Reader comments · Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone: Equal marriage will not be in Queen’s Speech · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone: Equal marriage will not be in Queen’s Speech

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Ignorant right wing tory papers (as read by drooling fascist troglodytes) are blaming marriage equality for the epic shafting the ConDems got.

    This argument fails to consider the fact that the voters went left and Labour supports marriage equality. But then intelligence isn’t exactly a hallmark of their readers.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 2:54pm

      The Tories will lose if they don’t support it. I can’t imagine backbenchers wanting to see their party defeated in 2015 over this one issue alone as equal marriage supporter Tory MP Francis Maude intimated some time ago. I think once the consultation is over, a bill drafted and then read in Parliament for the first and second time, some will evolve and do what is pragmatic and vote for it for party unity and a successful re-election.

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 3:10pm

      Exactly right Valsky. The Tories have been under attack long before Cameron announced his support last October. As our American cousins say…”it’s the economy, stupid.”

    3. Paddyswurds 6 May 2012, 3:36pm

      Actually Valksey, the swing to to the opposition is largely in keeping with what normally happens to the ruling party in midterm elections and was largely expected By Cameron. The drubbing the LibDems got on the other hand was for helping the Tories into Downing st in the first place…

      1. It was a big swing though.

    4. what they have ignored is that local councillors have no influence on parliament. lol

    5. Labour doesn’t support marriage equality, mind you. Miliband does, but his party have nothing to say on the subject – ditto the Cameron and the Tories. Only the Lib Dems actually have this as a thing they formally support.

  2. Foster Twelvetrees 6 May 2012, 2:42pm

    Never trust the Tories.

  3. Mark Pack 6 May 2012, 2:45pm

    Sorry, but you’ve got this story all wrong. It was never announced or plans that equal marriage would be in this Queen’s Speech. The commitment was always to legislation in this Parliament and that is being kept to.

    Saying that something that was not due to be in this Queen’s Speech is now indeed not going to be in the Queen’s Speech is certainly not a change and in fact not even really news :)

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 2:48pm

      Absolutely right about that! I think the resistance we’re seeing from the right wing and religious nutters has more to do with their knowing that equal marriage is inevitable. Opposition has been the same in every country where it has been introduced, so this is a storm in a teacup.

  4. Robert in S. Kensington 6 May 2012, 2:45pm

    Although it would have been nice to have it in the Queen’s speech, I’m not going to worry too much about that. Of course, the hatemongers will have a field day and spin it to outer space deluding themselves into believing they’ve scored points. The laugh will be on them in the end.

  5. I wondered when old fig Leaf Featherstone would be trotted out like the obedient puppy she is to cover up the Tory’s wavering

  6. Craig Denney 6 May 2012, 3:25pm

    How long do you think you can string us along for Mr Cameron?

    or on the other hand;

    Look at the damage this is doing to the church the longer you string this out?

    It’s a toss-up between the destruction of the church or waiting a bit longer for marriage equality.

  7. I wonder what the Queens view is?

  8. The Tory sky certainly didn’t fall in in when Boris ordered the anti-gay posters off the buses: he won the London mayoral election just a few weeks later and did far better than Tory candidates in general.

    Instead of deferring or abandoning it, the Coalition should bring in marriage equality NOW. Just do it !

    Come the election in three years’ time, society wouldn’t have collapsed so the religious bigots wouldn’t be able to predict gloom and doom: it would be a done deal and there would be no mileage for them in continuing to complain. Any anti-Tory campaigns would only benefit Labour, so they’d only be shooting themselves in the foot.

    1. They can’t “just do it” go familiarize yourself with how acts of parliament are made and you will see that there are MANY MANY stages which take around a year to implement we are looking at april 2013 at the earliest and 2015 at the latest (because the House of Lords like to be difficult). Its frustrating to read people whinging about how long its taking when in reality its only at the consultation stage (and not been there long either).

      1. Craig Denney 7 May 2012, 10:40am

        I think the Tories will drop marriage equality when it gets to the House of Lords and will not try and push it through.

