Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Policing minister Nick Herbert ‘rather fed up’ with being told civil partnerships are enough for gay couples

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Great that he’s so confident about it all happening so quickly. Wonderful.

  2. Hear, Hear!

  3. That There Other David 31 May 2012, 12:44pm

    Well done him. A very articulate way of expressing why now is the right time to do this. Unfortunately the interview being in the Evening Standard means it’s likely only going to be read by those who support marriage equality anyway, but with any luck it will get picked up in syndication and appear in other regional newspapers.

    1. As most of the decision makers spend time in London and probably take note of what’s in the Standard, it’s as good a platform as any.

      And in any case, some of our strongest support is a long way from London (didn’t I read about strong support in the NE?)

  4. It’s not only been told that we should be happy with CPs though…what about all the other nasty things some of the Tory MPs and bishops have come out with..

    I’m bloody sick of it as well and making us wait until 2015 doesn’t fill me with great joy as well.

    1. Indeed – people like NIck Herbert are hiding the true colours of the homophobic Tory Party.

      Marriage equality when it arrives will be thanks to the opposition (Labour) voting in favour of it.

      Thanks to the homophobic bigotry of about 100 Tory MP’s the coalition cannot introduce marriage equality on its own.

      1. enough of the political point scoring. there are supporters and objectors from every major party. Don’t try and use this a platform to boost Labour. last time I checked the Lib Dems introduced this bill and have all their MP’s on side (partly due to whip but also down to it being official Party policy) but of course you miss that out cause it smacks in the face of your political agenda.
        grow up and open your eyes to the changes within the tory party…is it perfect…hell no…is it better….definitely. I don’t vote Tory but I appreciate its evolution over the last few decades. many old guard and bigots still remain but over time will depreciate as society scorns such attitudes more and more.

        1. It’s not ‘political point scoring’

          David Cameron has promised to introduced marriage equality, but is allowing the bigot MP’s in his party to vote against it (about 100 MP’s).

          Therefore it is a statement of fact to mention that if marriage equality is introduced by this government then it will be in spite of rather than because of the Homophobic Tory Party.

          1. dAVID, the fight will be in the Lords – not the Commons, which will be a slam-dunk. Nick Herbert is as much a member of the Tory party as are the rabid homophobes – and he has a ministerial post. He’s not covering for them, he’s fighting our corner from the inside – whatever our political ties (and mine aren’t Tory) we need to be supporting him not jibing at him.

          2. Sister Mary Clarence 31 May 2012, 2:50pm

            Interested to know where you’re getting those figures from, and you seem to be oblivious of the strong support for marriage equality that has come out from senior members of the Tory party.

            You might also like to go back and look at what David Cameron had to say on the subject before being elected as PM.

            I’m guessing you might be a Labour supporter possibly.

            Perhaps you could talk us through their position on marriage equality when they were in government?

      2. Hardly. It will be thanks to the Lib Dems pushing the issue of marriage equality and many in the Tory party having moved on from the days of Section 28.

        There are certainly a lot of Tories who aren’t in favour, but there are also Labour MP’s who feel the same way. Thankfully many in the party are progressive and have stopped with the “civil partnerships are enough” rubbish they were spouting while they were in government.

        When it comes to the vote, it will be entirely cross-party, and as much thanks to those in government as to the opposition. It may only pass with them, but to say it’s thanks to them is hardly accurate.

        1. Wrong.

          There are approximately 100 Tory MP’s who are neo-fascist bigots ie they will be voting against marriage equality.

          Marriage equality (if it happens during this government) will be in spite of the Tory Party, rather than because of the Tory Party.

          The Tory Party remains the party of neo-fascist homophobic bigotry.

          1. And who are these approximately 100 Tory MPs? This shadowy cast of bigots who lurk on the Tory backbenches? Rather than work off some C4M/DM rhetoric designed to give some credibility to their argument let’s deal in facts. Yes some Tories are opposing, as are some Labour, and no doubt elsewhere but as things stand according to the C4EM those in favour are almost four times that of those against. So equality will be in spite of the bigots(nothing to do with tory/non tory)

          2. Sister Mary Clarence 31 May 2012, 2:53pm

            Events on the 1922 committee at the moment kind of indicate that Cameron has significant back bench support, with those opposing equal marriage getting booted out of key roles, so I think most of what you’re saying is made up rubbish mate.

          3. Also if the Tories won 306 seats at the last election and there ARE approximately 100 MPs ready to vote down marriage equality then by my knowledge of maths that would mean there’s still a majority of Tories onside. So your claim that equality would be voted in in spite of the Tories doesn’t really add up does it?

          4. It doesnt matter how many Tories vote against as long as all 42 Tory MPs (who last time I checked – it may be more now) had told C4EM they will vote for equall marriage, along with the Green MP, all but 1 or 2 Lib Dems and 90% of Labour MPs – we then have a majority.

  5. Robert in S. Kensington 31 May 2012, 1:08pm

    I second Nick Herbert’s statement enthusiastically. He’s absolutely right, what if straight people were told that they’d have to have a CP instead of marraige. We all know what the response would be overwhelmingly which would prove that they are not equal no matter how many rights of marriage the confer. I bet if there were a move to replace civil marriage with CPs, there would be public uproar and again, we know why don’t we? I’m glad he’s said this, long overdue and it can’t be said enough.

