Lib Dems laugh off 'homophobic' allegations (From Surrey Comet)
Contact us: Got a photo? Text 'SLPICS' to 80360. Got a story? Call the newsdesk: 020 8744 4244
Lib Dems laugh off 'homophobic campaign' allegations
10:07am Friday 6th July 2012 in News By Nazia Dewji, Reporter
Kingston Lib Dems laugh off allegations of homophobic campaign
Liberal Democrats have laughed off allegations they ran a homophobic campaign to win the Grove ward by-election last night.
Candidate Adrian Amer, who fellow Conservatives said was gay, lost by just 23 votes to Liberal Democrat Rebekah Moll after a recount.
A Lib Dem leaflet used on the doorsteps said: "It's always a straight fight here in Grove ward."
Ben Summerskill of gay rights group Stonewall tweeted: "Shocking news coming in about things whispered on doorsteps in Kingston Council by-election".
Simon Hughes, deputy leader of the Liberal Democrat party, apologised in 2006 for anti-gay smears in the 1983 general election where literature described as "the straight choice" against Peter Tatchell.
He later came out.
Matthew Sephton, chairman of LGBTory, the Conservative Party’s LGBT group, told the Conservative Home website: "I am shocked to hear the allegations of homophobic campaigning in this week’s Kingston by-election and I urge the Liberal Democrats to look into this matter further.
"Talk of a ‘straight fight’ or a ‘straight choice’ in such a campaign is at best insensitive and at worst a poor veil for blatant prejudice."
But leader of Kingston's Liberal Democrat Derek Osbourne, laughed when presented with the allegation.
He said: "There will be a lot of people roaring with laughter about this. It is nonsense.
"I doubt any of us knew he was gay.
"It is just an expression that we use in our leaflets and have been using for a long time – because it is a two horse race. Homophobic? Bizarre beyond belief."
Rebekah Moll said: "It feels out of the blue and it feels wrong to cast this.
"It is a shame that this has happened and that it was construed that way."
Mr Amer was unavailable for comment this morning.
His party colleague Councillor Andrea Craig said: "We did not say anything in our campaign about Adrian’s sexuality because it is not relevant but I cannot definitely say that that is not the message [in the leaflet].
"I would love to say it was but it is not something that can be proven.
"If it was [homophobic] it would be despicable. It will come out quickly if this is the case."
A spokesman for the Liberal Democrat national party said in a statement: "The Liberal Democrats have a long and proud record of fighting for LGBT+ rights. In the Coalition Government we are working to deliver equal marriage and promote equality around the world.
"Today we are flying the pride flag above the Cabinet Office, the first time it has flown on Whitehall.
"There was no intention whatsoever to use the word straight in a way which could be seen as derogatory to a gay candidate.
This is a phrase used in campaign literature across the country, regardless of sexuality, by all parties.
“Sexuality is, and should be, completely irrelevant in political campaigning. And Liberal Democrats completely abhor campaigning which could be interpreted as offensive.
“The ‘straight choice’ leaflets from the 1980s were wrong and offensive.
"The party has made it clear to all our campaigners that such language is not acceptable in our campaigns and has taken clear action where it has crossed the line."
Was the campaign homophobic? Call the newsdesk on 0208 744 4244.
Comments(14)
Prince Philip of Greece
says...
11:57am Fri 6 Jul 12
Agamemnon & Cassandra wrote:WTF? How does the Tory candidate being gay "compound matters", exactly?
The Tories are traditionally bad losers, and to compound matters further for them their candidate has now apparently been outed as gay.
It makes no difference whether the other parties were previously aware of that, but I suspect that they weren't. What does matter is the ability of a candidate to represent their ward. That is what people should be voting for, their private life shouldn't come into it.
No doubt we'll now have all the Gay rights campaigners huffing and puffing about it. But is is pleasing to see Mr Amer and Miss Moll keeping a dignified silence.
It's a storm in a teacup from people with their own agenda.
And when you complain about something, A&C, do you "huff and puff"? Or is that a description you only apply to gay people?
The Sword of Truth
says...
