|
When Jacqui Smith, the UK Government's Minister for Women & Equality, published the long-awaited Civil Partnership Proposals for the recognition of same-sex couples, on 30 June 2003, she asked for official responses before 30 September 2003.
The four Directors of Isis Financial Planners have made their submission as detailed below. The paragraph numbers refer to those contained in the Government's Consultation Document (for more information see: Women and Equality Website).
The texts in bold are the Government's questions, that in italics is our response.
1. Are there other measures that could be taken to further ensure the safe registration of same-sex couples while meeting the need for a public register? No comments
2. Do you wish to comment on the proposed recognition arrangements in paragraph 4.19? We believe the Government is correct in wanting to maintain integrity of treatment across the United Kingdom in relation to areas reserved to the UK Parliament. It would be unfair, as well as confusing and impractical, to have a separate regime in Scotland in relation to social security, public sector pensions and other matters reserved to the UK Parliament. We hope, further, that the Scottish Executive will put forward its own proposals to implement civil partnership in its jurisdiction at the earliest possible opportunity, in order to eliminate the inequality existing at present in the devolved areas. We hope, also, that similar legislation will be introduced for Northern Ireland, so that there will be uniformity of treatment of civil partners throughout the UK. The Government should also give full legal recognition to civil partnerships and same-sex marriages legalised abroad. This would be consistent with international law which has recognised trans-border marriage for centuries. Many British same-sex couples will find themselves in that situation having chosen to marry or register their civil partnership abroad. Failure to do so could leave the Government open to court challenge in the UK and in the European Court of Justice.
3. Do you wish to comment on the proposed arrangements for the electoral process in paragraph 7.4? No comments .
4. Do you wish to comment on the possible arrangements for unregistered same-sex couples in relation to income-related benefits in paragraph 7.20? In our opinion, there should be complete uniformity of treatment between heterosexual and same-sex relationships. It would be anomalous not to treat unregistered gay and lesbian couples in the same way as unmarried heterosexual couples.
5. Do you wish to comment on the proposed arrangements for unregistered same-sex couples in relation to child support in paragraph 8.5? Same as above question.
6. Are there any other rights and responsibilities not discussed above that you think should be given to registered partners? Yes. The inheritance tax spouse exemption should be automatically extended to registered civil partners. There is no mention of IHT spouse exemption or capital gains tax inter-spouse transfer in the consultation document. This should be clearly stated. There should be complete uniformity of treatment in the tax system for registered partners and married couples. Survivor pension benefits in all occupational pension schemes should be fully recognised as of right for all registered civil partners in the same way as spouses are automatically recognised. This does not seem to be the current intention of the document. Failure to do so will generate and perpetuate the current discrimination against same-sex couples and will lead the way to serious and costly court challenges for the government and pension trustees.
7. What do you think of the term 'civil partnership registration'? Is there a term that you would prefer? Perhaps the term 'civil union' would be more user-friendly. This terminology is already being used in other jurisdictions.
8. Is there a more attractive term to use than 'registered partner'? No comments .
9. Do you have any other comments ? Yes.
· The proposals on civil partnership are very good news and well over due. The consultation document addresses the major issues of discrimination faced by same-sex couples and we welcome the Government's initiative. However because the government is taking a low-key approach to the partnership issue by creating a new civil partnership, which excludes heterosexuals, and amending legislation piece by piece, we foresee much confusion and many loopholes being created by this piecemeal approach.
· Unfortunately, some major financial issues have not been properly addressed in the proposals (see question 6). There is very little detail about how the Government will treat registered civil partners with respect to major taxation discrimination such as inheritance tax, capital gain tax and pension rights in occupational pension schemes. It is disappointing that the document does not seem to address the tax issues. We would like to see clarification that the current spouse exemption on inheritance tax will also apply to registered civil partnership couples. Logically, these tax issues are so fundamental that one would expect to see them within such a document. However, we are delighted to see many areas of discrimination being amended such as property transfer on death, intestacy laws, enduring power of attorney and hospital access.
· In terms of pensions, it is very encouraging that all major statutory schemes such as the NHS, Teachers, etc. will receive full pension rights although we question the fact that it will be 2010 before the state pension will recognise registered civil partners. But, as far as company schemes are concerned, the document does not propose full recognition of civil partners' pension benefits as of right (which is different from current rights for "spouses"). The proposals may confuse pension trustees and still allow those with a homophobic tendency to discriminate against same-sex couples in their schemes.
· Overall, this is an historic step in the right direction. It could be even more so by taking on-board the experience of other countries which have tackled these issues. It would be far more effective, and simpler, to add the wording 'registered civil partnership' to the definition of spouse for all legislation. This would achieve total equality across the board, just as the Canadian Government has done recently. The UK 's proposed system will still be open to discrimination and we can foresee serious court challenges in the future, especially with respect to pension and tax issues
|
