The institution of marriage is still alive, if not entirely well.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics show that while 58% of the population in England and Wales live with a partner, the number of those without a wedding ring or civil partnership is increasing – up from 10% to 12% in the last decade.

The numbers getting married are in sharp decline, down by 4% between 2001 and 2011, so that less than half of the adult population of 45.5m now chooses to tie the knot.

At the same time, the divorce rate is rising, with 42% of marriages destined to end before ‘death us do part.’

Against this background of social change, Prime Minister David Cameron has said he believes the values of marriage – give and take – are “values that we need more of in this country.”

At this year’s annual Conservative Party conference he announced tax breaks for lower income married couples to start in 2015. The scheme will be extended to those in civil partnerships in 2016. It will allow couples, where neither earns more than £42,485 a year, to transfer £1,000 of an unused tax-free allowance to a partner who is not working or working part-time. This could increase their joint income by up to £200 a year.

Those who approve of the move have condemned the figure as being too low. Critics, however, say it is simply pandering to the notion that there is an idealised family unit and object to the principle behind it.

Mr Cameron says his wedding day was the happiest of his life, alongside the births of his children.

“Since then, Samantha and I have been a team,” he said. “Nothing I’ve done since – becoming a Member of Parliament, leader of my party or Prime Minister – would have been possible without her. There is something special about marriage – it’s a declaration of commitment, responsibility and stability that helps to bind families.”

Mr Cameron has been careful to include civil partnerships in the new legislation and added: “This summer I was proud to make Equal Marriage the law. Love is love. Commitment is commitment.”

But there are those who feel the Prime Minister is flying in the face of widespread, irreversible social change that has been gathering pace since the 1960s. And that rewarding those who legalise their relationships is unfair and divisive.

Psychologist Sarah Daly, a senior lecturer and researcher at Huddersfield University, believes such legislation is discriminatory.

“The issue for me is why the Government is pushing things that discriminate against other people,” she said.

“There are lots of different relationship constellations but they (the Government) are saying that marriage is better.

“Society has changed and there are many more cohabiting couples, single people and people in polygamous relationships – more than you would think.

“What’s important is that someone is in a committed relationship. There are studies that suggest marriage can improve your mental health and help you live longer, but more recent studies show that it’s about being in a committed relationship and having somebody to look out for you that makes the difference, whether or not you’re married.”

She says secure, loving relationships confer a number of benefits.

And she added: “For women there is research that suggests there’s a mental health bonus for being in a relationship and for men being in a committed relationship has a health premium because their partner often has a positive influence on their lifestyle choices – but they don’t have to be married.”

Those who believe marriage still has a place in our modern, increasingly secular, society maintain that it remains the best institution within which to raise children.

Sarah says there is no hard evidence that being raised by married parents is better than being brought up by cohabiting parents.

And tax incentives for the former would be unfair to the families of unmarried couples.

“It’s not the childrens’ fault if their parents are unmarried,” she added.

“There is research to suggest that if you come from a two-parent household that children do better in school but again you don’t have to be married.

“It’s all about sustained relationships.”

However, Sarah says there is evidence that people who cohabit and have children are less likely to stay together than those who marry and have a family, perhaps because it is easier to walk away when there is no legally-binding contract.

“Of course, it should also be pointed out that the benefits of marriage are only there if there is commitment,” she said. “The flip side is that being with somebody in a negative situation is bad in terms of mental health and means that you are much better off being single.”

Sarah, who is married, says the institution has a long cultural and social history, often tied to religion.

“We live in a much more secular society now and the influence of religion has declined,” she said. “But marriage is part of our culture. In Western society it’s about love, marriages and when you’re in love you want to be seen as one instead of two.”

She believes that one of the reasons why some couples choose not to get married is purely financial.

“There is a pressure on them to celebrate their marriage in a certain way and they may not be able to afford it early on in their relationship,” she added. “And then by the time the honeymoon period wears off and they can afford it they might have decided that they don’t want to be together any more.

“Getting married really is a personal choice but you shouldn’t forget that it does confer legal rights and benefits that you don’t get by cohabiting.”

According to the Rev Canon Simon Moor, vicar of Huddersfield, the new tax breaks are a pointless gesture and simply divisive.

He said: “I’m not sure what the Government is trying to do with them because £200 isn’t enough to persuade people to get married and not enough to keep them from getting divorced. 

“I suspect they are trying to balance out the negative feedback from pushing through gay marriage.

“I have no problem with gay marriage and I would do it tomorrow, but the Government did get a lot of flak.”

The Church of England views marriage as a covenant – binding agreement.  Those seeking a religious wedding now account for less than 30% of the total  but the Rev Moor believes the desire for a ceremony can prompt couples to examine their thoughts and feelings in a way that couples who simply decide to live together may not do.

“Marriage and civil partnerships are at their best when people do some thinking about what they are doing and how they are doing it,” added the Rev Moor, who has been married for 20 years.

“In Ecclesiastes, marriage is likened to a ‘two-strand rope’, the two strands being better than one.

“The Government is picking out marriage because they see the strength of that covenant but I’m not sure I agree with tax breaks.  They are promoting the bonding of society through covenants.

“But it’s going to annoy lots of people and is choosing one type of relationship when there are lots of others.  It’s not about marriage, it’s about people making a commitment to each other.”

IT wasn’t until the mid 1500s that the Council of Trent deemed marriage to be one of the Protestant Church’s sacraments and at that time it was largely a ceremony for wealthier people. 

Poor people would simply live ‘over the broom’ in a common law marriage.

A marriage act of 1753 made it illegal to get married in anything other than a church or a chapel and marked the beginning of the State’s involvement in such matters.

By 1836, however, civil marriages were allowed and in 1858 divorce was legalised without the need for an act of Parliament.

In 2005 civil partnerships arrived, offering legal rights to same sex couples in the UK.

Meagre tax breaks for married couples are simply a political sop to the Conservative right wing.

That’s according to Huddersfield Labour MP Barry Sheerman.

“It’s a knee-jerk reaction, a bow to the traditional right of the Conservative Party,” he said. “A bit of a gimmick.

“What Mr Cameron is trying to say to his party is that ‘I might believe in gay marriage but I also believe in traditional marriage as well’.  He put his head above the parapet over gay marriage and now he’s trying to prove he’s a true Tory.”

Mr Sheerman, who has been married for 48 years, is critical of the new legislation that would allow a higher earner to transfer some of their tax-free allowance to a lower-earning partner, because he says it is not ‘evidence-based.’  It is also such a small amount of money – no more than £200 a year – that he feels it will make little difference. 

“I don’t like the principle it’s based on,” he said.

While Chancellor George Osborne describes marriage as the ‘glue in society’ and believes the institution should be recognised, deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has dubbed the tax break as ‘unfair’, while Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman said it was a ‘bizarre’ backward step. 

Mr Sheerman, former Chairman of the House of Commons Select Committee for Children, Schools and Families, says research shows that strong, stable relationships are important for families but these can be formed outside of marriage.

“The truth is that not all marriages are stable relationships,” he said. “I was brought up with a mother and father who rowed all the time and hated each other.  There are some pretty awful relationships that are married relationships.

“What’s important is a good, strong, loving relationship. Instability in human relationships is bad for everybody – the adults and the children.”