Reader comments · Update: Christian Tory councillor suspended for anti-gay tweet · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Update: Christian Tory councillor suspended for anti-gay tweet

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Jolly good. They really are on the wrong side of future history.

    1. Yes, they have run out of the usual insults to offer really, they keep repeating the polygamy and bestiality scares and the confusing the children horror as well as the destruction of civilization threat.
      Have they finished? If so then we don’t accept these insults, we reject them.

      When people offer you things or insults and you reject them, then those things or insults remain the property of those who originally offered them to you.

  2. Seriously, this guy needs to really read some books and become educated. I would gladly bet money that he would agree with Hitler’s Eugenics policies.

  3. He should get on the Daily Mail forum. He’ll be able to spout this nonsense all day long without anyone saying anything. They’re all just as insane about this as he is! :P

    1. Eddy - from 2007 13 Oct 2011, 8:20pm

      Yes, Kris, the Daily Mail, and The Telegraph, is read by THOUSANDS of Britons who totally agree with James Malliff, who hold James Malliff’s views entirely. Just scanning the Comments sections of both newspapers proves this.

      I urge all of us here who visit Pink News to register ourselves with both The Daily Mail and The Telegraph and to artfully combat the hatred and homophobia which is spewed there daily.

      Even if you just visit to tick the red and green arrows the opposite way from that which their readers are voting, that will help lessen their feeling that they hold the opinion of the “the majority”.

      Us spouting away on Pink News ONLY is not going to help fight this battle.

      1. that’s a waste of time Eddy. The Daily Heil comments page is heavily moderated, so that the comments that are published, coincide with the extreme-right agenda of the paper (the Daily Mail – the paper of choice of the BNP).

        1. dAVID, so we have to rise to the challenge of writing very artfully, so as to ensure our comments ARE published on the Daily Mail.

          And remember we can also click on those red and green arrows.

  4. Other suspendable comments should also be , gay marriage wil lead to marrying multiple partners, marrying your sister, put society and humanity at peril, against the natural order and so on…as far as I’m concerned all arguements against gay marriage , contniued discrimination and inequality towards us are offensive

    1. One of the most amazing cultures in human history advocated the marriage of siblings within its Royal House (The Ancient Egytpitans); An English Monarch married his own dead brother’s wife (Henry VIII), until 1890, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Christians) were openly Polygamous in America; the US state of Texas allows marriage of 14 year olds (children?) with parental consent. I wonder if Mr. Malliff would like to remember that when he prounces further diabtribe on the free union of two ADULTS who merely wish to be legally recognised as a couple?

  5. Can we take bets now on whether he’s a twisted closet case? What he said has all the hallmarks of a self-loathing homosexual.

  6. Suspension is not enough,

    He needs to be permanently expelled from the Tory Party.

    His opinions are so offensive and so obscene that he makes the BNP look mild-mannered.

    Extremist bigotry has no place in mainstream politics.

    If this monstrous bigot is allowed back into the Tory Party, itn is confirmation that extremist bigotry has a place in the Tories.

    And if that is the case then we all need to be very scared.

    1. Yes, I agree dAVID

      Although we need to let processes happen and suspension can lead to being expelled. Yes, lets keep up the pressure to demonstrate the offensive nature of his comments and then raise the pressure if he is not expelled

      1. He is entitled to say what he wants, just as you lo drone on saying you want to be ‘married’.

        1. Absolutely. And he can then accept the consequences of being to some extent a public figure and saying stupid things.

        2. Patrick Lyster-Todd 13 Oct 2011, 2:15pm

          Fortunately he is not entitled to say as he wants as his own party association quickly realised. So, Matthew, why don’t you take your biased comments elsewhere … ? Or have you got nothing better to do than hang around on a gay news website?

        3. Yes he is absolutely allowed to say what he wants – we all are,

          However as a member of a mainstream political party, if he says what he has says and is allowed to remain in his party, then it means that his party endorses his extremist bigotry.

          If the Tories endorse his extremist bigotry then we need to know this, so we can ensure that we not vote for ANY Tory candidate.

        4. How’s the newspaper campaign going, Matthew? ;) You know – the one you claim to have started to help free the man who set his dog on that poor woman.

          Do tell.

        5. Everyone has the right to say what they want, but, and there is a but. When you speak against a section of society, LGBT,Blacks,Asians, Muslims and that speech is comparing them to sub-humans ( like Hitler did ) then that is wrong unless you have evidence to support your accusations.

