Why are the Tories putting a price on loving commitment?

So here we are again. Gay Marriage. Civil Partnerships. And a Tory rebellion.

Except this time it’s different. Tim Loughton’s amendment calling for Civil Partnerships to be extended to heterosexual couples is being branded a “wrecking amendment” and could – bizarrely – see anti-gay rights Tories like David Jones voting the same way as staunch defenders of equal rights on the Labour benches.

The argument being put forward by the Tory leadership is that granting such rights would delay the implementation of the Equal Marriage Bill (something that no-one should want to see – the house has spoken clearly on this issues), and yet their reasons for opposing the amendment appear to be entirely financial. The government are claiming – without any real explanation of their figures – that Civil Partnerships for heterosexual couples would cost the government £4 billion.

But aren’t there some things that we cannot – and should not – put a price on? If so, allowing loving and committed couples to mark their partnership legally is surely one of them. The Tory leadership’s argument amounts to arguing that the government will have to pay out more money to loved ones if someone dies – seemingly prefering the existing system where unmarried couples who choose not to marry exist in a legal limbo. Stay classy, Maria Miller.

Worse, the way in which Miller and Cameron are approaching this amendment calls into question the very argument that Civil Partnerships and Marriage are one and the same. If those heterosexual couples who wish to enter into civil partnerships chose to marry instead, the costs would be the same, yet you sense that rather that the Tories worrying about the cost to the exchequer, they would be delighted. If Civil partnerships and Marriage are truly seen as equal in the eyes of the government, then the choice to engage in either should surely be available to all.

Heterosexual couples should have the opportunity to enter into Civil Partnerships if they feel that this is a better representation of their love and commitment for each other than marriage. The argument that this would see a surge in costs as heterosexual couples choose to enter into Civil Partnerships rather than Marriage merely serves to prove that their is a demand for such legislation.

Marriage is not for everyone, and each and every couple in the land who wish to enter into an alternative, legally binding arrangement that allows them to show their love for each other should have the opportunity to do so. Labour MPs should reject arguments about the cost of Civil Partnerships and fight hard for the swift implementation of Equal Marriage. But they should vote for Equal Civil Partnerships today too.

Because you can’t put a price on loving commitment, as much as the Tories seek to do so.