        I still don’t trust these Tories.

        1. They have no reason to drop it, to do so wouldn’t follow suit with their LGBT policy – and the HoL can only deny it twice the fact that its been said by ministers again and again by 2015 heavily suggests that they intend on pushing it through whether the Lords agree or not.

  9. Any reasonable person (whether they like the process the government have decided to follow or not) would have seen that the current consultation does not end till after the Queens Speech, thus the likelihood of including equal marriage in this Queens Speech was remote.

    All that is happening is that right wing extremists are feeling the pinch at their nice little mindsets being challenged and they are making a noise.

    The reality is that in a poll published today over 60% of the UK population support gay couples having civil and/or religious marriages.

    The government has not changed its stance on equal marriage.

    Fossils of the Tory party like Howarth and the Chief Whip might think they can stop progress – they can’t.

    There is not one change to the plans for equal marriage.

  10. This was what Simon Hughes said on Newsnight (4th May 2012) –

    Simon Hughes: …. We will be judged at the end of five years. If growth has come, if unemployment is down, if employment’s up – that will be the test. And our job now is to absolutely concentrate on every single lever of growth and increase fairness. And if we can deliver a fairer Britain – cos Labour didn’t …

    Kirsty Wark: So you’re not going to concentrate on constitutional change and gay marriage? We’ll talk about that, coming on in a minute.

    Simon Hughes: They’re absolutely secondary issues ..

    Kirty Wark: secondary issues

    Simon Hughes: .. to the central issue of Britain sorting out the economic mess, and giving a fairer Britain to people …

    1. to be fair they are “secondary issues” to the heterosexual population, so they will focus on something that will benefit everyone but it doesn’t mean that they can’t do multiple things at once – did you see the size of that “Protection of Freedoms Act” that was passed its not just about removing convictions for consensual gay sex – its huge with 11 acts amendments in just the last document between house of lords and house of commons.

    2. Peter Cat 6 May 2012, 9:26pm

      They’re not secondary issues – they should be at the very heart of “giving a fairer Britain to people”.

      1. The problem is if they introduce equal marriage but they do not fix the exact problems that he mentioned then people will not vote for them, people voted Tory because they wanted the mess of an economy fixed, they wanted mass unemployment fixed (all of which existed before they took over) not because of their equal marriage policy the fact is they are addressing an issue which never should have arisen labour should have done this in the 10 years they had in power.

        1. tory economic plan isn’t working, we are back in the recession with high unemployment and without a plan for economic growth.

          of course they will be preoccupied with economy and whether they go for equal marriage or not, improving economy alone will be enough for them to win next election.

          there is no incentive for them to introduce equal marriage. the worst scenario for them in 2015 would be weak economy with equal marriage legalised.

          1. Robert in S. Kensington 7 May 2012, 2:54pm

            They can’t win without the gay vote if they’re thinking of re-election, assuming equal marriage fails the HoL. Just look at the results of the last general election, not even a mandate. Austerity measures already in place do nothing. Cutting benefits, taking money out of the hands of the public (spending power) is a recipe for disaster. Every recession in the history of economics has demonstrated that spending one’s way out of it is what brings about recovery. Investment in infrastructure, manufacturing has a trickle down effect and are the two biggest job creators. The more jobs created, the more revenue pouring into the treasuries via taxes that help diminish the national debt as well as unemployment. This government must pass equal marriage otherwise it won’t be electable either way.

          2. we was never out of recession kane, labour left us in recession and it takes years to build yourself back out. Its a natural cycle of the economy to recess, slump, then grow and hit the high, then to recess again so far in history the recession has been less and less worse each time. How do you know theres not a plan for economic growth, at the moment they are trying to reduce the nations debts, whats the point in growth if you don’t get to keep any of it?

