Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Cotswolds: Anger as council shuts down discussion on equal marriage motion

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Robert in S. Kensington 10 Jul 2012, 5:56pm

    Yet again, more Tory bigotry rearing its ugly head. They’ll do all they can to sabotage equal marriage.

    1. James Justice 10 Jul 2012, 6:23pm

      It is difficult to see what it has to do with Cotswolds District Council. On this occasion I think the Tory councillor is correct to say that council meetings should be about delivering services to the people of the Cotswolds.

      1. Fair point, yet some of his constituents will be LGBT. In or out of the closet.

        1. Very true, but that still does not make this the domain of local government.

          1. Anti Widecome 11 Jul 2012, 5:10am

            Still, perhaps he could have offered more understanding before ushering the conversation back to council matters. The fact that he sparked anger would suggest he doesn’t care to think that he may have LGBT constituents.

          2. Jock S. Trap 13 Jul 2012, 4:43pm

            Will it not be local register offices etc that perform equal marriage ceremonies…. thats local government therefore this issue has everything to do with local councils.

          3. Jock S. Trap 13 Jul 2012, 4:56pm

            Sorry registry offices…

        2. Spanner1960 11 Jul 2012, 12:21am

          And I am one of them.

          1. I think you should contact him and advise him of your general political hue and that he failed to represent or support you.

          2. Btw very nice part of the world you live in!

          3. Spanner1960 11 Jul 2012, 1:09pm

            Like I mentioned, there is a difference between support and actively pursuing a directive.

            Frankly, I don’t really give a toss what councils think of LGBT rights, as long as they cover the local issues. Everything else should be managed by Westminster.

            …and yes, it is gorgeous around here, I should have moved here from the smoke years ago!

      2. nonsense. Any issue affecting even a single one of their constituents is a matter of concern for the local council. Councils regularly pass motions in support of or against various issues of national concern. It is just in this particular case that the Leader is using excuses legal competency and subject matter jurisdiction to avoid annoying his religious anti-gay friends.

  2. Lol, when it suits their cause they are the first to say how much they deplore the nanny state interfering in the life of the individual.
    They probably vehemently oppose the banning of hunting with dogs and denounce it as unacceptable state interference yet they will approve of the “nanny state” with holding the right of tax paying, consenting adults to a *civil* marriage.
    Make your mind up guys, show some consistency-“nanny statism” or freedom of the individual?

  3. Katherine Griffiths 10 Jul 2012, 6:31pm

    Why is a local council being criticised for not debating an issue that belongs in Westminster? It is not bigotry but common sense about the use of the councils time

    I’m sure that the council has far more important local issues to deal with.

    1. More time was wasted on discussions and feeble justifications for preventing a vote on this motion than in simply allowing the 5 minutes it would have actually taken to vote. This is just pure hypocrisy by Cllr Stowe and his anti-gay cohorts.

  4. Actually I completely agree with the Cllr Stowe – I want my local government to worry about the bins. I want my national government to worry about gay rights. I think Cllr Stowe was quite right to say they would offer no opinion.

    1. But he stated clearly that civil marriage equality is related to the ‘moral codes of the nation’.

      If he believes that equal civil rights for the LGBT population has anything to do with the moral codes of the nation, then he is a clear bigot.

      Equal civil rights have nothing to do with morality

      1. Only in the sense that it is immoral to deny equal civil rights or to fail to support them when (especially when in public office)

      2. Yet Councillor Harris himself stated that it is an “issue of basic human birthrights, morality and fairness”. Is he equally clearly a bigot?

      3. Bisexual woman in Edinburgh 11 Jul 2012, 12:59am

        Acutally, I think that it is indeed an issue of morality, in that is is immoral to deprive groups of their civil rights. But that’s probably not the way he meant it, and I agree that it sounds like a subtle homophobic slur.

        1. I think it was intended as a homophobic slur, but I agree that morality only comes in when you deny civil rights – which the district council decided they did not wish to support – shameful!

    2. Jock S. Trap 13 Jul 2012, 4:46pm

      Jaz… and who will be performing such ceremonies? It is very much a local government issue too!

  5. That Tory councillor Lynden Stowe is correct when he says that it is not within the District Council’s remit to decide on civil marriage equality.

    But the fact that he thinks that civil marriage equality has something to do with the ‘moral codes of the nation’ shows that he is a disgusting homophobic bigot.

    Typical Tory – thinking that civil marriage equality is something other than a civil rights issue.

    What does LGBTory make of Mr Stowe’s disgusting homophobia?

    (Rhetorical question above – I know full well that LGBTory is not allowed to hold opinions – even relating to LGBT equality – unless approved by Tory HQ first.)

    1. That There Other David 10 Jul 2012, 6:45pm

      It all looks a bit like an ambush to be honest, and I certainly agree with the posters above who say that local government has no place trying to second guess the national Parliaments and Assemblies on this. I want the law changed as much as anyone here, but do we really need to resort to tactics like this?

      1. That There Other David 10 Jul 2012, 6:50pm

        That’s not really a reply to dAVID BTW. I just hit the wrong button ;-)

    2. Lynda Yilmaz 10 Jul 2012, 9:18pm

      I feel as though i agree with everyone at the moment. The local authority’s remit is to worry about services for their area. I also agree with dAVID that his choice of words ‘moral codes of the nation’ indicate that he sees gay marriage as a ‘moral’ issue rather than a human rights issue. So I think the real problem here isn’t that he refused to debate the issue, it’s that he used what could have been a legitimate reason to refuse, but illustrated by his choice of words that he was just too cowardly to come out and say what was on his mind! Phew….

    3. Again, the author of the motion himself said that it is an “issue of … morality …”. How is such a statement homophobic?

    4. Spanner1960 11 Jul 2012, 1:26pm

      Typical socialist attitude from you too.

  6. I thought that the purpose of councillors was to represent the people.

    I though local authorities sought to be inclusive and representative of all people.

    Other local authorities have demonstrated their commitment and support to equality by publically recognising the civil rights issue of equal marriage (including in some cases voting on the issue – in some cases the decision was unaimous).

    Councils which have made declarations of support in the UK and Ireland for equal civil marriage include Thanet, Belfast City, Cork City, Manchester City, Brighton & Hove, Southwark, Newcastle City Council and many more

    I find it odd that the Cotswold Council seem unwilling to voice support for equality and fairness when other local authorities see that as their domain.

    Interestingly the leader of the council will publicise support for charities (not necessarily the remit of the local authority – arguably nor is equality – so why choose one not the other?).

    The has also been politicking about

    1. police commissioners – which are not the role of a district council – by members of the council. If they can talk about that, then they can talk about fairness and equality for the citizens who vote for them.

    2. Spanner1960 11 Jul 2012, 8:35am

      There is a difference between support and actively pursuing these matters.
      The bottom line is if the government supports LGBT rights, then local councils are told to do the same, it is as simple as that. There is no need for them to even get involved in the matter, it has absolutely nothing to do with them.

      1. Indeed there is a difference between support and actively pursuing these matters.

        It appears Cotswold DC decided neither to actively pursue or support.

        Other DC’s have supported equality and civil rights for LGBT people they represent. Its clear that Cotswold DC think LGBT people are not something they wish to publically support. Disappointing.

        1. Spanner1960 11 Jul 2012, 1:28pm

          Disappointing, but I won’t lose any sleep over it.
          I’d rather they spend they time and money on more pressing matters, like getting the bins emptied and the roads maintained.

  7. People who fail to represent their electorate or act fairly?

    Why do you feel the need to broadcast vile homophobic messages on here.

    The participants in this website do not NEED more people like Lynden Stowe – or to hear from you, Aiden.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 11 Jul 2012, 12:18am

      Aiden’s IP address can be easily removed by PN. I think I’ll contact one of them to do just that. They’ve done it with others, so they can do it with him.

      1. Sounds like a plan.

  8. Before ANYONE judges whether or not Snowe was correct or incorrect we need to do some research to determine if this council has a past practice of discussing and supporting national issues. If they do then Snowe is completely out of line. If they don’t then his position is defensible.

    1. They have discussed police and crime commissioners.

    2. The CDC have passed numerous motions in support of various national issues… it is just that for this issue, they suddenly don’t want to get involved in anything beyond local issues. This is indeed hypocrisy in its purest form, and is being used solely as an excuse to justify Cllr Stowe’s opposition on the issue and the more overt anti-gay antipathy of Cllr Fowles. Unfortunately, religious bigots seem to have more sway over this council than those favouring equal civil rights.

  9. And less like you “Aiden”

    1. Lynda Yilmaz 10 Jul 2012, 9:55pm

      I’m kind of interested in this Aiden character. Since my first run in with him when Stu filled me in about his activities on here, I’ve read several of his comments. What strikes me about Aiden is is need to read and comment in this forum. The rest of us on here do so because we have personal reasons to be involved with this debate. Aiden’s interest surely goes beyond his apparent opposition to gay rights. Many people are homophobic but they don’t spend their time reading about or commenting on them. I’m thinking Aiden doth protest too loudly (and I bet I’m not the only one)

      1. It’s a general view Lynda, of a very boring and tiresome condition. You’ll note too how seldom he actually engages in debate (for obvious reasons, you might say), which makes him a troll, which means one should do one’s best not to give him the attention he so clearly craves.

  10. Gemma Gillon 10 Jul 2012, 10:34pm

    Again democracy is subverted by conservative business speak. Yet I don’t think the lib dems can claim the democratic high ground. The council ARE there to do a job for the people directed by central government and as it’s stands homosexual marriage is unlawful, so the council supporting something that is unlawful might give the coalition for marriage a platform to lambast the cause and council in the courts. I actually think the conservatives indirectly done us a favour. They embarrassed themselfs and denied the opposition the chance th litigate.

    1. nonsensical sophistry…

  11. Spanner1960 10 Jul 2012, 11:36pm

    As a gay guy who lives in the Gloucestershire Cotswolds, I can state personally that this has absolutely nothing to do with a local council. Sure, I want same sex marriage voted for in parliament, but that is a national government issue, not a local council one. I am more concerned with the fact that Gloucestershire has the worst roads in the country and that my car is being trashed by potholes than I have of some politically-correct twat wittering about something that is way beyond this council’s remit.

    Handle the matters in hand that you are elected to do and leave the big stuff to those in Westminster.

    1. Gemma Gillon 11 Jul 2012, 3:00am

      ” I am more concerned with the fact that Gloucestershire has the worst roads in the country and that my car is being trashed by potholes than I have of some politically-correct twat wittering…”

      Im going to have that engraved on the tomb stone of the equal marriage cause when parliament dump the LGBT on it’s ass. Lol.

      1. Not going to happen, Gemma

    2. Have Cotswold District Council supported the military and their bravery? According to the media they have.

      Surely, military issues are a matter for national government at Westminster?

      If they can support our troops (and I am glad they do) then they can support civil rights for LGBT people.

    3. “As a gay guy who lives in the Gloucestershire Cotswolds…”

      Hmmm, claiming to be within the discriminated group yet supportive of Cllr Stowes fallacious and hypocritical excuses… I just don’t buy it.

      1. As a homosexual man who lives further south, I agree with Spanner1960. I have nothing to sell.

  12. Gemma Gillon 11 Jul 2012, 3:17am

    In truth, if you all had any sense people you would be backing the gay horse in this. Civil rights are moral issues and sometimes you got to protest like he’ll to get them otherwise if you sit there and pass the buck you loose your rights. Martin Luther King Jr and the black civil rights movement would have staged a sit in in ever council chamber in the country by now. The council should have held a mini referendum on the issue and if the locals backed it so should the council.

    1. Spanner1960 11 Jul 2012, 8:31am

      Oh get real. Local politics needs to respect human rights etc, but things like same-sex marriage are not local issues, and even if they were to stand up and make a hoo-ha about it, it would not affect the parliamentary vote a tinker’s jot.

      I don’t pay my council tax to see these people waste my money on unachievable directives. They are there to manage local facilities and administer the area, not get into a public debate about matters which frankly, don’t concern them.

      I suggest you learn a little bit about how this country’s political system works before making yourself look an idiot.

      1. Jock S. Trap 13 Jul 2012, 4:55pm

        ‘local facilities’ like registry offices for example?

        Think you’ll find this issue is very much to do with local government.

  13. The council’s representative in Westminster ie their MP has come out against marriage equality (see the C4EM website). The council were debating also to ask their MP to support same sex marriage and the Tory councillors quashed this. The council does perform civil marriages for all people so it is their duty to fight for this. After all it’s the registrar at the council that wil be perfoming most SS marriages if we ever get them!

    1. Absolutely.

      Have Cotswold DC made (and if so published) a response to the government consultation on equal marriage (the vast majority of local authorities have and are supportive, but I can not locate one for Cotswold – if I was cynical I would say this might indicate a homophobic motivation linked to those issues you make, John).

  14. Well done, Joe Harris and Paul Hodgkinson!

    You have exposed the homophobia of the home territory of David Cameron, Rebecca Brooks, and many of those others who constitute England’s Cotswold-dwelling “backbone”.

    1. Spanner1960 11 Jul 2012, 11:15pm

      Cameron and Brooks live in Chipping Norton, which is in Oxfordshire, and hardly even in the Cotswolds. I suggest you brush up on your geography before taking sideswipes at completely unrelated people.
      Oh, and you forgot Jeremy Clarkson too.

  15. Hmmm… I wonder if the IP traceback on Aiden’s comment leads to Lynden.Stowe@gloucestershire.gov.uk

  16. Local authorities and councillors are regularly lobbied by the third sector and others (especially in the run up to local elections) to have influence over BOTH local and national issues.

    Its therefore reasonable to expect where the issue is one of fairness and equality of the people served by the council for them to form a public statement of supporting their population.

    Other local authorities have not only published their response to the government consultation on equal marriage but also had council motions supporting same sex couples marrying.

    Failure to support or publish such support can understandably be perceived as a snub and stating that the council do not support same sex couples.

  17. It all makes sense now.

    Lyndon Stowe is not real – its Nick Griffin as an imposter

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/mar/01/conservative-councillor-mistaken-bnp-leader

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