Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Gay Tory Nick Herbert speaks to PinkNews.co.uk

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. It’s sad that some still see equality as something in the mind, that we can imagine into being by accepting illiberal laws such as civil partnerships. I think now, marriage equality is important for various LEGAL reasons, and no “As far as I’m concerned, if it’s a civil partnership, I regard it as marriage.” will help solve them.

  2. Herbert speaks too much. Just legalise same sex marriage and be done with it.

  3. Jan Altus 3 Jul 2010, 7:01pm

    Open civil partnerships to straights. It’s worked well in France (where religious marriages have all but disappeared).

  4. Patrick James 3 Jul 2010, 7:31pm

    A small bit of knowledge about the internal politics of the Conservative party put light onto some of Nick Herbert’s words.

    For Nick gay marriage is not an issue.

    He says:

    “As far as I’m concerned, if it’s a civil partnership, I regard it as marriage.”

    This was in response to Boris Johnson’s sudden conversion to the cause of equality in marriage.

    Nick did not say that Boris Johnson’s support of gay marriage is commendable etc.

    Why would that be, you might ask?

    Before I suggest an answer I will mention that we do get a lot of guff from Nick Herbet about plans for equality here there and everywhere, but never ever actually saying where this equality might actually happen.

    So, why is Nick not really very enthusiastic about gay marriage?

    Currently Nick has invested his future in David Cameron. It is from David Cameron that Nick hopes for promotion in the Conservative party.

    Boris Johnson can support gay marriage because Boris certainly does not look to Cameron for promotion, he is running for mayor again soon so Boris supports gay marriage as he has to or he’ll not be mayor any more.

    But Boris amazing conversion to the cause of gay marriage causes a problem for David Cameron. Cameron wants to bury the gay marriage issue as it is just going to be a huge cause of conflict with the very right wing elements in the Conservative party, who in fact are dominant in the party.

    So, who better to be telling us that gay marriage isn’t very important after all?

    Why, Nick Herbert of course!

    Nick H. is the most prominent LGBT conservative and so he is the best person for the party to be telling us that we shouldn’t want equality in marriage really, surely we should be satisfied with civil partnerships, should we not?

    Nick Herbert is the man who works hard to whitewash the Conservatives party’s alliance with the Polish Law and Justice Party.

    He’s the one that keeps telling us that, surely other parties like Labour and the Lib Dems share European groups with right wing parties as well. But there in reality there is no similarity at all between these “relationships”.

    The Conservative party actively promotes the Polish Law and Justice Party within the European Union and within Poland.

    Nick Herbert knows that fine well, but of course any concern for the LGBT rights of the most vulnerable people in Europe will not get in the way of his ambition within the Conservative party.

    To facilitate his own political ambitions Nick Herbert will tell us that we shouldn’t be concerned about gay marriage. That we should not worry about Polish LGBT people.

    If we didn’t already have a word for “scum” I would suggest we use “Nick Herbert”.

    P.S.

    Remember that Nick will be going to the Europride in Poland on 8th July. He told us this before the election.

  5. Nick is my MP and I’ve written to him a couple of times, once regarding the Digital Economy bill nad the other regarding the ban on fox hunting. He has made it clear that he is in it for the votes, not to make society a better place. He may be gay, but he’s a Tory. I will never support him while he still holds the view that it is OK to kill foxes for “sport” and while he supports the draconion Digital Economy bill.

    “If we didn’t already have a word for “scum” I would suggest we use “Nick Herbert”.”
    (Dam… wish I’d written that! :) )

  6. Sister Mary Clarance 4 Jul 2010, 12:23am

    Still very much bitter I see Patrick (not to mention deranged).

    They still haven’t mentioned the re-introduction of Section 28 – any clue when we might expect this, as you seem very much in the know?

    No?

    Oh well, just make some garbage up. You normally do.

  7. You can regard chickens as peacocks but it doesn’t make it so!

    What a stupid answer. Toeing the party line until the very end! SHAME, SHAME, SHAME on Herbert for having less courage than Boris, a straight man, when it comes to this issue.

  8. If a civil partnership is “the same” as marriage, then call it marriage, not something else. Either it IS marriage or its NOT.