          3. james there is no point in focusing on debt reduction without implementing plan for growth. lack of growth means no jobs, no jobs means less tax money in the budget and higher social security bill and since there is less money from taxes government has to borrow more money on the international markets, which in the end defeats the purpose of reducing the debt in the first place. trust me i understand the mechanics of recession. couple quarters ago we had very small growth but now we are again in the negative in other words this government took us back into recession

  11. Ok , I accept that “gay” marriage won’t be in the Queen’s speech, but just simply saying before 2015 is a bit vague …..surely we know an exact dae when the consultation ends and some smart person could actually work out a timetable when a bill could be drafted etc etc.

    Any idiot could just say before the next election. Lynne Featherstone did also say back in 2011 in the Church times that only “baby steps” would be taken on gay marriage and from where I’m sitting she hasn’t deviated from those tiny baby steps

    1. the issue is not with the House of Commons it is with the House of Lords who can reject bills and make the House of Commons wait a year before presenting them again (this can happen twice) and there is also a “ping-pong” stage where the bill is sent back and forth between the Houses. So 2015 is the absolute latest that it will happen.

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 7 May 2012, 2:59pm

        Unless of course Cameron were to invoke the Parliament Act overriding the Lords. If not, delaying it until after 2015 will guarantee a Labour win and lose the Tories gay voters, something they can’t afford to lose.

        1. 2015 is the latest, and nobody would invoke the Parliament Act on this issue, it makes you look like a dictator something which the religious nuts and labour worshippers would love to happen. Thats like saying the Queen is going to invoke her emergency powers whilst Parliament is not sitting to make a few new laws (there’s a way of doing it but in reality it will never be done)

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 7 May 2012, 2:57pm

      I believe the consultation ends on June 14, 2012, john. A first draft of a bill I think will probably emerge in the Autumn or towards the end of the year.

  12. Perhaps it’s dawned on them they won’t be here in 5 years so it doesn’t really matter. They may only have 1-2 years left to line the pockets of the top 3% of earners.

    1. Don’t worry, Labour will carry on lining the pockets of the wealthiest again once they’re back in.

  13. Why does the BBC keep talking about what “ordinary people” want? They seem to be suggesting we’re not ordinary people.

    1. Ken Chekwas 6 May 2012, 7:17pm

      Of course homosexuals are not ‘ordinary’.

      How many times have you heard someone ‘coming out’ as an heterosexual?

      1. How many times have you heard of homosexuals oppressing heterosexuals?

        1. The minority cannot oppress the majority and the ‘abnormals’ cannot oppress the ‘normals’.

          Homosexuality is an aberration and no amount of laws and ‘gay ‘marriage’ can change that!

          1. perhaps the situation in Syria and Bahrain will help you to understand why you are wrong on the concept of oppression

            and your opinion on sexuality expressed in a village idiot capacity is frankly irrelevant

          2. What happened in syria and Bahrain? Formula One was still held in Bahrain and the syrian President is still in power. The UN has been unable to send forces to syria because it was vetoed by Russia and China. In other words, the need the absolute MAJORITY of the UN security council before the can protect the ‘MINORITY’ syrian rebels.

          3. So the human rights abuses in Syria do not matter because Russia vetoed it?

            Actually a majority in the security council voted for action in Syria – perhaps Ken should learn the practices and principles of the UN before commenting on them!

          4. Ken

            It must be hideous to live with such a bigoted world view as you choose to live in.

            I anticipate by the end of this decade around 50 countries globally will have legal civil marriage for same sex partners.

          5. ken im not surprised that you didnt get it, after all it takes certain degree of iq level to engage in thinking process.

            both in syria and bahrain minority shia goverments oppress majority of sunni muslims citizens, so you are proven wrong in your earlier assessment.

            your village is desperately suffering from missing its idiot

          6. You hear that, Ken? MINORITY Shia governments.

            Incidentally, blue eyes are an aberration too – do you refer to blue-eyed people in those terms? No, thought not.

  14. Peter & Michael 6 May 2012, 6:18pm

    Well. the tories have backed down on Gay Marriage, no doubt they have now lost the Gay vote and the next election. Yes, as George Osborne has said that they are focused on the economy and foreign aid, yet the Equality of a minority has been dashed. One can bet that the Lliberal democrats will have lost votes at the next election due to their treatment of the student population, the conservatives will not have the grey vote nor the Gay vote giving Labour the next election success. We shall be writing to our conservative mp telling him that their promises to the Gay community were worth nothing !

    1. Ken Chekwas 6 May 2012, 7:15pm

      Gay votes are insignificant.How many are they again?

      1. Many more than there are regular church goers!

    2. where does it say they have backed down? go read the article fully and you will see that Lynne Featherstone expressly says “NO UTURN ON EQUAL MARRIAGE” … read the whole article not just the first few lines.

  15. Barry William Teske 6 May 2012, 6:30pm

    Rinse and Repeat (Don’t for get to remove that FABULOUS JEWLERY)
    ” People who concern themselves with the rights of other adults who engage in consensual acts involving sex, love, and/or eating croissants together are damaged and in pain. ” Rob Delaney (full creds to Mr Rob Delaney)

  16. Of course equal marriage won’t be in the Queen’s speech this week, the consultation has another month to run. Does anyone expect any decision to be made halfway through a statutory consultation?

    Would you like a Council to approve a huge development next to your house before the end of the public consultation?

    This is a democracy – we consult on changes to our environment or society, listed to all consultees and proceed with a recommendation. Only totalitarian fascist or communist states impose measures without consultation.

    1. I dont seem to recall anything in the US constitution that requires consultation on matters being legislated in congress. They do set up committees to investigate issues but it isn’t mandatory. And the US is argubaly more democratic than the UK… it doesn’t have a non-elected body, such as the House of Lords, that can veto bills passed in the lower house. So your reference to totalitarian states is hyperbolic nonsense.

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 7 May 2012, 5:50pm

        I’m all for abolishing the House of Lords altogether. It’s not necessary, irrelevant and undemocratic and by no means represents the people.

  17. I’m one of life’s pessimists, but my prediction is that gay marriage proposals will be in 2013 Queen Speech. It will be a free vote, House of Commons will vote for it, the Lords against.
    With election approaching Cameron won’t dare antagonise the tory right, so won’t use parliament act. He will be able to say he kept to his word to bring it forward this parliament. Gay marriage in next ten years but not yet.

  18. I am one of life’s pessimists. My prediction is gay marriage will be in 2013 Queen’s Speech.
    The House of Commons will vote for it, in a free vote however the Lords will vote against. With election approaching he will not dare use the parliament act and antagonise the tory right.
    He will be able to say he kept to his commitment to bring it forward this parliament. There will be gay marriage in next ten years but not yet.

    1. Oops, so good I said it twice lol! Thought it said initial message hadn’t been sent!

      1. If he wants to keep the coalition together he may have to use the parliament act to prevent the collapse of the government.

        1. not really. lib dems know that they would be the biggest looser if coalition collapsed

          1. I suspect there is a plan at the back of the minds of the LIb Dems to garner support from their grass roots by forcing legislation through in the second half of the government by threatening to withdraw (and if need be actually causing the government to collapse). The issue of gay rights may be one of several they are prepared to act on. (Although I would have liked them to have shown balls earlier in the coalition with education fees etc).

          2. It appears my prediction of the Lib Dems withdrawing from the coalition may be realistic if todays articles by The Times political editor are correct.

            Would Labour try to form a coalition with the Lib Dems to retain a stable government?

  19. Yvette Cooper knows damn well that Parliamentary process takes a year to implement at the very least so why is she demanding it to be done this year. No doubt a deliberate spread of misinformation to make it look to the public (who do not know about the law making process) that the Tories do not support it.

    1. and the fact me pointing out she knows that it would not be done before the end of the year because of due process being voted down proves how many sheep there are that believe everything thats said.

  20. Alex Hunter 7 May 2012, 5:17am

    The Tories are now showing their true colours. The first whiff of electoral defeat and the backbenchers want to drop gay rights like a hot potato!
    It shows that underlying attitudes have not changed in the Tory grassroots: they’re just as homophobic as ever.

    Similar story in City Hall: Boris seems to have quietly ditched support for gay rights to appeal to his right-flank.
    Dropping the annual Pride reception in 2010 sent the message that gay men and lesbians are no longer welcome in City Hall.
    Just because he wore a pink cowboy hat doesn’t make Boris a reliable supporter of gay rights!
    It seems to me he was a fair-weather friend; whereas Ken was a friend for all seasons.

    1. Was Ken a friend for all seasons when he cosied up to preachers of homophobic hatred?

  21. Well being deemed a second hand citizen only worthy of a percentage of the rights others enjoy, I think it is only fitting and proper that I only pay that percentage of tax.

    1. You have full rights of marriage like every other citizen

      1. I presume you are trying to callously and insidiously suggest that I can marry someone of the oppositie sex as much as any other person. Thats not quite the point is it? I can not marry the man I love whereas a heterosexual man can marry the person he loves. Emotion and love are important concepts in marriage (defined in law of the marriage act and in the vows made to each other – also for those who choose to believe in religion mentioned in various holy books as a prerequisite for marriage).

        I presume you would fight for freedom of religion, Ken?

        51 countries outlaw being Christian. Although every person in those countries has the right to choose religion – just not Christianity. Of course, everyone has the same rights there – to choose a different religion (not Christianity). As everyone is treated the same, why should we be worried about it?

        Of course, equality is not about uniformity its about equal value – not that bigots would understand this.

  22. tories know that priority for most voters is a recovered economy. unless they can be absolutely sure that this can be achieved at the end of this term there wont be any advantage for them in introducing equal marriage.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 7 May 2012, 12:40pm

      Well, then, if they lose what little gay support they have by dropping the entire marriage issue, then yes, they will be defeated in 2015 no matter if the economy picks up or not. Did you see the results of the last general election? Labour will probably form the next government.

      1. They have said expressly that they are not dropping it, wheres all this paranoia coming from? Gay people do vote based on other factors such as economy, unemployment, education, etc.

  23. POSITIVE DEVIANTS LONDON 7 May 2012, 11:36am

    A Special Equalities Award for the Management of Crusaid who all kept their jobs after the following;
    Crusaid Head of Dept Charity e-mail to HIV Police Panel Member…..
    “pendantic,uncooperative and causing stress hassle and pain to alot of people” …..If Crusaid is so bad get another Job with a better employer”

    Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 15:12:56 +0000

    I want to see the two of you in the meeting room tomorrow at 10 am. No excuses. I sincerely hope that this email conversation has not been widely distributed.
    Robin Brady
    Chief Executive

  24. POSITIVE DEVIANTS LONDON 7 May 2012, 11:38am

    A Award for THT’s Legal Advisor destroying Crusaids Gagging Order with Police Panel Member from 2004 Theres Equality for you..Now that The Terrence Higgins Trust has “destroyed” Crusaids Compromise Agreement (Gagging Order) inherited in the merger with Crusaid as per their e-mall below how was Charity money used to pay off Crusaids Staff ? ? ? and how much ? ? ?

    Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:23:37 +0000
    Subject: RE: Fao Amanda Bearman THT Legal Advisor – Data Request for Data Being Destroyed by THT

    Dear Mr xxxxxx,

    I’m afraid I am unable to assist with your request as I did not consider the documents, did not keep a list and they are all now destroyed.

    Kind regards

    Amanda Bearman


    1. You expect us to believe these are genuine diocuments


  25. POSITIVE DEVIANTS LONDON 7 May 2012, 11:51am

    The London HIV Charity Sector are desparte to cover up Gay Men having to have AIDS Diagnosis in Staff Appraisals in London HIV/AIDS Charity Sector, until a Police Panel Member advised The Charity Sector it was wrong and Illegal. The “Charity” Sector used Charity Money to pay them off to keep quiet – theres equality for you all

    Equality = Gay Men having their AIDS Diagnosis in Staff Appraisals in London AIDS Charity Sector LOL 8-)

    The LGBT Media have been desperately trying to cover up this story after the wrong member of staff had someone elses AIDS Diagnosis in their Staff Appraisal – a Police Panel Member no less !!!!!!!!!!!!!

