Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

General Election 2010

Exclusive: George Osborne to meet Peter Tatchell ahead of David Cameron’s ‘coming out party’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. The fact that the Tories even think that Peter Tatchel is a relevant and respected voice in the gay community of today, shows just how tragically out of touch they are. If you are going to meet someone, at least meet someone who isn’t a marginalised irrelevance.

  2. I disagree. Peter Tatchell is a very much respected and relevant voice. Other campaign groups quietly negotiate and find compromise, but there will always be a place for noisy, awkward-squad campaigners who simply won’t take no for an answer. You may be uncomfortable with his approach, and indeed disagree with him at times, but that doesn’t make him marginalized or irrelevant.

    The significance of this can’t be underestimated. Rather than ignore the flashmob the Conservative Party have chosen to engage. They have clarified policies on LGBT issues, and appear to be willing to continue to debate. For all of their faults (and historically there have been many) this can only be a positive step. By contrast none of the other parties have even mentioned LGBT issues to far in this campaign. Are they hoping all of the focus will be on why you shouldn’t vote Conservative, rather than why you should vote for them?

  3. I totally disagree. Twatchell is an irrelevant dinosaur and a laughing stock. I can’t actually think of anyone I know who has a single good thing to say about the repellent little hypocrite.

  4. P. Tatchell has Never and will Never speak for me.

  5. Colm, most of the other main parties constantly mention LGBT issues, which are embedded in their manifestos. The Tories are being challenged because they only use us to score points at the polling booths. After that we are discarded.

  6. Peter Tatchell does a lot of good work

  7. Squidgy “P.Tatchell has Never and will Never speak for me.”

    I totally agree. Tatchell is an irritating anachronism that has continued to plague ordinary gay people for years. Him and his Outrage! bunch have done nothing but put us in a bad light. Colm is wrong, if you want something doing, you discuss it and come to a compromise, not stand outside Parliament waving placards or invading cathedral services. All you do is antagonise people and they go against you even harder.

    Unfortunately, there is no real representative for LGBT people (I refuse to call it a ‘community’), as Tatchell is too reactionary, and Stonewall completely inept and politically biased (They also refuse to recognise transexuals).

    It is about time someone formed a solid, politically neutral organisation that would represent everyone.

  8. The Chistian Institute are hoping the conservatives will win:




    Of all candidates, Mr Chameleon is the one who scores more points and approval from the homophobes. And why? Because he consistently votes against the interests of the gay community.

  9. Ok well I’ll worry about that After we’ve done the proper business of sorting the economy out and getting this country out of the Labour driven bankrupcy!

    There’ll be another election by then though so I guess nothing to worry about after all.

  10. “It is about time someone formed a solid, politically neutral organisation that would represent everyone.”

    How is that possible? Every person wants different things to the next person

  11. I agree with anyone who says transexuals shouldn’t be part of the GLB grouping which is why i always refer to Gay people ranther than the misnomer GLBT , which sounds like it should be on a greasy spoon menu somewhere.
    They claim to have no gay leanings whatever, so where do they fit with our community? I fail to see any relevance.
    Intelligent comments please, i’ve had enough of the abusive racist screaming nellies.

  12. dave: “How is that possible? Every person wants different things to the next person”

    I would have thought that was pretty obvious. Much in the same way as the Campaign for Racial Equality. An unbiased, governmentally independent outfit that can act as the face of LGBT people, so we can state what we want, and they question, propose and fight if needs be, our cause. We may all have different priorities about what we want, but I think we are all pretty much after the same things.

  13. Patrick: “Intelligent comments please, i’ve had enough of the abusive racist screaming nellies.”

    Ah so you don’t like racist abuse thrown at you, but you are willing to make transphobic comments about others on a gay news site. How very magnanimous of you. Trust me, my comments will be the least of your worries. When the trans girls read your crap, they will rip you limb from limb.

    oh, and it’s LGBT. Yeah, I don’t like it either, but at least I get the preferred order right.

  14. ‘I can’t actually think of anyone I know who has a single good thing to say about the repellent little hypocrite.’

    Think of me, Mark. Peter Tatchell should be hailed by all gay people as a hero for our cause.