  9. It’s a bit weak but at least there is a hint of some discussion on gay marriage. Thank heavens Clegg is saying that he is pushing for it. All we need now is for Stonewall and Labour to change their anti gay marriage stance and we’ll be flying along…

    Yes, it would be nice for CPs to be open to straights like in France, but France didn’t set up a parallel system, they set up a looser set of rules for less committed couples and left marriage to truly committed couples.. unfortuntely they didn’t realise that gay couples can be just as committed as straights. There doesn’t seem to be any logic to the British system of parallel laws which have to be kept in step and if they bring in a relgious element as well then why continue to give it a seperate name – is it so important to classify us as a gay couple or a straight couple – why do we need this artificial classification , it is like be made to wear a pink triangle on your clothes ……

  10. Patrick you made a valid point about politicians putting party politics and ambition above convictions but then descended into personal insults by labeling Nick as “scum”. Sister Mary Clarence then adds to the hateful tone with a load of personal attacks on you as a result of your comments.
    I just wish we could get to a point where Pink News is a safe place for us to debate without the need or resort to playground name calling…..anyone else up for that?

  11. dave wainwright 4 Jul 2010, 10:40am

    It has only taken 40 years for them to speak to us , why should we trust such a retarded party to run the country when they are so slow on the uptake ?

  12. I think Ashley H (5)has a good point. It concerns me when any party proudly states that they have x amount of LGBT MP’s when it is far from the case that being LGBT makes you a decent human or a good MP.

    But at least, Ashley, you have had a reply from your MP! I’m still waiting after 6 weeks for mine to reply to a 2 line email.

  13. You’re right a gay mp doesn’t mean that he/she is a decent person or that they promote LGBT rights or will answer you emails but as the Guardian states he is trying to prove that the tory party/policies ,not individuals, “have come a hulluva long way” and that is the point…

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/02/tories-out-in-force-gay-pride

    “When the Conservatives last had their hands on the tiller of power, none of their MPs would admit to being homosexual, they voted against lowering the age of consent for gay sex, and invented a law which made it illegal for schools to mention homosexuality.

    How things change: tomorrow, eight years after Alan Duncan became the first Tory MP to come out of his own volition, Nick Herbert, the openly gay Conservative policing minister, will give a speech at Pride London about “how the Tories have come a helluva long way”.

    ….

    “The coalition is so pro-gay that not only have they has set up a cross-government programme of work addressing LGBT policy, but they have promised “additional action for transgender equality” – exactly the sort of initiative the Tories used to mock Harriet Harman for daring to suggest when she held the equalities brief. To return to the Home Office float’s Shakespearean theme of yore: “The wheel is come full circle.”

  14. Please stop referring to GLBT eg T as not being liable for marriage post operative or pre operative transexuals with a gender recognition certificate can marry. I don’t really like the tories but in all honesty I can’t see how they can undo gay rights which have advanced much more so than trans rights. Trans rights have advanced because Labour and the tories were taken to the European Court of Human Rights, no government has willingly done anything for trans people who are the most persecuted of all minority groups

  15. Patrick James 4 Jul 2010, 5:36pm

    Stewart writes:

    Patrick you made a valid point about politicians putting party politics and ambition above convictions but then descended into personal insults by labeling Nick as “scum”. Sister Mary Clarence then adds to the hateful tone with a load of personal attacks on you as a result of your comments.

    Hi Stewart

    Well thank you for you post. In fact I did regret calling Nick Herbert “scum” after I posted.

    However I have followed the Conservative party’s activities in the European Parliament and the way in which Nick Herbert has been whitewashing their activities and it does indeed make me very angry.

    In truth it is very rare indeed that I do actually call anyone anything :)

    Sister Mary Clarence always uses personal attacks on me so there is nothing new in that here.

    I just ignore Sister Mary Clarence 90% of the time.

    I just wish we could get to a point where Pink News is a safe place for us to debate without the need or resort to playground name calling…..anyone else up for that?

    Yes, I would be very much in favour of this and to this end I will try very hard not to call Nick Herbert “scum” again :)

  16. Sister Mary clarence 4 Jul 2010, 8:24pm

    Stewart, apologies for what seems like a personal attack but Patrick promised us the retunr of Section 28 as part of his constant diatribe against the Conservatives.