  6. Well spoken Nick, of course it is purely about equality.
    There are some nasty religious bigots behind C4M who are totally opposed to equality who claim it is enough for gay couples to have 2nd class civil partnerships, these are the exact same people and groups who were opposed to the introduction of civil partnerships so no wonder they don’t want full marriage equality, they don’t want same sex relationships to be recognised at all.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 31 May 2012, 1:46pm

      Absolutely right. Most of them don’t even want civil partnerships but note how they conveniently use it as sufficient to deny us access to equal marriage. It’s also disingenuous of the religious cults using the same tactic knowing that even they don’t even want gays to have any legal protections. I remember their opposition during the consultation saying how they will harm marriage. This is nothing more than an exercise in bigotry on their part, really disgusting. Why is it I wonder that they just don’t grasp the difference between civil and religious?

  7. Why has Cameron ditched the whipped vote in this issue then- if he is so committed to equal civil marriage!

    1. Because about half of the Tory MP’s are neo-fascist bigot scum.

      If Cameron was to introduce a whip then it would split the party in 2.

      That would be perfect – Edward Leigh and Nadine Dorries etc etc could then join the BNP party – which is their natural home thanks to their homophobic extremism.

      1. That There Other David 31 May 2012, 6:53pm

        If they did that it would give the BNP (or more likely UKIP) representation in Parliament. Hardly a situation I’d describe as “perfect”.

    2. Duh – straightforward political expediency. He doesn’t need them in the Commons to get this through, so why aggravate them? Better to allow them to let off their bilious steam and move forward regardless, than to face internal challenges to his leadership.

    3. Sister Mary Clarence 31 May 2012, 2:58pm

      A whipped vote allows a few old bigots to defy the whip and it becomes headline news.

      If he doesn’t whip, the same old bigots will vote against equal marriage and the headline is half what it would have been. Its then very open to see who is behind the modernised Tory ethos he’s pushing and who isn’t. Much easier to see who he want to enable to do well in the future, and who is going to get their marching orders.

  8. Good for him.

    I am rather fed up being told that those MP’s who voted for CP discrimination are ‘brave’.

    I am also fed up being told that voting for marriage equality is ‘brave’.

    It is not a matter of bravery. Equality and equal civil rights are markers of a decent, humane society.

    It does not require ‘bravery’. It requires human decency.

    I hope Nick Herbert supports the expulsion of the many, many neo-fascist MP’s within the Tory party who support segregation and discrimination.

  9. Can we have it sooner rather than later? Me and my fiance are waiting!

  10. Great to see strong, dynamic, and determined words from the minister.

    There is no justification for the bigotry and inequality that people like Bone, McCartney and certain religious extremists seek to perpetuate. No justification whatsoever and parliament will change it – soon.

    1. As a gay man, Nick Herbert should also be loudly condemning the neo-fascist homophobia of so many of his Tory colleagues.

      Then again, in that regard he seems are silent as the absurdly irrelevant LGBTory Group in actually bringing his party colleagues into the 21st century.

      1. He has condemned Peter Bone and others.

        He has not been silent.

        Your suggestion that he has been is fictitious and I presume is based on a desire to paint a Tory politician in a negative light.

        The issue of equal marriage is much more important than party politics.

        Herbert has been forcefully strong in his comments on equal marriage. (I strongly disagree with him on other issues! but on this issue he is clear, honest and direct in his approach, suggesting otherwise is wrong).

  11. Mr Herbert seems to have got the measure of it. We are fed up of this vile hardly-diguised homophobia dressed up as reasoned and/or faith-based argument.

    A useful and welcome contribution to the campaign

  12. Garry Cassell 31 May 2012, 3:17pm

    There’s never a better time than the present to do it…why wait for more trash from the bigots(clergy)..let’s get going on it RIGHT NOW!!!

  13. Robert in S. Kensington 31 May 2012, 3:34pm

    I would like to hear a straight Tory MP to endorse exactly what Nick Herbert has said, hopefully more will step forward and do just that.

  14. Piper Peter 31 May 2012, 4:46pm

    Good- we are fed u of being told this and that about gay marriage- let’s just get on with it.
    The anti-bigots will never be satisfied best put them aside. The major churches are intrinsically disordered, no matter how they dress it up with homophobia.;All cardinals,archbishops and bishops are disordered.
    Good for Nick he can be our role model anytime.

  15. Jack Mitchell 31 May 2012, 11:45pm

    Sorry, but am I to take it that the solemn pledges I took with my partner at our Civil Partnership are inadequate and seond rate? What are we to do when “Gay Marriage” becomes law? Do it all over again?

    1. Civil partnerships are only considered second rate because it is the only choice available at the moment. when gay marriage becomes law hopefully you won’t have to go through another ceremony but just choose to ‘upgrade’ to marriage if so desired. I personally don’t want either and am happy ‘living in sin’ ;-)

  16. Rich (original) 1 Jun 2012, 1:09am

    who cares….

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all