  15. tatchell is a great man who has devoted his life to gay rights. some of you should have more respect for a man who along with others have contributed to the freedoms (however unequal they still are) we now enjoy.

    and i agree with patrick#12 – there’s nothing transphobic about saying that transgender are not the same as gay men and women. they’re not. transgender want to change their gender, gay men and wommen do not. and fighting for transgender’s rights is not the same battle.

    and there is a gay community, and those of us who know we belong to that community are fighting for equality for those who wish to be able to love someone of the same sex. those who think there is no gay community are homophobic and must be very bitter about the community as it is, they’ve probably been excluded from it for being vile and so pretend there is no community. they usually stick up for conservative right wing politics that attempt to repress others, and dont like liberal left wing politics.

  16. Found this buried in the comments of an old story – PinkNews doesn’t think it worthy of proper coverage.

    Letter to Pinknews from Martin Popplewell who interviewed David Cameron for GT magazine.

    Hi Ben hope you are well. I’ve just been reading the comment piece on pinknews and was concerned about the reporting of the GT interview.

    We advised DC’s press team 10 days before the interview that we would like to film it. As soon as he sat down to do the interview the 3 cameras present would have made it clear that we were filming. Before we started there was no request to just do a press interview. It was only when he started floundering on a number of issues – not just the Lithuania vote – that he then tried to wriggle out of the situation with the “thoughtful print interview” line. This has been the line from Conservative HQ after the interview and has been appearing on a number of Conservative blogs but I think the reality is they’ve been trying to find a way to explain away an interview which went badly.

    On the Lithuanian vote. It’s wrong to focus on the fact that David Cameron didn’t know about the vote. The fact was that not one of his MEPs voted the right way to condemn a piece of legislation that Amnesty International had raised concerns about. MEPs from both the Labour and Liberal Democrats had voted against the legislation.

    After the interview we were told that Conservative MEPs wouldn’t vote on a nation state’s domestic issues – hence the Conservative decision to abstain. This is simply not true. A month after the Lithuanian vote the Conservative group themselves tabled a motion regarding Italy and press freedom. This was confirmed by Cathy Newman at Channel 4 News. So the Conservatives do vote on other nation state’s domestic issues but only when they choose to do so. On this occasion they choose not to despite the concerns of Amnesty International. This says something about the priority that the Conservatives put on gay issues when they think they’re not being watched. It’s something I’m sure your readers would care about.

    At the moment it appears that the interview we did – which raised legitimate questions about the Conservatives commitment to LGBT issues – is being dismissed with lines spun by the Conservative Press Office. I’m sure you wouldn’t want that to be the case.

    Is there any chance we could have the above comments reflected on your website. It would also be appreciated if your team could take on board the above when covering the GT interview in the future.

    Kind regards


  17. @SvL I’d invite you to either expand on, or withdraw your libellous comment.

    I have never been ejected from an organization; unceremonously, in discrace or otherwise. Indeed the only other campaigning organization I have been a part of was YouthSpeak, where I was Chair until we disbanded, having achieved our aims.

  18. Tatchell is far from a great man, more an embarrassment that just doesn’t know when to quit.

    Besides that I refuse to support anyone who doesn’t accept we are born gay and therefore being gay is un-natural!


  19. #14 I am not in the slightest “transphobic” as you so quaintly put it. I just fail to see the relevance to gay people. As i said and you conveniently ignored, they claim to not be gay, least any i have met over the years. And if you are going to comment, dont forget the transboys , or are they irrelevant to you for some reason.
    I doubt the girls and boys of the trans community will have any problem with what i have just said. If they do , i hope they will be ready to explain in a rational manner, rather than make idle threats as do some of the racist posters on this site.

  20. “oh and its LGBT” Says who. its what ever i wish to make it. and this time its GBL, and i may say its something else in an hours time if i so wish. That is the concept of free speech but a racist screaming nellie like you wont have any knowledge of concept. Do you use voice recognition software by any chance, or are you dictating for someone else, because the manner of your posts would indicate you are a stranger to the “Inglysh” language.

  21. Did Peter Tatchell REALLY say of Call-Me-Dave’s concessions to us of yesterday: “Although only a halfway house, this is a move in the right direction.”?

    Peter, Peter, Peter! Please, I hope your suggestion that the Tories have met this community “half way” is simply some kind of diplomatic ruse, part of some game-plan of yours!

    For the fact is that the Tories when they were last in power enshrined in law a draconian measure which gagged every employee of every school in the land from saying or doing anything which might be perceived as giving students the impression that homosexuality was OK. The Tories then kept that draconian measure firmly in place throughout their time in office. Only when Labour finally succeeded in 1997 in kicking the hateful Tory party out of government was the legislation repealed (removed).

    Since then we have certainly had no “half-way house”, Peter!

    But what HAVE we had?

    This is what we have had from the Tories:

    In 1999 William Hague sacked Conservative front-bencher Shaun Woodward for refusing to back the party’s stance that Section 28 should not be repealed. (Remember that the Tory’s Section 28 of 1989 effectively gagged any employee of a school from giving any impression to students that homosexuality was OK.)

    In 2000 while David Cameron was campaigning for the seat of Witney he wrote a letter in The Telegraph attacking Shaun Woodward for his pro-gay stance. He also attacked Tony Blair too for his being pro-gay rights. These are Call-Me-Dave’s actual words from that time: “The Blair government continues to be obsessed with their fringe agenda, including deeply unpopular moves like repealing Section 28 and allowing the promotion of homosexuality in schools. . . Blair has moved heaven and earth to allow the promotion of homosexuality in schools”. Do you really believe that the leopard has completely changed his spots simply because he now needs our votes and is saying, “Trust me!”?

    In 2003 David Cameron MP fought against and voted against the Labour Government’s repeal of Section 28 in the House of Commons.

    By 2005 Say-Anything-Dave has done a complete turnabout and he tells the BBC he’s delighted Section 28 has been abolished! He told a BBC journalist: “At the end of the day, one section of our community did feel discriminated against by Section 28, and so I’m glad on that basis that it’s gone”

    In 2008 Cameron voted against a law making it easier for lesbian couples to have IVF treatment. He says that this issue goes to the heart of his message that Britain’s society is broken. Are we now to believe, just two years later in 2010, that Cameron no longer believes that “Britain’s society is broken” and that we LGBTs are not to blame for it?

    In 2009 Call-Me-Dave decides to appear at a gay pride event and say sorry to us for the ban on anything that might be construed as a positive view of homosexuality in schools. He said “Yes, we may have sometimes been slow and, yes, we may have made mistakes, including Section 28, but the change has happened”. It was an apology but there was little real remorse in it. Was it not just a clever preparation for wooing us for our votes in the following year?

    Having delivered this “I’m weally weally sorry” just two months later in 2009 Tory MEPs refused to go along with a cross-party European Parliament vote to condemn a homophobic law that had been passed in Lithuania!

    Then earlier this year, in 2010, in his interview with Attitude magazine, Call-Me-Dave criticised the Church of England over its attitudes to homosexuality and called upon the Church to accept equal rights for gays.

    But a little later, in April 2010, Call-Me-Dave’s Shadow Home Secretary Christopher Grayling was revealed by The Observer newspaper as having said that he feels sympathy for those businesses who wish to turn gay, lesbian, or transgender people away – despite it being against the law to do so. Cameron failed to discipline his colleague and a few days later yet another Tory candidate, Andrew Bridgen, said much the same thing as Christopher Grayling. Cameron similarly failed to discipline Bridgen. Both Grayling and Bridgen currently continue as Tory candidates in the election despite having shown support for the “right” of businesses to turn gays, lesbians, and trans people away.

    On April 10th 2010, Call-Me-Dave sought to woo gay and lesbian voters in an article written for PinkNews. He said that if gays or lesbians were in Civil Partnerships they would be eligible for the same £3 a week that he was promising to married heterosexuals (provided gays and lesbians are on a low wage also). He also promised “a clean slate” to anyone who had a “gay-sex offence” on their records. The only other thing he offered in his article was the sentiment that he was “heart and soul” behind gay rights and a request that LGBTs should simply trust him! However, Call-Me-Dave’s record since he ditched his seven-year position as Director of Corporate Affairs at Carlton Communications (a major media company) to “find a seat” in politics does not inspire confidence.

  22. “I refuse to support anyone who doesn’t accept we are born gay and therefore being gay is un-natural!”

    Duh? Squidgy needs to pipe up and ask all of the senior cons if they think that his gayness is something that he is stuck with or just a lifestyle that he’s chosen!

    What the Tory answer? Gays and lesbians are just people who have unfortunately chosen to go against the scriptures and choose a the gay or lesbian lifestyle.

    Church-going Tories, and basically ALL Tories are on their knees in front of the Archbish of Canterbury, put the scriptures first and gays, lesbians, and trans people . . . . way way down the list of perversions to be prayed for.

    Even their Archbish won’t come out strongly in favour of gays and lesbians!

  23. “In 2003 David Cameron MP fought against and voted against the Labour Government’s repeal of Section 28 in the House of Commons.”

    People do change their minds in time – you only need to look at the views of John Bercow to see what I mean. However we do need more convincing evidence of David Cameron’s belief in equality, especially as his party voted against the gender equality resolution in the European Parliament as recently as this February. He ought to express his dismay at the vote, and tell his MEPs to either support equality in future or lose the Tory whip.

  24. always thought PinkNews was a LGBT site not part of the Tory party propaganda machine!

    But it seems I was very wrong :(

  25. dave wainwright 11 Apr 2010, 6:12pm

    Whilst I find myself not entirely agreeing with all of Peter Tatchells comments and opinions, I do feel that those commenting should have a little more respect for this man who for over 30 years has fought tirelessly and selflessly for changes in the law and LGBT and human civil and human rights , there is no need to be rude for someone who has done more than any other putting his own neck on the line , time and time again to highlight injustice and oppression , I first met Peter Tachell back in the 1970’s on the GLF organised Gay Pride Marches and picnics , and I wish I were half the man he were ..I take my hat off to him and I salute him for all he has done over the years.

  26. Brendan A:-

    The difference being that my point wasn’t about any Tories it was about Peter Tatchell. Please do read threads dear.

  27. How are P. Tatchell’s comments about ‘gay not being natural’ really any different than that of what you say about the Tories or the Churches. Yet he is a ‘great man’.

    Great man, my a**e!

  28. dave wainwright 11 Apr 2010, 8:38pm

    remind us dear, of what you have ever done and who you are, hiding behind a pseudonym, before you go calling one of the great gay warriors of your lifetime an arse , dear x

  29. Peter Tatchell 12 Apr 2010, 3:39am

    Squidgy: I never said gay isn’t natural. Read the article you cite above. I did not write the headline.

    Patrick: I did not say that the Tories were meeting us halfway on gay rights (not even a quarter of the way). I said the Tory proposals to regard gay sex convictions as spent for the purposes of criminal record checks was “half-way” because it does not quash the convictions (which is what OutRage! and I have long campaigned for).

  30. Peter Tatchell 12 Apr 2010, 3:42am

    Ooops! I said Patrick. In fact I was replying to Eddy:

    Eddy: I did not say that the Tories were meeting us halfway on gay rights (not even a quarter of the way). I said the Tory proposals to regard gay sex convictions as spent for the purposes of criminal record checks was “half-way” because it does not quash the convictions (which is what OutRage! and I have long campaigned for).

  31. Too many pics of DC!!!! Cant we just have that childs scribbled tree symbol instead??? Some of us don’t think they have changed and never will!!!!

  32. Of the 15 stories appearing on the front page of Pink News, 12 are about the Tory Party.

    Yet Pink News claims not to be biased.

    How stupid do the editors and reporters regard us?

  33. Thanks for that link, Squidgy. There could be no clearer demonstration of the FACT that Twatchell is a blithering halfwit.

  34. Squidgy do you have a problem making connections? Does everything have to belted out at you as if you had the mental development of a five-year-old?


    You said in 18 that “I refuse to support anyone who doesn’t accept we are born gay and therefore being gay is un-natural!”

    AS A RESULT OF WHAT YOU SAID I THEN SAID in 22 that (if refuse to support anyone who doesn’t accept we are born gay and therefore believes being gay is un-natural) you (being a constant supporter of the Homophobic Tories) need to ask all of the senior Tories if they think that YOUR gayness is something that you are stuck with or just a lifestyle that you have chosen!


    You failed to grasp all of this (because of your inability to grasp things which are subtle) and thus you pompously and queenly said in 27: “my point wasn’t about any Tories it was about Peter Tatchell. Please do read threads dear.”

    Hopefully now you will have seen how you completely missed the connection.

    Most people here, Squidgey, run rings round you and it’s about time you saw that and realised that you are nowhere near as intelligent as you have thought. Sorry to have to inform you of this.

  35. Peter, thank you for your message at #30. I accept that PinkNews, yet again, reported matters sloppily. You advise at #30 that you were speaking of one particular issue, gay sex convictions. But PinkNews applied your “half way house” comment to ALL of the Tories’ gay rights policies, viz:

    “Yesterday, writing for PinkNews.co.uk, Peter Tatchell welcomed Mr Cameron’s new gay rights policies: ‘Although only a halfway house, this is a move in the right direction.'”

    Thanks for assuring me and everyone else that you do not think the Tories are anywhere NEAR a half-way house on gay rights policies.

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.