Reader comments · David Cameron speaks at private Pride event but will not join gay rights march · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


David Cameron speaks at private Pride event but will not join gay rights march

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. “Private” Pride Party, typical Tory. What did they do, march around the Ball Room and then go shooting with wellies on? They just don’t get it.

  2. Hmmmmm at some point they (politicians) will have to be seen with us.

    When its a Church of England event its strange how they (politicians) never have any diary conflicts I’m calling shenanigans on this.

  3. …it’s probably a fox hunt, Bobo.

  4. Cue the rightful shock and negativity aimed at the Tories due to their transparent, old-fashioned and bigoted attitude towards gays and lesbians……..

    Then cue the Thatcherites who are so stubborn that they refuse to admit that their own party is essentially against their sexuality.

    Bloody eighteen hundreds throwbacks.

  5. Brian Burton 1 Jul 2009, 11:59am

    Now does anyone here on these Pink threads really think David Cameron would be seen dead, marching with Pride? Lets not kid ourselves here. He has just struck an alliance with the European Homophobs. So please vote for the labourites, at least they stand up to be counted. With Cameron, at present, it’s all SMOKE AND MIRRORS.

  6. Simon Murphy 1 Jul 2009, 12:01pm

    A ‘private Pride event’? Probably with his new best mates – the Polish Law and Justice party whose leader believes that tolerance of homosexuality will lead to the destruction of humanity. Not that this will bother ‘Dave’ as he’s only really comfy with people who live in castles.

  7. I still can’t stand the Tories and haven’t forgiven them for section 28 and their opposition to it repeal. Where is SMC to stand up for these bigots; they need her.

  8. Cameron in 2001:

    The Blair government is obsessed with a “fringe agenda… including deeply unpopular moves like repealing Section 28 and allowing the promotion of homosexuality in schools”.

    I was at the event last night. He did not apologise or show any genuine constrition or show any understanding of the issues that still need to be addressed on homophobic bullying etc.

  9. Simon Murphy 1 Jul 2009, 1:32pm

    For all his talk about progress and inclusity what evidence is there that the Tories have changed in ANY way when it comes to equality for the gay community. Tals is cheap (as we can see when looking at Obama). Gay people who vote Tory are taking a big risk. Many people are disillusioned with Labour but the Tories are not the only alternative. They are however the riskiest alternative when it comes to gay equality.

  10. @Eddy you were obviously at a different event to the rest of us last night then.

    David Cameron did indeed apologize, in some detail, for mistakes his party had made in the past such as Section 28. He also specifically detailed, in answer to a question on homophobic bullying, what his parties policies were. He then answered a question on their new grouping in the European Parliament and how he was addressing the issues with some of the other members.

    No-one is claiming that the Conservative Party has a perfect past record, or indeed is wholly changed, but creating a false record of a speech is disingenous. Hopefully someone will have videod it so an indisputable record can be shown.

    PS David Cameron was never down to attend Pride, he said from the beginning that he had other enagements. Jeremy Hunt, the Shadow Culture Secretary, will be speaking. If you want demonstration of what a non-story this is, you might want to look at the Guardian who decided to pull it after realizing there was no truth to it –

  11. theotherone 1 Jul 2009, 1:48pm

    but Brown’s not going either folks…

    Cameron has spoken of his suport for Gay Rites, Boris was there last year. Brown? Brown shelved Gay Rights legislation, promoted ‘religious tolenence’ laws, threw almost every woman out of his cabinat, backed religious exclusions to Gay Rights legislation…

    Who looks worst here?

  12. If Cameron had announced Pride parade attendance, the same people pissing and moaning about his absence above would be pissing and moaning him having no right to be there because decades ago, when DC was not an MP, Churchill’s Home Secretary ordered a crackdown on gays. Knee jerk, antiquated leftism only makes us politically irrelevant. Join the 21st Century.

  13. Simon Murphy 1 Jul 2009, 2:53pm

    No11: Clay:

    In 2000, ‘Dave’ said that the Blair government was obsessed with a “fringe agenda… including deeply unpopular moves like repealing Section 28 and allowing the promotion of homosexuality in schools”.

    Keeping section 28 was in the 2001 Tory manifesto. ‘Dave’ voted in line with the Conservative view at the time.

    Now ‘Dave’ has teamed up with the Polish Law and Justice Party in Europe – a party whose leader believes that tolerance of homosexuality will lead to the destruction of humanity.

    ‘Dave’ should f*ck off. His pretence at being inclusive are not backed up by his actions.

    Gay people who are pissed off with Labour should look to an alternative for voting. ‘Dave’ and his party of rich chums are not the alternative

  14. The day the Tories (and this goes for all the political parties for that matter) do not have to announce “we have changed”, will be the day they finally have changed.

    Actions speak louder than words after all.

  15. I hope Nick Clegg takes the opportunity to turn up. He’s the prettiest of the party leaders anyway.

  16. Robert, ex-pat Brit 1 Jul 2009, 5:19pm

    If I had been Cameron and to prove how pro equality I am, I would march, regardless of any prior commitments. Nobody can convince me he’s any better than Brown or anyone else in politics. So which change is he talking about then? All a bunch of spineless cowards and always with an excuse not to attend, how convenient. Gay voters who elect Cameron are in for a big surprise.

  17. Looks folks, let’s face some hard realpolitik here. Not everyone in the UK is relaxed about – nor embraces – gay sexuality. Not everywhere is a sophisticated urban community that has learned to rub along with itself. Gay sexuality remains a difficult subject for millions of people – voters – who actively or passively disapprove. That’s why you won’t yet see the likes of a PM – or a PM-in-waiting – leading or participating in the parade. You may see Clegg – you may not – but the LibDems can do such things because they remain a minority party. And being gay, regardless of your desire for it to be otherwise, places you in a social minority.

    Change takes time and is incremental. A decade ago, you wouldn’t have seen what Cameron has just done; a decade ago you wouldn’t have had what Johnson did in 2008; a decade ago, gay sexuality did not enjoy the same level of acceptance as it does today.

    So, friends – patience. Rome wasn’t built in a day. I’m a conservative and I’m straight: having found this page from Guido Fawkes and read the comments here with interest, I wanted to add a little dash of realism amidst the knee-jerk reactions. For the record, I don’t care a stuff about sexuality, only the content of character. May your God go with you.

  18. I think the jury is still out on the Tories. Judge them by what they do, not what they say. Yes BoJo was at the march last year, so if it does clash with his son’s b-day, well fair enough. As for Cameron and the others… hmmmm. While I am quite happy to believe that DC is no homophobe, the same cannot be said for a great many others in his party.
    But it would be churlish in the extreme not to recognise the huge movement that the Tories have made. They still have a quite a way to go, but at least (and at last) they are moving in the right direction.

  19. See here what
    Cameron says to the new Speaker (at approximately 1.30) I think it say’s it all and for the matter only 3 Tories voted for him!

  20. vulpus_rex 1 Jul 2009, 5:53pm

    David Cameron could find a cure for cancer, eradicate 3rd world hunger and then put a man on Mars but there would still be the usual mewling in here about clause 28.

    To listen to some one would think that David Cameron is a swivel-eyed, frothing gay basher who wants to send us all to the gas chambers.

    That’s rubbish and hardly consistent with having two gay men in his shadow front bench.

  21. vulpus_rex: yery true. Bigotry works both ways it seems.

    Craig: The reason why only 3 Tories voted for Bercow is because he’s a total tw@t. Not because he’s Jewish. Former leader Michael Howard is not a tw@t – but he is Jewish. Oliver Letwin is occasionally slightly tw@ttish – but he is also Jewish and in the shadow cabinet.

  22. theotherone 1 Jul 2009, 7:57pm

    he realy is a tw@t that speaker.

    BTW: I pointed out that Labour wasn’t to eger to get rid of clause 28 and the post was deleted.

    I pointed out that some principled polititions in the Scotish Parlament went against the wishes of the UK Labour party and repealed clause 28.

    Why was my post deleted?

  23. peter tatchell (who is a member of the green party) will be there. need i say more?

  24. This merely signifies that issues relating to LGBT issues are no longer a political party issue as the Tories have jumped on the LGBT bandwagon becasue they can see potential voters in Light of Gordon Brown loosing the plot with the economy. It has to be pointed out that both David Cameron and Boris Johnson have less than perfect records in regard to voting for LGBT reforms at Westminster. Pride has been taken over for Political opportunists to catch votes, it will not wash with me, I think about the bigger picture namely economic policies.

  25. Tim Roll-Pickering 1 Jul 2009, 11:19pm

    No party has a perfect record on Section 28. Labour and the Liberal Democrats have forgotten the positions they took when the legislation was passed.

  26. Jules at posts at 17 and 21. I think your point about wishing to see a bit more realism and rational argument on this site and decrying knee jerk reactions would have carried a bit more weight if you had not subsequently described Mr Bercow as a total tw@t !

    I agree with you that things take time and I feel many of the postings here on issues such as civil partnerships fail to understand the hard political process of getting legislation through parliament. The Labour Government get criticised for the length of time it took to repeal section 28 but their attempts were thwarted by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords by the voting process. It was mainly Tory MPs and Tory peers who thwarted its repeal, but also alas a few unreconstructed labour politicians. To hear from the Tory leader now that he regrets his party’s stance is welcome but he will be judged by his actions rather than his words when (as expected) he moves into No 10.

  27. Just read the accounts of Peter Tatchell’s election campaign as the Labour candidate in the Bermondsey by-election in 1981. You will see the true actions of all the political parties against a gay candidate in Peter Tatchell. The same people still run all these parties as back in 81 the spin of inclusiveness is just window dressing.

    Political leader don’t mind being seen with the few acceptable members of the LGBT. But they never want to be seen supporting us as a whole movement.

  28. @theotherone

    “Cameron has spoken of his suport for Gay Rites.”

    That’s because that’s all Cameron and his party are – talk.

    The Tories always speak of how much they’ve changed on gay rights but when it comes down to the actual voting in parliament it’s a different picture.

    The majority of Tory MPs voted against Labour’s bill to ban discrimination against gays in the provision of goods and services in 2007. David Cameron himself voted AGAINST allowing lesbians IVF in 2008, as well as voting against hate speech protection this year, as did almost all other Conservatives. At this moment the Tories are trying their damned hardest to stop Labour’s Equality bill which will very likely be scrapped if they get into power next year.

    You may be impressed by Cameron and the Conservatives’ hollow little apologies on Section 28 and the lovely talk about how their now so progressive on gay rights but I’m not. I’m more concerned about what they actually do.

  29. lithotomist 2 Jul 2009, 9:27am

    So did Cameron invite Peter Tatchell to his Pride do ? Only there was enough criticism on here of the PM for not doing so, and nobody’s mentioned it this time. Will peter tatchell now complain the Tories snubbed him ?

  30. theotherone 2 Jul 2009, 9:49am

    SO moamaom it dosn’t matter what Dc says YOU know better…

    Voted for: Civil Partnership Bill [Lords], Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations, voted against Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill — Fertility treatment requires male role model — rejected.

    Gordon Brown, on the other hand, didn’t make it to parlament to vote on menny of these issues and voted to say that a child requires a Mother and Father. Seems he’s got a poor voting record

  31. theotherone 2 Jul 2009, 10:01am

    it apears my posts are either being rejected or moderated as my posts either disapear or do not go up straight away.

    I hate to pull out Free Speach but how can we, as a group, silence people within our group if the disagree with us? Debate is the way forward not censorship.

    I would ask who runs this site as blatend untruths regarding the voting records and views of some MPs but if I post regadring the history of Labours shamefull history on the repeal of Clause 28 the post disaperes.

    Will this post disapear too?

  32. theotherone 2 Jul 2009, 10:02am

    can someone explain why my post regarding the comparitive vboting records of GB and DC has not gone up but a post I made later HAS?

  33. theotherone 2 Jul 2009, 10:10am

    I’ll try a third time with my post about the comparitive voting records of GB and DC:

    so moamaom it dosn’t matter what DC says YOU know better.

    Could you explain why DC voted for protection against discrimination, for civil partnerships, against an amendment to the recent adoption law that would have disalowed Gay Adoption. Brown, on the other hand, has been absent at almost every vote and voted for the above amendment. Seems his voting record is verry, verry poor.

  34. The issue is about what the Tories will do should they (!) come into Govt! Those of us old enough to remember the Reign Of Terror under Baroness Thatcher will be hard to convinced on the issue of LGBT rights and the Conservatives. Section 28 WAS a draconian law which people do not forgive or forget. I am not saying that Cameron would try and repeal Gay Rights but when he sides with homophobes in the EU Parliament you do tend to get a slight wiff of jackboots!!!!

  35. If you posted including a web address then it would of beenrejected its not censorship its just a poor messaging system.

  36. Abi1975 If Peter Tatchell had actually come out in the Bermonsdey by-election he might have won and would be a Labour minister now.

  37. Simon Murphy 2 Jul 2009, 11:22am

    Peter Tatchell WAS out in the Bermondsey by-election in 1981. It was the Liberal candidate (who participated along with the Tories in the homophobic smear campaign against Tatchell) who was the closet case.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The Tories have shown no real commitment to equality. They are all talk which is not backed up by action. I think a Tory overall victory would be a disaster for this community as all the hateful bigots would reappear the minute they won.

    I’m thinking the best outcome at the next election would be the Lib Dems on coalition with a bigger party. The Tories simply cannot be trusted. And ‘Dave’ Cameron’s past voting record on gay issues is evidence of that.

  38. vulpus_rex 2 Jul 2009, 12:50pm

    The level of anti-Tory scare mongering in here is ridiculous.

    I am 100% sure that the first thing any new Tory government does won’t be the complete equalisation of rights between all sections of society. So what, it will take time.

    I am also 100% certain that the first thing they do won’t be to line us all up and shove us into gas chambers.

    After the disaster of new labour I think the Tories deserve a fair chance.

  39. theotherone 2 Jul 2009, 1:49pm

    why then did my post from yesterday disapear when it didn’t contain a web adress?

  40. @theotherone

    I’d take Brown’s record over Cameron’s. Brown has not once voted against gay rights; Cameron has, multiple times, including on the most recent votes (IVF for lesbians, incitement of homophobic hatred). Oleaginous two-faced Cameron talks pretty to gays then stabs them in the back while in the Commons.

    Also it’s parties as a whole that are important on these issues not single individuals. Is the Tory party’s consistent and current fight against equality OK just because Call-Me-Dave voted in favour of CPs?

    Cameron was in a MINORITY of Conservatives who supported Labour’s anti-discrimination laws. The vast majority of Tory MPs are still homophobic, that fact won’t go away not matter how hard you hand-wring.

  41. Tim Roll-Pickering 2 Jul 2009, 3:34pm

    Simon’s facts about the Bermondsey by-election are inaccurate. It took place in 1983 and Peter Tatchell did not actually confirm he was gay (on the advice of Labour HQ), though the media and other candidates ignored this.

    Tatchell was already controversial because he was the epitome of the far-left activist infiltrating Constituency Labour Parties and capturing the nomination – at one stage before the general election Michael Foot refused to endorse Tatchell at an exchange in the Commons. The Conservative campaign in the by-election was largely focused on Tatchell’s extremism.

    It was John O’Grady, the former Labour leader of Soutwark council who had been deposed (and, I think, deselected) by Tatchell’s far left allies, who made the main running on Tatchell’s sexuality. O’Grady stood as an independent Labour candidate with the backing of outgoing Labour MP Bob Mellish. The attacks were joined in by the Liberals with their famous “I’ve been kissed by Peter Tatchell” badges.

  42. Sister Mary Clarence 3 Jul 2009, 3:07am

    You’re absolutely right Tim, he was sold down the river by his own party, locally and nationally. Loose links with Militant Tendancy (who printed his campaign leaflets) only worsened things.

    John O’Grady, who was the Labour leader of Southwark council at the time stood against Peter, under the banner of the Real Bermondsey Labour Party, and it is rumoured that in the last week of the elections a leaflet depicting Peter next to the Queen with the headline the headline ‘Which Queen will you vote for?’ was his doing.

    The Tories seemed to be the only ones in the whole affair that kept their noses clean.

  43. Mmm. Someone mentioned “Gay Rites” (sounds a bit like rude stuff, like orgies etc oh eh come back Mrs Slocombe!) I think they mean “Gay Rights!” Oh the wonders of the English Language!

  44. theotherone 6 Jul 2009, 12:14pm


    would you please actualy look a tthe voting record of DC and GB? You’ll see a diffrent picture emerging. As to the views of Tories: have you seen the story here about the views of Tory candates?

  45. theotherone, why are you trying to portray Cameron as something he is not? He voted AGAINST the repeal of section 28, he voted AGAINST gay adoption, he voted in favour of an anti gay amendment to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. This is Dave’s record on gay issues.

  46. theotherone 8 Jul 2009, 2:39pm

    no jason I’m asking for a comparison between his record and GBs. Why does no one want to do this? Is it because it’s not exactly flatering?

  47. Brown has NEVER voted against gay rights legislation, Cameron has.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.