          If you have no evidence to support your accusations then all you do is speak hate and prejudice. We as a species are evolving and slowly learning to think for ourselves and realise that Judeo-Christian Theocracies are now becoming irrelevant and obsolete.

          As a practising witch, the only way I can see our species evolving is through peace,love,understanding and acceptance.

          Blessed Be

        6. Absolutely he is entitled to say what he wants …

          However, one would hope he has some intelligence if he is representing the public in office (although sometimes there is a paradox). If he is intelligent then he must realise that freedoms to do things (eg make comments through freedom of speech) carry with them responsibilities …

          Clearly, if one made disparaging comments about Christians, gay people, Asian people, the disabled etc then a mainstream political party (and arguably either the standards committee of the local authority or national standards board) would be wholly justified in suspension or expulsion (including removal from office).

          As for “droning” seems to be more reflective of your predictable comments, Matthew

      2. “His opinions are so offensive and so obscene that he makes the BNP look mild-mannered.”

        I’m sorry, I find his views stupid, unintelligent and offensive in that one can extrapolate that he thinks gay people are at a similar level to animals but I think that suggesting that the BNP is mild-mannered is pushing it a bit far.

        going over the top doesn’t help.

  7. Jack Holroyde 13 Oct 2011, 11:04am

    “He was responding to a message former Tory MP Paul Goodman, who tweeted that the move could led to recognition of polygamy.”
    Funny, I was debating that the other day. BIG issues around it’s possible use of tax evasion (you could be married to your romantic partner and claim that your business partner is a lover for business tax breaks), but once a wording is found that minimises this without needing constant state interference, then we’re onto a winner.

    Anyway, I get more kisses off my dog than I do off my boyfriend – how about I marry the dog instead?

    1. I think thats what Denmark is for ?? ;-) hehe

  8. “I was not intending to be offensive.
    It was much more a comment to try to establish where we draw the line on these things”. IT WAS OFFENSIVE. DRAWING A LINE MEANS DIVISION, ALL WE WANT IS EQUALITY.
    “It sounds terrible now but it was not meant to be anti-gay. I am not anti-gay and I respect people’s views on this issue”. YOU DON’T MAKE THESE SORTS OF COMMENTS AND THEN TURN ROUND AND SAY I’M NOT ANTI GAY! HE’S A TWO FACED HOMOPHOBIC PIECE OF TORY JUNK !

  9. He truly is a piece of bigot scum.

    Are the people of Bucks in general as extremist and as monstrously bigotted as their monstrous councillor.

    Or did he his vicious extremism before he was elected to his office?

  10. “I was not intending to be offensive. It was much more a comment to try to establish where we draw the line on these things.”

    I don’t see why its not obvious. We draw the line under two consenting adults. A man and a woman, two consenting adults. A man and a man, two consenting adults. A woman and a woman, two consenting adults. A man and a child, NOT two consenting adults. A man and a dog, NOT two consenting adults.

    These bigots keep asking where we draw the line, why don’t they get this answer?

    1. His inability to see that makes him unfit for public office.

      An elected publid representative who supports discrminationn against a segment of his constituency should not be in public office.

  11. I’ve never found “slippery slope” type arguments at all convincing. Logically, they just don’t work. Furthermore, if they did then we would have to make opposite-sex marriage illegal too, because clearly THAT is on the slope too.

    What you’re doing, you vile bigot, is trying to insinuate that there is something wrong with gay marriages by pretending they have anything in common with bestiality. That’s not an argument, that’s a base insult. People who can only support their views with such nonsense have no place as our political representatives.

    1. Well said!

    2. Obese-City, Oklahoma 13 Oct 2011, 7:53pm

      Yes the slippery slope is used so often by the religious nuts, but it’s totally illogical. You could just as easily say allowing religious freedom will lead to child sacrifice in Surrey.

      1. Ooooo I’m going to be using that one!

        Nicely put

  12. “A Christian Tory councillor in Buckinghamshire has been suspended for comparing gay marriage to bestiality.”
    Does anyone know which “Christian” Church Mr Malliff attends in Wycombe. It would be interesting to get their reponse on his views!!!

