Conservative Home's debate blogs


  • DVD rental
  • Conservative Books
My Photo

Conservative blogs

Blog powered by Typepad

  • Tracker 2
  • Extreme Tracker

« Fox endorses Cameron | Main | Hustings begin today »



Come on Derek. No amount of "propaganda" would have made me gay, any more than preventing its "promotion" would make a gay boy straight.

Every gay person I know has always known they were gay. Every single one. Fact.

Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, the more gay guys the better - leaves more women for us straight blokes!

Sean Fear

Sparta was pretty successful at promoting homosexuality.

I doubt if everyone's sexual preference is fixed for ever from one's early teens (although that's obviously true for a lot of people).


Clause 28 was a totem policy that played to the socially conservative (I won't say homophobic because that's overstating it) as such it was poor use of of legislation, designed for image with little substance; as well as being part of the Maggie v Ken war of the early 80's. A better solution would have been increased parental governership of local schools.

If we truly believe in reducing the state, in de-centralisation then we also need to accept that the role of central government in "managing" local government means an acceptance of loony left councils as much as it does good tory ones (freedoms have downsides as well as upsides). If councils have responsibilities and are answerable to local electors then it 's the electors who should accept the results of their choices or throw the councils out.

I wouldn't have wanted Horace Cutler & the London Conservatives to have run a campaign centred on the threat of homosexual propaganda but it wasn't a Government issue - Education was a local responsibility (and should become one again).


"the role of central government in "managing" local government means an acceptance of loony left councils "

Impossible..........local councils exist by virtue of Act of Parliament in many cases acquired as Private Acts in the 19th Century. They are subject to The Treasury and as such under direct control - Gordon Brown is probably the first Chancellor since Neville Chamberlain 1931-1937 to interfere in every department and have direct control of departmental policy. In fact with his focus on domestic policy and limited international exposure, he is in many ways more similar to Neville Chamberlain's control-freakery than he might wish to admit.


" Education was a local responsibility (and should become one again)."

I doubt it can - Central Government pays the bills and since the 1944 Act the Secretary of State has powers which will never be rescinded.

Look at Leeds and Bradford - neither controls Education - in both cases London decreed that Serco and other providers must get 10 year contracts.

Education is doomed. There is no ability to check Central Govt power - it is a unitary state and it is more likely local councils will be abolished and replaced by private companies responsible to a regional quango.

Sean Fear

In general, yes we should let people elect loony left councils - and allow them to make a hash of things. Hopefully, people will learn from the experience.

Certainly, the election of several rotten Labour council's in 1986 did wonders for our London candidates in the 1987 general election.

As Terry Coleman put it; he went to a conference in 1987 entitled "Can Labour Win London Again?" and commented that Labour had left no stone unturned in their determination to lose London.


Sorry I don't share your pessimistic view of what's achievable. Local Governments may have devolved powers but we need to re-create strong local government with planning, education, policing, health back closer to local control. Then we need to create a consistent funding model - a mix of centralised grant and local property tax but under control of local government, no more strings attached. Then Ministers should also be willing to stand up and say for example - sorry but that's something you should ask Birmingham about .
A bigger problem is deciding what the comptencies of the federal, national and local authorities should be. I'd support the UK Parliament having basically trade/commercial regulations, defence, constitutional affairs and homeland security (including intelligence) customs & excise, Inland Revenue, & national parliaments transport, social services, environment, national standards (Ofsted type activities for education, health), national judiciary, with rest left to local authorities.
This would mean having an English Parliament - not difficult if English MPs voted on English matters and Government recognised which Depts were English rather than UK.

Brie Van De Camp

" To those who claim that sexuality is something which cannot be changed by influence or propoganda, then explain how someone can be bi-sexual? "

Bi-sexual people have not changed their sexuality.


Thank you Brie/Bree. Your experience as a mother of a gay son is much appreciated.

Brie Van De Camp

And as a Reagan's supporter too.

James Maskell

I do not support Section 28 and would abolish it, were I Prime Minister. Of course I am not the Prime Minister, thank God. I can understand why it was passed in the first place but that was a long time ago and times have moved on since then. We are a lot more tolerant of minorities and I have no problem with people being allowed a free choice as to what their sexuality is. Who are we to forcefully restrict that choice? Sectio 28 is one of the things that Ive disliked the most that Conservatives have come up with.

Politicians have a sad knack for saying things in their youth and regretting it come election year. When I post I make sure I know it is what I mean to say and not something that will come and bite me in the backside in the future.

Its good fun though to see someone quirm after they get caught out.


"I do not support Section 28 and would abolish it, were I Prime Minister. "

Your name is Tony Blair and you have done so !


Sorry is realism not pessimism. Once Thatcher introduced rate-capping and abolished the GLC after first trying to overturn the election result and being told that was illegal; local government is dead.

Frankly I would hate my local metropolitan council to have more power, it has lost capability since the 1970s and I would rather it was abolished altogether. Our Parish Council was destroyed in 1972 - the small shopkeepers who ran it have long gone as have local shops.

There is no going back and education in the state sector is a disaster. Our metropolitan council cannot even collect waste paper properly.............I would be opposed to it having any responsibility for anything.

James Maskell

Thank God for that then, one less thing for me to do when im Prime Minister!

The comments to this entry are closed.

About Conservative Home


  • Conservative Home's
    free eMailing List
    Enter your name and email address below: