Reader comments · Gay Lib Dem David Laws ‘won’t return to government’ · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Gay Lib Dem David Laws ‘won’t return to government’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Ian Bower (Lincoln) 22 Sep 2010, 4:34pm

    Quote: ‘his own personal trauma’.

    Well he could have avoided that ‘trauma’ by being honest in the first place –
    honest about claiming his expenses
    honest about his sexuality.

  2. HelenWilson 22 Sep 2010, 4:53pm

    Millionaire decides he wants the state to pay for his accommodation while not entitled to it.

    He takes his toys away and says I’m not playing any more when found out.

    If he was on the dole and stole £40,000 of benefits he would be facing jail.

    Why should David Laws get away with it.

  3. When is he going to “marry” James? Perhpas he could be the first lib dem to do the gay marriage thing when the lib dems introduce that bill of theirs and the coalition govt passes it!!!. That would impress me..

  4. I hope this is just a ploy to get people saying, “Oh, please, Mr. Laws, you MUST come back to government!”

    If it is not, then we can only assume that David Laws is such an un-proud and gumptionless individual that he is not up to being in the public eye and being up to being known as a gay man.

    Come on, Laws! Show us you have some balls! There is NOTHING to be ashamed about. You WERE ashamed of your sexuality being known, but now we all know and it is time for you to show some pride.

  5. It’s a relief he won’t be coming back to government. Anybody who claims fraudulent expenses for something he wants to keep secret is far too stupid for ministerial office.

  6. hes a crook thats why he had to leave not for being gay … he stole £40,000 and gave it to the bf he lived with…

    they both have a salary or had and i doubt he was charged rent >.>

    i think he should of been arrested. he uses his sexuality as a smokescreen pfft.

  7. Why is everybody focus on his sexuality? He stolen 40.000 tax money. It’s absolutely irrelevant that he’s gay. He was a good salary but still v greedy.

  8. Jess Conrad 23 Sep 2010, 11:03am


  9. paulawilmott 23 Sep 2010, 11:15am

    yes agreed.. a crook. but just because he was caught with his nose in the trough like so many others doesn’t excuse his complete lack of a spine. obviously he doesn’t have any guts at all.. I don’t think we will see him standing up for anything or anybody, his recent actions prove how truly spineless and cowardly our “leaders” are.. just in it for the money and themselves. pr thrown out the window for a pointless av system?.. cowardice.. they are scared we will all vote “none of the above” and kick the whole shower out. we need a new electoral system and we need to see these rich people work for their money like the rest of us.. expenses.. bah.. how many people working 50 hours a week on minimum wage get expenses? these people earn more than enough to pay their own way. make it a salaried job like the rest of us are expected to have and lerts put an end to being ruled by millionaires with more money that most of us can imagine lining their pockets at our expense while telling us to tighten our belts. vive la revolution!.. as the cheese eating surrender monkeys say.. in France people like this would be swinging from lampposts! It’s time to get out on the streets and show them what we got.. I bet I could find 10 million people who want a fair voting system.

  10. Galadriel1010 23 Sep 2010, 11:57am

    I still have some sympathy for him (and don’t blame him for not wanting to come back after the fire and brimstone from every angle). It’s very easy, when lying to everyone including yourself about the state of your relationship, to fail to notice that you have one which has crossed the line. IIRC, he was Lundie’s lodger first, and the relationship followed. Maybe the point when he stopped claiming the expenses was the moment when they decided (realised) that they were together. People can be very stupid when it comes to love, it’s one of its defining features.

    Yes, he could have been open about his relationship, but when you’re set in your ways it can take a solid kick up the arse to move you. And he didn’t have to claim the money at all, but one doesn’t get to be a multi-millionaire by being entirely moralistic.

  11. He was extremely stupid to get himself into this position, however, I can understand his wanting to keep things secret as I know of one person who said when it all came out that if he had come out about being gay before the election then people wouldn’t have voted for him. I actually don’t think that would have been true but sadly there are people in the world that feel like that.

    Personally I think he’s been a very good MP, I live in his constituency, and he has always done his best for the local people.

    Unfortunately he’s shown that like all of us he is prone to moments of bad judgement.

    If he is found to have done something illegal with his expenses then he should face prosecution and if guilty should be punished. If that happens then its going to be the end of his career in politics.

    If he’s not found to have done anything illegal, like the majority of MPs, then he should be allowed to get on with what the electorate have put him there to do which is to represent us.

    I agree with him that he shouldn’t go back into government. Maybe at a much later date when he has proved that he has learnt his lesson and proven that he can make sound judgements.

    In the meantime I think that he should forget about not putting himself up for re-election in 5 years times. He should stand and let the electorate decide whether they want him to represent us or whether it is time for someone else to do so.

  12. de Villiers 23 Sep 2010, 1:56pm

    He took £40k to which he was not entitled. However, had he declared his true situation and claimed for a second home, he would have been entitled to more than this sum.

  13. I think some people are being a bit unfair. He did not move into his boyfriend’s flat and start paying rent to his boyfriend; he moved into a flat and then became romantically involved with his landlord. It’s a totally different thing. There was no initial intent to decieve. By all acounts it was an on/off relationship, so at what point did the landlord become a boyfriend? How can you define such a shift?

    I agree that he needs to show some gumption and get back on his horse.

  14. He couldn’t possible put his head above the parapet again, the whole thing reeks to high heaven. At least he doesn’t have to issue statements on the condition of his wife’s womb. It wouldn’t surprise me if Miss Lundie is replaced with Miss Myers err long. Not in the slightest.

  15. Hodge Podge 23 Sep 2010, 4:26pm

    While a multi-millionaire shouldn’t be claiming expenses full stop, I do have sympathy for him. It would be good to see him bounce back proud of his sexuality.

  16. Where is David Cameron crying “Come Back”… ??

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.