    1. I can’t get it verified that James Malliff is a definite member but there are lots of links to the Malliff family at St Andrews church, High Wycombe – who have this contact email address:

      1. Wouldn’t that be bording on harrassment?

        1. Asking a church for their view? Hardly.

        2. No more harassing than your repeated inflammatory comments on PN, Matthew

    2. Hi Stu
      Thanks for this information.

  13. Still the Nasty Party underneath…

    1. Sister Mary Clarence 13 Oct 2011, 5:26pm

      Strange then that the ‘party’ are the ones who suspended him

      1. strange then that it’s the leader’s view that gay marriage is right and proper that he objects to

  14. “Not anti-gay”? Did I miss something, comparing the marriage of Gay people to the marriage of humans with animals?

  15. Did he actually compare gay marriage to bestiality?

    On my travels around the internet I had picked up the idea that bestiality was something else. Not that I was looking for that in particular. It must have been a virus that redirected my browser. Actually it was something I heard.

  16. If he read the bible correctly, he would find out that polygamy was actually condoned. I don’t see him condemning Islam for allowing it, up to four wives at a time, yet they are recognised as legal marriages. Seems to me polygamy is an entirely heterosexual phenomenon. This vile bigot should be banned permanently from the Tory party. Always amazing how people like this when caught in a rant aimed at gay people punctuate everything they’ve spewed with…”I’m not anti-gay”. What a moron.

    1. Who cares what the bible thinks – it’s nothing but ancient, badly written work of fiction.

      The bible’s statements should have absolutely nothing to do with our laws.

      And these religious maniacs need to learn that lesson.

  17. Darren Taggart 13 Oct 2011, 12:53pm

    I’m not anti X! I just think that X shouldn’t have equal rights.

    Y is bad. So that makes X bad too.

    Why do religious fear logic?

    1. paddyswurds 13 Oct 2011, 1:56pm

      @Darren Taggart….
      ……….Because it is anathema to their whole lives and beliefs. They absolutely abhor logic because logic makes their lives worthless. Logic doesn’t allow a man to stride across water or to feed thousands with a rotten fish and some stale bread or to bring a person who has been dead for hours back from the dead.

    2. Because as Gregory House MD said – If you could reason with religious people, there wouldn’t BE any religious people…

  18. Well most of us have bedded a few dogs in our day……..!

  19. Mumbo Jumbo 13 Oct 2011, 1:45pm

    Christian eh?

    Well, to quote the Bibble (Ezekiel 23:20:

    “There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses……”

    Say whaaaat?

  20. the undeniable 13 Oct 2011, 1:48pm

    he is NOT anti-gay?! really? REALLY? egad!

  21. He is said what he believes in, and he has a right to that.

    If speech can only be inoffensive, then we are no free country at all.

    And I totally agree with what he said, and I am ALLOWED TO,just as he is.

    I fear not, he will be back soon, and his views will still be his own.

    1. paddyswurds 13 Oct 2011, 2:02pm

      ….you also believe that someone who (possibly never existed) and died 2000 years ago will be back soon. So with that reassurance we are confident you are purely and simply WRONG.

    2. You might be allowed to – or even ALLOWED TO – but if you have a public position you can damn’ well accept the consequences of expressing bigoted views publicly.

      Would you consider it acceptable for people in public office who consider black people or Jews inferior to publicly state their prejudices with impunity? If you do, it says all that needs to be known about you, Matthew.

      1. I doubt you’ll get an answer to that question, Rehan. Matthew’s MO is to make a number of comments, including some quite nasty ones, then not reply when he’s called out on them. You have to pity him really.

        1. I know, Iris, and I admit it’s cheap taking advantage of such stupidity, but it was a boring day at work and I needed a little light relief.

          1. Totally understood, Rehan :D And your comment might not have been read or even understood by Matthew, but it was an excellent point.

            I never understand how anti-gay marriage people can’t see the offensiveness of what they say and how very, very similar it is to what was said about interracial marriage decades ago.

    3. Patrick Lyster-Todd 13 Oct 2011, 2:21pm

      However, hate crime remains just that and if someone went around shouting out that gay peole who wanted to get married were no better than animals (et al) then I would expect the police to quickly arrest that person. There is a distinct difference between free speech and those who deliberately ferment hate. People do have to take responsibility for what they say …

    4. Matthew sweetie,

      Of course he has a right to say what he believes in …

      As a responsible member of society representing the public of Wycombe, he has both a right to freedom of speech and a need to understand that when exercising that right there come responsibilities …

      Equally, he does not solely represent heterosexuals or Christians in his ward, he represents all people and thus has to ensure that he maintains the level of standards set for public office …

      When he makes bigoted comments whether they be about gay people, ethnic minorities, those with disabilities, or whatever the difference is the moment he demonstrates his lack of responsibility and lack of morality

    5. Jock S. Trap 5 Nov 2011, 4:46pm

      This coming from one of the worst examples of a human being?… Seriously?

