Twenty-six Anglican bishops are given seats as of right in the House of Lords.
The UK is the only western democracy which reserves seats for clerics in its legislature.
This is unfair, undemocratic and undesirable. It's time to abolish the bishops' bench.
Two archbishops and 24 bishops of the Church of England currently have automatic seats in the House of Lords. They are sometimes known as 'the lords spiritual'.
We campaign for a secular upper house with no specific religious representation, whether of Christian denominations or any other faiths. In a secular state no religion or its leaders should have a privileged role in the legislature.
Any serious proposals to reform the House of Lords must address the unjustified privilege of the bishops' bench.
62% of Brits think no religious clerics should have an automatic right to seats in the House of Lords.
After over a century of decline in religious attendance in Britain, the claim that bishops — or any other religious representatives — speak for any significant constituency is not warranted. Less than 1% of the British population now attend Anglican services on the average Sunday.
In addition, the presence of religious leaders amounts to double representation of religious interests as many peers already identify themselves as being religiously motivated. Retired religious leaders are often appointed as peers.
Bishops do not have any "special moral insight" unavailable to everybody else. The idea that bishops or any other 'religious leaders' have any monopoly on issues of morality is offensive to many non-religious citizens. Those who profess no religion are no less capable of making moral and ethical judgements.
In an increasingly secular society the role of religious representatives in our legislature has become irrelevant, and has stood in the way of progressive legislation.
Take action!
1. Write to your MP
Ask your MP to help end the archaic, unfair and undemocratic bishops’ bench in the House of Lords.
2. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue.
3. Join the National Secular Society
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
Lords committee: respect the law before “the values of others”
Posted: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 13:26
Public policy must put "respect for the law" before "respect for the values of others" and defend "the shared values of British citizenship", a House of Lords committee has said.
In a report published yesterday, the Lords select committee on citizenship and civic engagement said faith schools should not be exempt from requirements to promote "shared values of British citizenship". It suggested using this phrase to replace the current term 'fundamental British values'.
It also said rules on school admissions should only be changed if doing so does not increase social segregation. This is a blow to government plans to allow more faith-based discrimination in new faith schools.
The committee also backed efforts by education watchdog Ofsted to crack down on schools which promote discriminatory attitudes about sex and relationships.
Several of its recommendations closely resembled the suggestions the National Secular Society made in its submission to the committee (begins on p.1096).
The NSS said a multi-faithist approach to public policy had undermined common citizenship, eroded some common human rights and values and harmed the rights of women and "minorities within minorities".
"Accommodating the vast plethora of identities within Britain requires engagement to be based on equal citizenship, rather than any particular identity frame," the NSS's submission said.
It added that the UK should "develop notions of universal rights and responsibilities that transcend all faith and belief systems" and that "equality and human rights" should be "central to young people's education".
The committee's report was titled The Ties that Bind: Citizenship and Civic Engagement in the 21st Century. Its summary said "the creation of a country in which every one of its citizens feels secure, engaged and fulfilled must be a primary objective of a successful modern democratic nation".
"While a variety of faiths, beliefs and customs can enrich our society, and respect for the values of others is a high priority, respect for the law must come first. There is no place for rules or customs whose effect is to demean or marginalise people or groups – equality before the law is a cornerstone of our society.
"The rule of law, together with a commitment to democracy, individual liberty and respect for the inherent worth and autonomy of all people, are the shared values of British citizenship from which everything else proceeds. These are 'red lines' which have to be defended."
The committee added that these values should "be promoted in their own right rather than simply as an adjunct of counter-extremism policy". It said guidance to teachers should show that the promotion of "shared values of British citizenship" was intended "to encourage positive citizenship rather than solely aiming to counter extremism".
"Shared British values can present a positive vision of what people in Britain believe, and could help prevent the need for counter-extremism intervention," it added.
The committee said faith schools should have "no exception to the requirement to teach shared values of British citizenship, still less the requirement to abide by the rule of law". That recommendation also applied to non-faith schools which are mainly attended by children from a particular faith background.