    It was untrue and unsupported opinion, and personally I’m sick to death of him passing of comments that are wholely untrue as fact putrely based on his political views.

    Many of us do have strongly held political views, but its a whole other issue to make it the focus of your day to post lie after lie after lie on here.

    The ‘scum’ comment is par for the course, don’t let him tell you otherwise.

  17. A quick reality check, the UK has an out gay man as the minister in charge of the police. Who would have predicted? Not me.

  18. SMC – surely even you can accept however that when Nick Herbert starts explaining why same sex couples should accept civil partnership apartheid, that he is suppporting discrimination against gay people.

    This comment is that type of homoophobic claptrap that we hear all too often from the likes of Stonewall:

    “”As far as I’m concerned, if it’s a civil partnership, I regard it as marriage. It has all the same legal status of a marriage. ”

    Well for starters itn DOESN’T have the same legal status of marriage. A same sex civil marriage is downgraded to a CP in Britain and a British CP is not recognised in many countries all over the world.

    secondly – I quite frankly don’t care that the likes of Nick Herbert and Stonewall regard themselves as equal.

    I regard the CP system as as offensive apartheid regime and just because Nick Herbert has no problem being treated as a 2nd class citizen is not justification for forcing all of us to be treated as such.

    Nick Herbert is a dishonest opportunist after all.

    Remember the controversy before the election about the alliance betweent the extreme right, neo-fascist Law and Justice Party from Poland. Nick Herbert spent weeks flat out denying that his Polish neo-fascist allies were homophobic.

    Until some weeks later he was despatched by Cameron to try to persuade their neo-fascist allies to tone down their sickening, homopobic bigotry.

    Niok Herbert clearly is a person whose principles will change depending on how convenient it will be to him

    His refusal to support the right of same sex couples to enter the legal contract of civil marriage is homophobic. Regardless of how he squawks about how CP is equality.

    Civil Partnership is not equality. How can it be, when the SOLE reason for the existence of CP legislaton is to deny same sex couples access to civil marriage based on theirn sexual orientation.

  19. ” “But we’re already saying we’ll look at allowing civil partnerships to have some religious element to them and we’re also allowing churches that allow civil partnerships to do so as part of the law change.”

    ALLOWING civil partnerships have some religious element to them.

    Is he delusuional?

    Doesn’t he realise that it will remain entirely at the discretion of the church whether or not to hold CP’s. Nick Herbert should try ANY catholic church in the country and see what their response should be.

    Whether or not churches perform civil partnership apartheid ceremonices does not alter the fact that gay couples are denied access to the legal contract of civil marriage simply because they are gay.

    That is homophobic disctimination and the sooner the Tories realise this the better.

    The likes of Nick Herbert and the homophobes at Stonewall may be hoping for the marriage equality campaign to disappear.

    It won’t. And while Nick Herbert continues to support homophobic discrimination against same sex couples (in the form of civil partnership) then he will be opposed at every turn.

  20. Sister Mary Clarance 5 Jul 2010, 1:54pm

    StephenC – my view of Nick Herbert is that he is an expenses fiddling opportunist who should have been booted out of parliament and potentially handed over to the police, therefore I have little time for anything that comes out of his mouth.

    I think the offer of a religious element missed the whole point and as part of the original consultation on civil partnerships, the lack of religious element was the appeal for a number of people.

    Despite what anyone else says I do not feel the need for marriage, which I believe is ‘equal’. Legislation in other countries will catch up over time, so whilst there is some inequality in that respect it will change

  21. Patrick James 5 Jul 2010, 2:16pm

    Sister Mary Clarence writes:

    Stewart, apologies for what seems like a personal attack but Patrick promised us the retunr of Section 28 as part of his constant diatribe against the Conservatives.

    Well no I have never suggested that there would be a return to Section 28.

    In fact if you read my comments prior to the election and after I say over and over again that I do not believe that the Conservatives will be introducing repressive legislation.

    I think you have confused me with someone else.

    I am a Labour guy but I have followed politics for some years and I am not likely to say silly things.

    I would be obliged if Sister Mary Clarence would stop following my posts with the suggestion that I am in some way bitter.