  22. i hope its a formality giving them to decide just how they are gonna make sure he never works in this field again.

    im not just saying that because of my sexuality. but councillors are supposed to work for communities, in which you will find both gay people and animals. to make such comments suggest you are completely out of touch from reality.

    1. paddyswurds 13 Oct 2011, 2:06pm

      ….justice would dictate that he be committed to a secure institution, and kept in solitary confinement for the rest of his days. He is a danger to the human race……

      1. As much as I detest his views and totally agree he is unfit for public office … that does not mean he is mentally ill … People can have abhorrent and incorrect views and not suffer from mental illness …

        1. paddyswurds 14 Oct 2011, 1:52pm

          …Irony! You must be American because your lack of irony is deplorable.

          1. It was the lack of a smiley face or lol that made me read what was written as literal …

          2. paddyswurds 15 Oct 2011, 12:43am

            Didnt think it necessary as the creep clearly isnt a danger to mankind any more than gay people should wish to marry animals…..

          3. @Paddyswurds

            Yes, well…. correct though you are … some comments of a similar nature have been said intentionally on PN without any intentions vis a vis comedy.

  23. JohnWilliam 13 Oct 2011, 1:59pm

    How can you compare gay marriage to bestiality and then claim you are not homophobic? I’m glad he was suspended but i can’t help but wonder how long it will be before the Daily Mail takes his side and tries some nonsense to spin this all against the gay community

    1. I think it was the headline writers of this website that raised the issue of bestiality.

      It’s an easy mistake to make – they even dishonestly put quotation marks around the words ‘sex with animals’ to make one think that’s what he said.

    2. Dr Robin Guthrie 13 Oct 2011, 4:11pm

      In fairness they published the story as is even with Stonewall replies.

      However their comments section is awash with the usual DM homophobic crap.

      un-moderated anti-gay comments allowed as per usual for this rag.

      1. The Daily Mail is the unofficial newspaper of the BNP – what do you expect from those scum?

        They willm defend Maliff – scum sticks together after all.

  24. Headline in today’s paper, in Canada where gay marriage is the law of the land: “Man and dog to wed at city hall. Family of the ‘bride’ high tails it out of town before ceremony”.

    Yes, because bestiality and polygamy have become rampant in EVERY country that has brought about marriage equality up until now.

    All those Norwegian farmers marrying their sows. Those randy Icelanders with their 20 wives. And of course, the polite Canadians, who at least have the decency to clean up after their new spouses when they leave city hall after the ceremony.


    Sometimes, I wonder about the REAL “average intelligence” of the human species. I suspect that it is far lower than we suspect, or would like.

    1. does the Canadian newspaper have a name?

  25. MyLyricalDreams 13 Oct 2011, 2:23pm

    Suspension… Little more than a slap on the wrist and hardly enough to prevent the next prejudicial, homophobic moron from making further outrageous remarks.

    1. Suspension may be the first part of the process to dismissal or expulsion … if its not then the council and local Conservative party are equally as bigoted – we must give them a chance to act and suspension may be the first part of the process of making those decisions

  26. No matter where you live, you can write and ask the local authority to dismiss this Councillor from post here: Wycombe Council – You can also demand the Conservative Party to remove his membership here: Wycombe Conservatives –

  27. Johnwilliam….expect more of this hysteria once the consultation starts. What I want them to do is provide the factual evidence to support their claims. Let them gather information from the ten countries where same-sex marriage is legal and present to the consultation. I think they’d find that the information would yield a big fat nil. They’re intellectualy bankrupt and not fit for a position in government, local or national. I wonder what the dirt is on Malliff, I’m sure some of it has stuck somehwere?? Loud mouthed religious homophobes often have a lot of nasty skeletons in their deep dark closets.

    1. As no religious organisation will be compelled to participate in any
      ceremony what business is it of theirs anyway? These are legal not religious marriages that are being proposed and as we don’t live in a theocracy why are they being consulted?

  28. “crude I concede but no apology.”

    “Mr Malliff later deleted the tweet and apologised.”