  26. POSITIVE DEVIANTS LONDON 7 May 2012, 11:54am

    Crusaid “make redundant” staff that came up with it maybe illegal for staff to have AIDS Diagnosis in staff appraisals in 2004 – theres equality for youBernard Forbes []
    >Sent: Tue 2005/03/29 03:48 PM
    >To: Robin Brady
    >Subject: FW: Further favour>
    >Further to below, I am told a letter regarding Walk for Life was received by
    >xxxxxxxon 23 March.
    >Mailshots to xxxx are a waste of Crusaid’s time and money, all they do is
    >wind him up and he then gets on to me.
    >His walker ID is 19882, if that helps to get him off your lists altogether,
    >while we try to help him get his life back together and move on.
    >Best wishes

    1. Looks like complete fabrication to me.

  27. POSITIVE DEVIANTS LONDON 7 May 2012, 11:58am

    Equality = Crusaid pays off Staff with Charity Money to keep QuietCRUSAID PAYS HIV POLICE PANEL MEMBER AND STAFF
    After Registered Charity Crusaid declaring on the Registered Charity UK Coalition of People Living with HIV/Aids Charity funded website Positive Nation’s Positive Voices “we’ve been upfront and honest” a few months after signing a Compromise Agreement which prevents to Charity from being upfront and honestDated 23rd July 2004 signed by Robin Brady CEO of Crusaid
    “The Charity on its own behalf and on behalf of all Associaciated Companies shall without any admission or liability whatsoever, as compensation for loss of employment,pay to the Employee the sum of £_________ inclusive of his statutory redundancy payment…”
    4. Settlement and Waiver
    The Employee believes he may have statutory claims and therefore could bring proceedings, against the Charity or any Associated Company,or its or their Trustees,employees or officerrs or former truste

  28. POSITIVE DEVIANTS LONDON 7 May 2012, 12:00pm

    Equality = Apology from Crusaid Trustees
    Congratulations to The Trustees of Crusaid for theatening a Police Panel Member with a HIGH COURT INJUNCTION and then apologising for writing to them for Money ALL HUSHED UP
    Subject: RE: Crusaid – Letter from Crusaid March 2007 sent to me in error
    Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 13:56:34 +0100
    I have contacted Crusaid. They do not know why your name is still on the circulation list for Walk for Life.It should have been removed . I have requested the same forthwith. I would imagine the list is separate to the main contact list. Apologies this was not done before. However as you know this is a circular – altho’ you should not receive it.

  29. POSITIVE DEVIANTS LONDON 7 May 2012, 12:07pm

    Trustees of Crusaid pay out Thousands in Compensation to Police Panel Member in 2004 if they agree to destroy dodgy e-mails and documents Charity sweet Charity

    London AIDS charity Sector declares “transparent upfront and honest” in 2005 Gay Press involved in cover-ups = Equality LOL

  30. POSITIVE DEVIANTS LONDON 7 May 2012, 12:09pm

    Equality = Lots of Money raised for people living with HIV/AIDS never made it to them….Millions when the truth comes out ?
    Why did so little money go to people living with HIV/AIDS ? raised by Crusaid ?

    As of last March, Crusaid was £22,000 in debt and chief executive Jordan Hay said the recession had caused a “decrease” in income.

    Crusaid offers funding to people living with HIV and suffering financial hardship. In 2008/9, it distributed £374,774 to 2,106 individuals. This was out of a total income of £1.6 million.

    The charity spends just 39.9 per cent of its total spending on charitable activities,

  31. POSITIVE DEVIANTS LONDON 7 May 2012, 12:12pm

    Crusaid Trustees threaten Police Panel Member with High Court Injunction without hesitation – then long closed LGBT Media covers up story from LGBT Community – theres equality for you !

