition to drop its gay marriage proposals.
They were speaking as it emerged ministers have tabled an amendment which would allow for a review of civil partnerships in 2019 at the earliest - five years after gay marriage is set to become legal under government proposals. But Mr Herbert said opinion polls suggested the majority of the public were in favour the plans.
"Across much of the western world, the tide of change on equal marriage is running astonishingly rapidly, because public attitudes to gay people are changing at the same rate. Younger people can't understand what all the fuss is about," he said.
"I am sorry that it has caused disagreement in our party, but just as civil partnerships were opposed at the time yet became widely accepted very quickly, so I believe will gay marriage. Losing touch with the new generation of our electorate would produce a different and far more dangerous kind of pain."
Civil partnerships review
Shadow home office minister Chris Bryant, whose civil partnership in 2010 was the first to be held in the Palace of Westminster, told Question Time he had always felt "slightly upset" when people said moves towards same-sex legislation would undermine marriage.
But he said the legislation should also allow heterosexual couples to have a civil partnership: "I think we should just have both for everybody. It should be exactly the same for everybody."
It has emerged ministers have tabled an amendment which would allow for a review of civil partnerships in 2019 at the earliest - five years after gay marriage is set to become legal under government proposals.
'Get on with it'
The review would pave the way for partnerships to be extended, or, if demand has plummeted, scrapped altogether.The review would pave the way for partnerships to be extended, or, if demand has plummeted, scrapped altogether.
Culture Secretary Maria Miller said there had been questions about whether heterosexual couples should be able to have a civil partnership as well: "There are strong views on both sides of this debate, and we have listened to those views. We are therefore offering the House the opportunity to have a review of this area, rather than legislating now without the required evidence." Culture Secretary Maria Miller said the government was listening to "strong views" on both sides of the debate and was now offering MPs "the opportunity to have a review of this area, rather than legislating now without the required evidence".
Gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell said the public had supported the move in a consultation last year and ministers should "stop delaying and making excuses". She has warned that extending civil partnerships to heterosexual couples now would mean major delays to the introduction of gay marriage.
And Conservative MP Tim Loughton, who has tabled his own amendment calling for the immediate introduction of heterosexual civil partnerships, said it was simply "a spoiling measure from the government". But gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell said the public had supported the move in a consultation last year and ministers should "stop delaying and making excuses".
He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "Let's get on with it, rather than let it drag on and on." And Conservative MP Tim Loughton, who has tabled his own amendment calling for the immediate introduction of heterosexual civil partnerships, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "Let's get on with it, rather than let it drag on and on."
The former children's minister, who opposes gay marriage, denied that his amendment was an attempt to wreck the bill - Ms Miller has warned that adding it to the bill would significantly delay the introduction of gay marriage. The former children's minister, who opposes gay marriage, denied that his amendment was an attempt to wreck the bill.
Ahead of a vote on the issue in February David Cameron acknowledged that there were strong views on both sides of the argument but said he believed it would make society stronger.