  29. Nigel Holland-Williams 13 Oct 2011, 3:51pm

    email the bigot and let him know how we feel.

    1. Happy_chap 14 Oct 2011, 1:01pm

      Or 01494 817949

  30. Keith Bradley-Wilson 13 Oct 2011, 4:21pm


  31. Nigel, thank you for posting his email address. I’ve just sent him my response.

  32. James Baxter 13 Oct 2011, 4:48pm

    He’s not anti-gay. That’s a ridiculous conclusion to draw from a statement like that. He is obviously just pro-bestiality.

    1. He’s as bestial as his gay marriage is like bestiality comment. What an ignorant, bigoted idiot. And he thinks he’s not ant-gay?! Ever hear of cognitive dissonance?

  33. Nothing less than expected, an apology that actually makes it ten times the worse!
    I hope he chokes on this own bile.

    1. Obese-City, Oklahoma 13 Oct 2011, 7:40pm

      He said no apology in the original tweet, so any subsequent apology sounds totally hollow. Just another one of the nasties in the party.

  34. These characters are doing everything to justify the claims made by people like Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Stephen Fry, Daniel Dennett and many others.
    This seems to be an issue that strips away the veneer of “niceness” they like to present to the outside world.

  35. Obese-City, Oklahoma 13 Oct 2011, 7:37pm

    Looks like the type of thuggish hooray Henry that is all too common in the Tory party.

  36. The reprimand of the was right for his racism and defamations, and you should always let them know , the next time after your supspension, you launch another hate attack and defamations, you will be fired on the spot, no tolerance of your evil viscious hateful mean spirited attacks to harm others, you simply keep your mouth off of the gay community, and your hate actions, are be arrested and reprimanded, you get home to your on undone desatersous hetersexual lives and families and marriages and try an help stop some of the rapes and murders and incest an wife beaters there and stop bothering good families of peace, that you hold not a candle stick to in goodness, When you reprimand and suspend the hatemonger, you make it clear if they do it again, they are fired. and its their big evil hate mouths that done it and their evil characters and actions.

  37. The different officials like david cameron and other officials in other countries and cities, are getting acolades for once, because people see a few officials with backbone that they want to believe in and trust for national security, against the evil characters of hate, that lead to horrific abuses and murders and suiceides, its the govermments and parliments positions as well as others positions to always to stand against terrorism and hatred and bigotry is terrorism, the young people will never ever have a good future are a future at all unless they stop these hate monsters, and the other trash in our nations like gansters, rappest and murders, you need, a foundation and structures, in love and humanity, and good will to the people, and you delegate from it and implement to it, with yours, the nations cannot functions now make it without it, the monsters are destroying our nations, and peace and harmony, bad for families , and businesses, and communites, bigotry must be stopped,

  38. Good on Tories suspending this guy. A few years ago they would not have! they have come along way.

  39. He is not anti-gay. He is anti-human. A disgrace.

  40. Why is it, the homophobic ones always look soooo gay?!

    1. In what way does he look “sooo gay”?

  41. Let’s also be perfectly clear: this guy is NOT a “christian” Tory councillor. He may SAY he’s a Christian, but his words and actions speak volumes about just how little he actually knows about actually BEING a Christian.

    He is, in effect, nothing more than a common, garden variety bigot.

    1. True christian v false christian discussions are of interest to no one but christians. The bible is so inconsistent that the term is meaningless. Westboro baptists follow the bible just as much as the most liberal anglican.

      Until you print a bible without inconsistencies and without the obscene filth that riddles it, we’re not interested.

    2. Rubbish – his bigotry is typical of christianity.

      Kind, tolerant and progressive christians are the exception – disgusting bigotry is the norm for the christian cult.

      1. Typical of some Christians ….

      2. In the same way your stereotypical portrayal of all Christians as being anti gay, homophobic people who are “against us” is a bigoted portrayal … have a bigger world view and see that your stereotyping is as bigoted as the worst type of religious leaders

        1. My hatred of religion hurts nobody.

          The fact that I regard the christian cult’s dogmas as pathetic, monstrous and vile does not impact the lives of anybody.

          The christian cultists like this Maliff scumbag is actively seeking to deny me my civil rights.

          Comparing my abhorrence for religion to the homophobia of religion is not a valid comparison, as the christians are engaging in actively destructive behaviour.