  32. POSITIVE DEVIANTS LONDON 7 May 2012, 12:14pm

    Crusaid Trustees (Rich Gay Tory Boys) claim High Court Injunction threat “long closed” all of a sudden and claim Police Panel Member”Marvellous” person ! ! ! !
    Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:52:53 +0100
    Dear XXXXXXX
    I have written to you today. We discussed this matter…. An error occurred. I dealt with it swiftly. … you are going on the walk….which is MARVELLOUS!

    1. If ever a post could confirm the acute mental imbalance of an individual, yours would most definitely qualify.

      Of you’re what we’re up against, then we’ve already won

  33. Dr Robin Guthrie 7 May 2012, 12:16pm


    You truly are insane………….

    1. Caped crusaider 7 May 2012, 2:04pm

      Must be upsetting for the Gay Doctor that was on the Board of Trustees of Crusaid ? ? ?

      First the Gag you with Charity Money – then they write asking for Donations and feedback and un gag you but you get to keep the Thousands paid to keep quiet about the AIDS Charity Scandals

      Sounds Great ! Good to see money raised for people living with HIV used so wisely

    2. Caped crusaider 7 May 2012, 2:06pm

      Good to see Positive Deviants London being “transparent upfront and honest” with People living with HIV/AIDS in the UK – a tough job but someone had to do it


      1. Odd how you have to post a reply on your own comment. You’re not even bright (or sane!) enough to hide the fact you’re the same person! LOL!

        Get help. Really, get help.

    3. ACT UP LONDON SILENCE = POVERTY 7 May 2012, 2:10pm

      Transparent upfront and Honest with People Living with HIV/AIDS in the UK – Well done Positive Deviants London its about time

      Shame it cost £90,000-00 to close down London AIDS Charity UKC”poor records and book keeping, no trusts set up” along with the £200,000-00″ lost on “failed vanity fundraising events by UKC Management

  34. ACT UP LONDON SILENCE = POVERTY 7 May 2012, 2:15pm

    First the Trustees of Crusaid threaten a Police Panel Member with a High Court Injunction then present them wiv a medal for fundraising – the Gay Media have been desperate to keep the story out the press.

    Well done Positive Deviants London for being Transparent Upfront and Honest with People Living with HIV/AIDS in UK

    1. What are you trying to say – it sounds like the rambling of someone needing sectioning.

      1. B L Z bub 7 May 2012, 5:04pm


        Talking to ones self can be deemed eccentric, however in this case the guy is just an @rse.

    2. GulliverUK 7 May 2012, 7:37pm

      In terms of charities NOTHING, but NOTHING, should ever be swept under the carpet or covered up in any way. I don’t understand exactly what has gone on but we do all know that sometimes charities do not always behave in the way in which we all want them to. An obvious example is Stonewall who were originally against pushing for equal marriage and had to be poked with a cattle prod.

  35. GulliverUK 7 May 2012, 7:34pm

    Should gay marriage be legalised?
    Telegraph poll

    Lynn Featherstone has said Gay couples will be guaranteed the legal right to marry before the next general election.

  36. Jay knightsbridge 8 May 2012, 4:10pm

    Its nice to see someone finally being transparent upfront and honest with the lgbt community at last :-) perhaps the full story on pinknews

  37. Jay knightsbridge 8 May 2012, 4:19pm

    Well done the police panel member ! Can we hear how they also stopped a aids charitydatabase of gay men with aids ending up all over london! Aftr ukc emailed it all over london.

  38. Jay knightsbridge 8 May 2012, 4:28pm

    Equality= one day people will be told what happened to the london aids charity UKC’S £75,0 00-00 rescue package ??:-) not more money down the drain n wasted:-x

  39. OverTheMountain 4 Sep 2012, 7:39pm

    Just stringing us along, they are just going to continue to talk about it while not acting on it.

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.