It also said "any change in the rules governing admissions criteria to faith schools should ensure that they do not increase social segregation". The government is currently considering allowing new faith schools to admit all their pupils on the basis of their parents' faith, a move the NSS is lobbying against.
On Relationships and Sex Education (RSE), the report said it was "entirely right" for education watchdog Ofsted to sanction schools which "fail to teach about LGBT people". It said: "Although religious groups are not bound by anti-discrimination law in the practice of their faith, promoting discrimination has no place in schools."
In February the NSS told the government that young people's access to RSE should not be restricted on religious grounds.
The committee also questioned whether the Department for Education was "sufficiently considering" whether faith schools would "promote shared British values" before they are opened, rather than "relying on Ofsted to inspect these schools further down the line".
And it said the DfE should ensure unregistered schools are "not used by communities as a way of avoiding learning about shared British values".
NSS chief executive Stephen Evans said there was "much to commend in this report".
"The committee has rightly stressed that public policy must not allow religious groups special exemptions to the laws and policies that affect the rest of us. It has also made the case for a positive vision of British society which tolerates difference while upholding the rule of law for all.
"Its recommendations on schools are also generally welcome. The government should pay particular attention to what this report says on faith-based admissions and sex education.
"But ultimately the government will need to go further than this committee is recommending. Promoting a free and fair society for all citizens relies on the rollback of religious influence in our public life – particularly in the education systems of the UK's constituent parts."
Cut bishop numbers in Lords, says panel chair, following NSS criticism
Posted: Mon, 6 Nov 2017 15:53
The chair of a House of Lords committee has said the number of bishops in the Lords should fall after the National Secular Society criticised its proposals for reform.
Lord Burns, who chairs the Lord Speaker's committee on the size of the House, told the Sunday Telegraph the committee favoured a reduction. He said it had excluded the measure from a report last week because it would have been a "distraction".
The committee, which had members from all parties and the crossbenches, said the Lords should be reduced to 600 members and its size capped at that number. It only suggested changes which would not require legislation after the Government ruled out passing it. It did not consider recommending reducing the number of bishops in the Lords, as the measure was outside its remit.
The NSS criticised the proposals on the basis they would hand bishops more power.
This weekend Lord Burns told the Sunday Telegraph he accepted the number of bishops in House of Lords should be cut in line with that of ordinary peers.
"The underlying view of the committee was it would be better if there was a reduction in numbers," he said. However, he added: "whether there are 26 bishops or 16 bishops does not change the nature of this House. There's plenty of time for that.
"The most important thing is to get the major structure in place. We can then worry about some of the other issues at a later point.
"It's slightly anomalous that the result of this will be that the share of the bishops is larger, the share of the hereditaries is larger, but we can live with that, certainly for a period."
In response NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said: "The Church of England's privileged power to shape UK legislation needs to be curtailed, and sooner rather than later.
"It is unclear why reducing the number of bishops would be a distraction, why this issue should wait for a later date, or why an increase in the bishops' power can be tolerated for a period. Lord Burns's defensive language appears designed to obfuscate the issue.
"And the power to take significant action lies with the Government. A meaningful public debate on the bishops' place in the Lords is overdue, and should conclude with the decision to remove their automatic right to sit in the UK parliament."
In its submission to the inquiry earlier this year the NSS urged the Committee to consider entirely removing the Bishops' Bench and ending the arrangement whereby religious representatives are given seats as of right. It argued that the bench is "an anomaly in a modern, liberal democracy and if a need to reduce the size of the chamber has been identified the Bishops' Bench is an obvious place to start".
A Church of England spokesman said David Urquhart, the Bishop of Birmingham and convenor of the Lords Spiritual, had "warmly welcomed" the report as "a clear way forward for dealing with the problem of the size of the House of Lords".
Bishop Urquhart "has said that bishops would not be averse to discussing the issue in principle", but "ultimately it is for Parliament to decide what shape reform of the Lords should take, and what the role of the bishops is within that".
A poll commissioned in 2010 by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust found that 74% of the population – including 70% of Christians – believe it is wrong that some Church of England bishops are given an automatic seat in the House of Lords.
Discuss this on Facebook.