          1. Your hatred of religion doesnt hurt me – it concerns me …

            Your hatred of religion and your rabid comments about it may well hurt some who are religious and are pro gay … in the same way that hatred of LGBT people by a religious or non religious person could hurt some gay people …

            It is entirely appropriate to compare your comments as you are engaging in offensive and stereotyping comments about people who actually may support your rights.

            As for Malliff, yes he is a scumbag, yes his views are abhorrent, yes he is bigoted, yes he deserves utter condemnation. But not all people who are religious share his dogma. Your anti-religion dogma appears as zealous and unrelenting as Malliff in his hatred of gay people.

            One type of hatred is not better than another type of hatred.

  42. He thought it , he said it, say no more! Dont try to cover your tracks! You have been revealed for all to see!

  43. why is everyone so bigoted about polygamy on here?

    If everyone consents and it’s not hurting anyone why is it so bad?

    Kind of unfair and it makes some of you guys look just as bad as they are, at least to me.

  44. My post went missing…

    Why are several people so negative about sex with multiple partners and polygamy on here.

    If everyone consents and are adults – I don’t see the problem.

    Makes some people look very hypocritical to complain about bigots when you have your own prejudices based on the same kind of “Christian family-values.”

    1. James, polygamy and whether it’s OK is another matter really. I see what you’re saying and it’s a valid point, but bigots use polygamy to try to distract from the real question of equal marriage rights – ie applying the same law to adults whatever their gender or sexuality. That is, the law as it stands NOW in the UK relating to the civil marriage of two people.

      For my part, at least, that’s the reason why I ignore any issues about polygamy in this debate – because it’s a fundie distraction tactic.

    2. I’ve often thought the same. I don’t see that polygamy is a bad thing in and of itself, but I disapprove of the kind of polygamy you get in certain religions or cultures where it’s one man and as many women as he likes but not the other way round, as a status thing with no ‘love’ or relationship involved other than sex and obedience. If people genuinely want to marry lots of people, then ok. But to my mind, it tends to be human nature to want to pair up with a single person that they love (for as long as it works), at least mainly, so I don’t see why allowing same sex couples to marry should suggest that polygamy is round the corner. They wheel the argument out to further upset traditionalists, but it doesn’t make a lot of sense if most (nearly all?) people fall in love with one person at a time.

      1. At this point in time, James, condoning polygamy while we’re trying to get civil marriage equality enacted for LGBT people is going to give ammunition to our foes. Get same-sex marriage passed first and let society see that this has NOT heralded polygamy, incest or bestiality. Personally, I have no problem with polygamy as long as it’s equal for both genders. Women too should be allowed to have as many husbands as they wish. I don’t see it though becoming popular if it were legalised. Think about the expense and the living conditions, especially when children are involved. It opens a can of worms too with child allowances and what the government pays out, impractical really. I don’t see it gaining popular support among tax payers.

    3. James, I understand your points but first, we MUST get same-sex civil marriage legalised first. If we start demanding polygamy and espousing multiple sex partners, that would be playing into the hands of our enemies who want to ban us from marrying. It’s the sort of language they use to discredit us and justify their reasons for opposing our right to marry. Let them see that our marrying doesn’t affect their marriages and doesn’t herald bestiality, incest or polygamy for that matter. Be careful what you wish for.

  45. As a GING he needs to be careful ?

  46. I don’t want to marry a goat.

    1. From some of the men I have known , a goat would be good company!

  47. Gaga Flash Mob Response Unit 14 Oct 2011, 3:27pm

    Flash Mob in his street!

  48. Have today emailled Baroness Warsi, the chief executive of Wycombe council, the conservative party agent for Wycombe, the standards board for England and Thames Valley Police to seek their views on Malliffs conduct. He is clearly in breach of both the standards board and Wycombe councils code of conduct and arguably committed a hate crime vis a vis a homophobically motivated section 5 or section 4a of the public order act 1996 and this could be viewed as aggravated under section 146 of the criminal justice act 2003.

    Be interesting to see their responses …

    1. Well the police are interested in taking a statement and considering whether this is a hate crime …

      1. Lets hope that they do prosecute the oxygen thief,

  49. Jock S. Trap 5 Nov 2011, 4:45pm

    Enough already just sack the man.

    1. David Millar 13 Nov 2011, 10:45am

      Oh no, lets have him in post a bit longer and wait for the next outburst.Th
      More likley the standards Board has something to go on then…..

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.