An honourable courtesy?...

In the last Parliamentary session, the Conservative MP for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport, Oliver Colville, introduced a Bill to grant courtesy titles to husbands and civil partners of Peers. I have to admit to having mixed feelings on the subject, acknowledging the equality perspective whilst sceptical of the value of courtesy titles full stop.

However, regardless of my personal view, the Bill never even got as far as a Second Reading in the Commons, and was lost at the end of the session accordingly. And now it's back (although not from outer space), courtesy of backbench Conservative Peer, Lord Lucas.

This time, it comes as part of an Equality (Titles) Bill, which covers the rights of inheritance to a hereditary title as well. If passed in its current state, it would grant the use of the title 'Honourable' to husbands and civil partners of Peers, baronets and Dames.

It could be worse, I suppose. 'Honourable' is fairly irrelevant, and tends not to be used, so could be ignored by those preferring not to conform with the orthodoxy. Frankly, I wouldn't see me using it much, except perhaps in certain unlikely social circumstances where it might be 'useful', i.e. the odd 'county set' event stuffed with Tories.

Taking the Bill at face value though, if you believe that equality is important, a half-hearted reform is as bad as no reform at all. The Bill still reinforces the second class status of husbands of female Peers and civil partners of Peers generally. If the appropriate courtesy title for the wife of a Peer is 'Lady', how does 'Honourable' compare with that? The answer is, it doesn't.

So, if the House of Lords really thinks that this matters, they'll apply genuine equality. And if they don't, I for one won't fundamentally mind if it is lost for lack of Parliamentary time...