End prayers in Parliament and councils

End prayers in Parliament and councils

Page 33 of 37: Prayers aren’t government business.

We don't think religious worship should play any part in the formal business of the state.

We want to see parliamentary and local government meetings conducted in a manner equally welcoming to all attendees, whatever their personal beliefs.

Parliamentary prayers

Sittings in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords begin with Anglican prayers. MPs and peers stand for prayers facing the wall behind them – a practice thought to have developed due to the difficulty members would historically have faced of kneeling to pray while wearing a sword.

When the chamber is at its busiest, parliamentary prayers act as a bizarre and antiquated seat reservation system. Even MPs and peers who are slated to speak have no option but to attend prayers in order to reserve a seat.

Whilst they may be viewed by some as an important tradition, parliamentary prayers serve to assert the superiority of Christianity (and the Church of England in particular) at Westminster. This 'tradition' is inimical to a modern, pluralistic, secular democracy.

In the Scottish Parliament, Tuesday afternoon sessions begin with 'Time for Reflection', with faith and belief representatives invited to addresses members for up to four minutes. The Northern Ireland Assembly begins formal business with a period of two minutes of silent prayer or contemplation. The Welsh Assembly has adopted no such rituals.

Parliamentarians who wish to pray are free to do so. But prayers should not form part of the official business of Parliament.

Council prayers

Many local authorities in Britain also begin their meetings with prayer.

Local democracy should be equally welcoming to all sections of society, regardless of their religion or belief. Council meetings should be conducted without anyone feeling excluded, or compelled to either participate in prayers or absent themselves from part of the meeting.

Council prayers open the door to wholly unnecessary conflict and sectarian squabbles within local authorities. There is a history of local councillors being bullied and marginalised for challenging council prayers.

The absence of prayers from the formal business of meetings in no way impedes religious freedoms or denies anybody the right to pray. Conversely, organised worship in secular settings imposes worship on those who do not share the faith. A genuine commitment to freedom of religion or belief is incompatible with including acts of worship in the formal business of council meetings.

If local authorities wish to hold a moment of silent reflection at the beginning of a meeting, or if councillors wish to meet for prayers prior to the meeting, they are at liberty to do so.

Take action!

1. Write to your MP

Please enter your postcode and urge your MP to support an alternative to parliamentary prayers, to make parliament more welcoming to people of all faiths and none.

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 - for example, if you would like to challenge prayers at your own council.

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

Council Prayers unlawful rules High Court

Posted: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:08

The High Court today ruled that "The saying of prayers as part of the formal meeting of a Council is not lawful under s111 of the Local Government Act 1972, and there is no statutory power permitting the practice to continue".

The judgement follows a Judicial Review initiated by the National Secular Society to challenge the practice of prayers as part of the formal business of council meetings in Bideford Town Council (Devon).

The ruling will apply to the formal meetings of all councils in England and Wales, the majority of which are thought to conduct prayers as part of their meetings. It does not, contrary to a recent report, extend more widely to "the role religious worship plays in public places", for example remembrance services, or councilors voluntarily attending them.

In passing judgement, the Head of the Administrative Court, Mr Justice Ouseley, directed: "I do not think the 1972 Act [...] should be interpreted as permitting the religious views of one group of councillors, however sincere or large in number, to exclude, or even to a modest extent, to impose burdens on or even to mark out those who do not share their views and do not wish to participate in their expression of them. They are all equally elected councillors".

Commenting on the judgment, Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the National Secular Society said:

"Acts of worship in council meetings are key to the separation of religion from politics, so we're very pleased with the judgement, and the clear secular message it sends - particularly the statement made about the 1972 Act (quoted in the preceding paragraph).

"We believe that council meetings should be conducted in a manner equally welcoming to all councillors, regardless of their religious beliefs, or indeed, lack of belief.

"The NSS is not seeking to deprive those who wish to pray the opportunity to do so; indeed, we fight to retain freedom of religion and belief. The judgement clearly states that religious freedoms are not hindered, as councillors who wish to do so are free to say prayers before council meetings.

"Our interest in this issue was prompted by a complaint from a Bideford Town Councillor, Clive Bone, who felt uncomfortable at having to sit through prayers, homilies and requests for divine guidance while carrying out his formal duties as an elected councillor. The only alternative to this discomfort was to walk out, unbidden by the mayor, which would look discourteous to those in the public gallery.

"We sought the Judicial Review only after Bideford had rejected compromises made by (now former) Councillor Bone and the NSS for prayers before the meeting, or a period of silence during the meeting. Bideford had also rejected legal advice from the National Association of Local Government and our lawyers that the practice could be unlawful. If Bideford had agreed to cease their practice of (Christian) prayers during the meetings, there would have been no basis for this action. Bideford was indemnified from costs and supported by the Christian Institute. There was no question of prosecuting councillors.

"The judgement echoed an admirably secular passage in the judgment by LJ Laws in McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd (2010), which a number of equality cases have also cited: 'The precepts of any one religion, and belief system, cannot, by force of their religious origins, sound any louder in the general law than the precepts of another. If they did, those out in the cold would be less than citizens and our constitution would be on the way to a theocracy, which is of necessity autocratic.'"

Prayers have been the cause of tension in a number of local councils. When Portsmouth Council allowed a Muslim Imam to say a prayer, one Christian councillor walked out of the meeting, later saying "I do not believe we are praying to the same god". Meanwhile, councillors in Shropshire called a fellow councillor "disgusting" when he wore headphones during prayers.

Putting the judgment in a wider context, Mr Porteous Wood added: "This judgment is an important victory for everyone who wants a secular society, one that neither advantages nor disadvantages people because of their religion or lack of it. This is particularly important for activities which are part of public life, such as council meetings.

"There is no longer a respectable argument that Britain is a solely Christian nation or even a religious one. An increasing proportion of people are not practising any religion and minority faiths are growing in number and influence. This underlines the need for shared civic spaces to be secular and available to all, believers and non-believers alike, on an equal basis."

The defendant has requested permission to appeal.

Read the full judgement

Read a full report of the hearing held on 2 December 2011

Cheddar Parish Council vote to continue praying

Posted: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 13:16

A row has erupted at Cheddar parish council in Somerset over prayers at council meetings.

Cheddar parish councillor Peter Gawthorpe wants the saying of prayers moved to ten minutes before official council business. But the council has voted to say prayers immediately before council business begins, although not as part of the official agenda.

Councillor Gawthorpe says having prayers during a meeting is 'unlawful and inappropriate'. He told the local Mercury newspaper: "Summons to prayer may happen in a theocracy but we live in a democracy, a system for everyone, irrespective of creed, gender or politics. We should guard this jealously, it is our heritage. I don't mind people having the prayer, but it should not be part of the meeting, it should be ten minutes before."

He said the praying could stop potential new members of council putting themselves forward.

Despite the council removing prayers from the official agenda, councillor Gawthorpe said this was still unfair to those not wishing to participate. "Some maintain that the prayer should be kept as a tradition from 1895 when the council began. If we maintain traditions from that era then we would not allow women the vote and child labour would still be acceptable. The world has changed and we need to recognise that."

Cllr Andrew Bosley said: "This is tosh. What does it matter? Is this all the council has to do with its time?"

Cllr Nigel Taylor also attacked the proposal. He said: "Are we going to scrap Christmas next because it is religious? It is political correctness gone mad."

Councillors voted against the proposal to move the prayer, which will continue to be held just before the meeting begins.

The National Secular Society's legal challenge to prayers during council meetings was recently heard at the High Court and a judgement is expected shortly.