New rights for gay couples divide Conservative Party

Tory divisions on homosexual rights were reignited yesterday as members of the Shadow Cabinet, backbenchers and peers all criticised Government plans to give gay relationships legal weight.

The Conservatives initially appeared to join a cross-party consensus on the proposals to create civil partnerships for same-sex couples when Oliver Letwin, the Shadow Home Secretary, gave his backing. But Gerald Howarth, a Shadow Defence Minister, and Ann Widdecombe, the former Shadow Home Secretary, warned the plans would undermine marriage and would be opposed by a majority of the public.

Two members of the Shadow Cabinet also attacked the proposals as "bizarre", while another stressed that the party had already made clear it would not support legalising civil partnerships.

The tension emerged after Barbara Roche, the Equalities Minister, confirmed that the Government would produce a consultation paper next summer to give same-sex couples the chance to register their relationships. Civil partnerships would confer property, pension and inheritance rights on gay men, lesbians and bisexuals for the first time in the UK. They would also give next-of-kin rights currently denied.

Mr Letwin indicated to BBC's Radio 4 Today programme yesterday that the Conservatives would support the measure when legislation was introduced. "Whilst we attach a huge importance to the institution of marriage we do recognise that gay couples suffer from some serious particular grievances," he said.

"If what the Government is coming forward with is indeed a set of practical steps to address a set of practical problems that affect people, then we will welcome them."

He denied that it would undermine the "special" status of marriage. "I don't think that anybody to speak of in my party believes there is any contradiction between believing, as we do believe, in the extreme importance of marriage and its special status and accepting there are particular concrete grievances that gay couples currently have that need to be addressed in law," Mr Letwin said.

However, many Tory MPs will oppose civil partnerships and the party's peers could block any bill in the House of Lords. Mr Howarth said Labour MPs were "out of kilter with the public" on age of consent and other sexuality issues and the Lords was "much more representative than the Commons".

"This is going to further undermine marriage in my view. We've moved in a space of a very short number of years from it being socially unacceptable, which was in my view wrong, to a situation where they are demanding parity. I think that is a very serious issue," he said.

"It seems to me that there is an over-representation of these different lifestyles in public life, in politics and the media. I don't come across this in other walks of life. It's not longer a question of it being tolerated. It's now a question of demanding parity, demanding rights. This move has taken such a pace forward."

One Shadow Cabinet member agreed. "The idea of giving a degree of equivalence either legally or ethically to homosexual marriage is incredibly controversial and would probably not inspire great support," he said. "The public would find it pretty bizarre if the Government concentrated on this instead of the real issues of public services that affect most people's lives."

Another senior Shadow Cabinet minister pointed out that the party had voted against Lord Lester's private members bill on civil partnerships earlier this year. "That position has not changed. We have not discussed it," he said. Ms Widdecombe said: "This would undermine marriage and it's no good pretending these relationships are on an equal basis with marriage. We have to have the courage to define what we think a family is and stand by that."

But John Bercow, the MP for Buckingham who quit the Tory front bench over its opposition to gay adoption, wants his party to support the plans, saying: "It is essential that all mainstream political parties should live in the present, prepare for the future and reject the past."

'We do not have the choice of getting married'

Gill Hay and Shirley Miller, who have been in a relationship for more than 10 years, couldn't believe their ears when they heard about the Government's plans on the radio yesterday.

Ms Miller, 49, who lives with her partner and her 11-year-old twin daughters in Stoke Newington, north London, was delighted. "I woke Gill up to say 'hey, listen to this! It was so exciting'."

Giving legal force to civil partnerships would make a huge difference to the couple's lives, from property and inheritance rights to being able to visit each other in hospital as next of kin. The proposals are poignant because Ms Miller has terminal cancer and has up to three years to live.

The couple share a £550,000 home but on Ms Miller's death, her partner will be liable for 40 per cent inheritance tax on the house. "I hope I will still be around in a couple of years, but it may not happen quickly enough for us. Our time is limited, but it would be great for other couples," she said.

Ms Hay, 46, said she now had no right to Ms Miller's local authority pension after her death. Ms Miller said that one of the most cheering aspects of the news was Oliver Letwin's apparent support. She accepted the criticism that similar rights were not to be extended to heterosexual unmarried couples. "But at the moment we simply do not have the choice of getting married. Straight couples do."

Ms Miller said that, on her death, Ms Hay would have to sell the house to pay tax bills. "The children are settled at school here and they and my partner have their friends nearby – essential support mechanisms at a time of illness and bereavement. The last thing they should be subjected to ... is the need to sell."