Ministers Signal Safeguarded Wedding Reform, Back Cash-Strapped Carnivals

High-Level Summary

Westminster Hall held two Backbench Business debates: on modernising marriage regulations and on Government support for carnivals. Speakers on marriage urged a simpler, faster system—raising humanist recognition and digital notice—while others stressed the need to retain safeguards. The responsible Minister confirmed a weddings law consultation “early this year” and highlighted that protections such as the 28‑day notice period were not proposed for shortening by the Law Commission. In the carnivals debate, Members set out the cultural, social and economic value of carnivals alongside rising costs, and the Minister pointed to ongoing Arts Council support and tourism ambitions. Both debates ended with formal resolutions that the House had considered the topics, with no divisions recorded.

Detailed Summary

Modernising marriage regulations

Opening the debate, David Mundell argued that the 28‑day notice period is out of step with modern life, saying the current delay “looks like an anachronism”. In response to an intervention on humanist ceremonies, he said, “I agree.” He cited economic and social impacts, including that the wedding sector is “estimated to be worth £10 billion to £15 billion annually”, and highlighted pressures for armed forces families facing “unpredictable posting cycles that do not align with a rigid, 28-day delay”.

Kieran Mullan cautioned that reform must preserve the integrity of marriage: “Safeguards are essential,”. Minister Sarah Sackman outlined plans to “move away from regulating the building in which a wedding takes place, and instead focus on the officiant”, and confirmed “the Government will publish a consultation early this year”. She stressed the importance of a robust notice process, noting the Law Commission “did not propose shortening the existing 28-day notice period” while recommending online notice. She added that the Government has “committed to allow non-religious belief organisations, such as humanists, to conduct legally binding weddings”, and referenced potential benefits including “a 3% increase in weddings in England”. The motion concluded without division: “Question put and agreed to.”

Government support for carnivals

Sarah Dyke set out carnivals’ heritage and economic contribution, noting that “220 traditional English carnivals still take place each year” and that Somerset’s season is “generating over £40 million every year”. She described sharply rising costs—“now cost more than £30,000 to put one single illuminated cart on the road”—and falling cash collections, with “collections have been falling year on year”. She urged a “statutory requirement to hold safety advisory group meetings” for councils ahead of carnival season.

Dan Aldridge highlighted Weston’s community and economic role, saying it “draws more than 400,000 visitors from a worldwide audience” and is an event that “receives no external funding support, built and run entirely by volunteers”. Ashley Fox traced Bridgwater’s historic carnival and rising costs, including that “the cost of insurance increases every year”. Minister Stephanie Peacock acknowledged cost pressures and cashless trends, undertook to follow up on safety advisory groups—“I will write to her about that specific point”—and on funding access—“I will make sure my Department writes to each hon. Member here after the debate”. She referred to “a 5% funding uplift to key national arts organisations” and tourism ambitions to “welcome 50 million international visitors annually by 2030”. The House resolved that it had considered the subject.