    If Sister Mary Clarence knew a little about me he would understand that in fact I have seen many things in my life and so an election result is not likely to make me bitter.

    I do feel that it is absolutely legitimate to make comments about the Conservative party without being accused either of being bitter or being accused of saying things I never said.

  22. Patrick James 5 Jul 2010, 2:22pm

    Jim rights:

    A quick reality check, the UK has an out gay man as the minister in charge of the police. Who would have predicted? Not me.

    Well, the UK used to have an out gay men in the most important positions in the cabinet.

    Now the UK has people with deeply homophobic records in the most important positions in the cabinet.

  23. Patrick James 5 Jul 2010, 2:31pm

    StephenC writes:

    Remember the controversy before the election about the alliance betweent the extreme right, neo-fascist Law and Justice Party from Poland. Nick Herbert spent weeks flat out denying that his Polish neo-fascist allies were homophobic.

    Until some weeks later he was despatched by Cameron to try to persuade their neo-fascist allies to tone down their sickening, homopobic bigotry.

    Yes Stephen I am very glad you have written this.

    It was this issue that has caused me to express my distate for Nick Herbert rather graphically.

    Nick Herbert’s denial and whitewashing of the Law and Justice Party in Poland was absolutely reprehensible.

    Here is a man who has gained so much from the marvellous change in culture which has taken place in UK but he seeks to deny that change to the very vulnerable LGBT people in Poland.

    I grew up in Northern Ireland myself so I know how sometimes extreme religious types can take over a society. I think that is what has happened in Poland.

    I also know how the extreme religious types can exert their influence in society and my guess is that to be LGBT in Poland could be very difficult.

    Nick Herbert treats those Polish vulnerable LGBT people with absolute contempt when he denies that the Law and Justice party are homophobic.

  24. Patrick James 5 Jul 2010, 2:46pm

    Sister Mary Clarence Writes

    Stewart, apologies for what seems like a personal attack but Patrick promised us the retunr of Section 28 as part of his constant diatribe against the Conservatives.

    I am repeating this I know but I never said this.

    It was untrue and unsupported opinion, and personally I’m sick to death of him passing of comments that are wholely untrue as fact putrely based on his political views.

    In fact my comments are very measured.

    Prior to the election I wrote over and over that the Conservative party would not actualy reintroduce repressive legislation.

    In fact I said the areas Conservative party’s strategy would be to advance the cause of religions in the UK and they would retain their homophobic overseas policies of associating with far right parties in Europe.

    That has certain been shown to be the case.

    Many of us do have strongly held political views, but its a whole other issue to make it the focus of your day to post lie after lie after lie on here.

    I can spend my day as I wish. There are many people who post here much more prolifically than I do.

    The ‘scum’ comment is par for the course, don’t let him tell you otherwise.

    In fact I think it is the first time I have used abusive language.

    If anyone wishes to look over my posts I would be very glad.

    You will notice I am not rude.

    You will also notice that my posts are followed by one from Sister Mary Clarence where he is rude about me.

  25. Patrick James 5 Jul 2010, 2:52pm

    Sister Mary Clarences

    Despite what anyone else says I do not feel the need for marriage, which I believe is ‘equal’. Legislation in other countries will catch up over time, so whilst there is some inequality in that respect it will change

    This is the first time in a long time that I have seen Sister Mary Clarence actually express an opinion instead of being rude about me.

    Sister Mary Clarence says that he does not feel the need for marriage. Well I do not wish to get married either and I am not going to propose to Sister Mary Clarence (its a joke), however doe Sister Mary Clarence not feel that those lesbians and gay men that do wish to get married should be entitled to do so on an equal basis as their heterosexual married friends?

  26. Nick Herbert said: “I think for a lot of us, we regard civil partnerships as marriages.”

    However, one sees from the 24 responses above that well over half of the people who have responded in these Comments alone totally support GAY MARRIAGE.

    So, Nick Herbert, the evidence suggests that what you have said is wrong!!!!!! We do NOT regard civil partnerships as marriages.

    Nick Herbert simply tried to brainwash the happy partying gays on their big day out in the sunshine! Why? Who set him up to do it?

  27. Patrick James 5 Jul 2010, 6:14pm

    Gerry writes:

    Nick Herbert simply tried to brainwash the happy partying gays on their big day out in the sunshine! Why? Who set him up to do it?

    Hi Gerry

    A very good question!

    Why is Nick Herbert playing down the gay marriage issue?

    Why is Nick Herbert not congratulating Boris Johnson’s support for gay marriage and supporting him?

    I think that Nick Herbert is working hard to bury this gay marriage issue because it is a headache for Cameron.

    Cameron knows that it will be very hard to deliver as the very large right wing of his party won’t like it.

    So, my guess is that now Nick Herbert is doing Cameron’s bidding by playing this thing down.

    I also think that Boris Johnson is being very crafty. Boris wants to remain mayor and he knows that the LGBT vote is very important to that objective. Equally Boris knows that he is creating a big headache for Cameron as Boris knows that Cameron will find this very difficult to deliver. I think Boris is rather enjoying landing Cameron in it, because while Boris has very little interest in LGBT rights, he knows very well that Cameron has a similar level of interest LGBT rights as himself.

  28. Patrick James 5 Jul 2010, 6:37pm

    The duplicity of the Conservative party in the last week has been breathtaking.

    While Nick Herbert and co were parading themselves at the Pride event in London David Cameron was meeting Jaroslaw Kaczynski and in so doing demonstrating his support for Jaroslaw Kaczynski in the Polish presidential election.

    This was kept astonishingly quiet in the British press of course but widely reported in Poland.

    At last there has been some press coverage in the UK, but the Daily Telegraph, you can read about it here.

    A quote from the article:

    For reasons best known to himself, David Cameron decided to receive Kaczynski in London last week, during the last week of the Polish campaign. For Kaczynski, this was a major coup: it allowed him to claim “support” from the Tory party for his campaign, and helped underline his “new” friendly attitude to foreigners.

    So who is Jaroslaw Kacznyski?

    He is chair of the Polish Law and Justice party.

    Jaroslaw Kacznyski is just about as “nasty” as you can get with regard to LGBT issues.

    He makes Ian Paisley look like an LGBT loving liberal!

    This was the man that Cameron was using unprecedented diplomatic efforts to get elected as President of Poland. Giving Kacznyski this “major coup” of the meeting, which of course Kacznyski made great use of with a press conference immediately after it.

    This illustrates the extent of this alliance with the Polish Law and Justice party.

    Now back to Nick Herbert. When Nick Herbert was parading at LGBT pride he knew fine will that David Cameron was intervening in Polish national politics to assist Kacznyski in this election.

    As it happens Kacznyski did not get elected (ho ho ho).

  29. But stepping back to the UK again:

    the telegraph also reminds us

    “During the election campaign, the Conservatives were the only main party to suggest that they would consider allowing full homosexual marriage, a move that although contentious would be easier to legislate for than altering existing laws on civil partnership and civil marriage.

    Their Contract for Equalities stated: “We will consider the case for changing the law to allow civil partnerships to be called and classified as marriage.”

  30. “During the election campaign, the Conservatives were the only main party to suggest that they would consider allowing full homosexual marriage, a move that although contentious would be easier to legislate for than altering existing laws on civil partnership and civil marriage. ”

    why then is this Nick Herbert individual suggesting that we should be satisfied with the current civil partnership apartheid scheme?

    Civil partnerships are not and will never be equality.

  31. your’re right but he does say the “debate is moving” …. just wish there was more noise from Stonewall and others and also wish the lab party would change their stance on the issue and put some pressure on as the opposition party – I guess it’s just wishful thinking they both seem to be terribly stubborn! Perhpas with the overhaul of the house of lords and kicking out the bishop vote may make things a bit easier??? Wasn’t this one of labour’s past failed promises?

  32. “he does say the “debate is moving” ”

    True – but in the next breath he dismisses the wishes of the majority of the LGBT population (whom neither he nor Stonewall represent) who are in favour of equality for LGBT people.

    Nick Herbert and Stonewall are clearly out of touch with the LGBT constituency.

    They seem to believe that if they keep repeating that we should be satisfied with apartheid, then eventually we will be.

    They are wrong.

  33. Nick Who???

  34. Perhaps this Nick guy also thinks he needs to be respectful of religious freedom of conscience in cases involving racism??

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.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all