2:38pm Fri 6 Jul 12
1. The Liberal Democrats fought an honest campaign
2. The public have once again decided in their favour.
3 Adrian Amer did not mention his sexuality during the campaign
4. After he lost the campaign, the Conservatives (I assume with the permission of Amer) see fit to launch a vitriolic attack on the Liberal Democrat party alleging homophobia.
Hmmmm. -- Sour grapes, bad loser are words that spring to mind.
Amer might have salvaged some glimmer of respect if he had accepted his second defeat with magnanimity.
During his campaign, Amer was the only candidate who sought to make political capital out of the murder of a local.
Frankly, I am disgusted. If Amer has any sense he will now accept his defeat with grace and move on.
TaniaW
says...
3:14pm Fri 6 Jul 12
From what I have heard, Mr Amer should have won this seat comfortably, but his extreme negative campaign even shocked the Old Guard of the local Tory party - and they know about negative campaigning! Maybe playing the gay card in ths way, and effectivly "outing him" is their way of bringing him back into line.
The Sword of Truth
says...
3:54pm Fri 6 Jul 12
R Batson
says...
10:34am Sun 8 Jul 12
Th facts here are simple the LibDems won by 23 votes that's it. Nothing else matters decision has been made by the people. I agree with Derek Osbourne this is all nonsense.
The Sword of Truth
says...
2:30pm Sun 8 Jul 12
R Batson wrote:I fear Mr. Batson is missing the point. Sexuality was never an issue during this campaign. The Conservatives made it an issue the morning after the election by contacting the press and groups such as Stonewall to complain that their candidate, Mr. Amer, had been the subject of a homophobic campaign by the Liberal Democrats. I find it somewhat difficult to believe that this was done without the express permission and knowledge of Mr. Amer. Mr. Amer himself could of course clarify this issue by making a public statement stating whether he was "outed" by his own party against his will or knowledge, or whether he himself made the complaint. If Mr. Amer was "outed" by his own party, no doubt he will pursue a formal complaint to Conservative Central Office.
I am struggling to see why so many comments here and why nearly all behind an Alias name. What does it matter if any one is 'Gay', its a free world and its a free world to keep ones private life private or not whichever they choose. Anyway in this day and age surely we have moved on haven't we? I am finding even writing what I am a little undignified and unbecoming, I don't feel I should be discussing this or making comment.
Th facts here are simple the LibDems won by 23 votes that's it. Nothing else matters decision has been made by the people. I agree with Derek Osbourne this is all nonsense.
R. Batson is of course correct in agreeing with Derek Osbourne that this allegation of homophobia made by the Conservatives is "all nonsense".
If Mr. Amer had accepted his defeat with grace, then this matter would never have become an issue. This is the second time that we, as the Grove Ward, have chosen not to elect him, and of course, it now appears that the people of Kingston chose not to elect him when he stood as a Liberal for Parliament.
Reading the above, I believe everyone is united in believing that sexuality in itself does not add or detract to someone's ability to be a politician. Indeed, there are many fine examples of gay politicians of all levels who perform exemplary duties as representatives of the people.
There is of course a further point worthy of some discussion which applies uniquely to politicians. Politicians will be required to vote on a wide ranging number of issues, from schooling, education, mental health care, care for the aged, the Arts, the Rose Theatre, licensing etc etc. The more the voting public know about their candidates the better they are able to judge whether that particular candidate will take an active interest in issues relating to them. Eg. I, being of a certain age, may well prefer an older candidate who would be more inclined to be interested in issues relating to care for the elderly etc.
Even if Mr. Amer chose to keep his private life private, surely we as residents were entitled to be told that he had stood for Parliament in the nineties as a Liberal.
In my view, there is a fine line between wilful non disclosure and dishonesty. Each person must come to their own conclusion. No matter how this sorry state of affairs with the shameful accusations of the Conservatives came about, it is perhaps now self evident that we, as Grove Ward residents, will on any future occasion be able to come to a more informed decision when it comes to this particular candidate.
R Batson
says...
12:37pm Mon 9 Jul 12
The Sword of Truth
says...
1:42pm Mon 9 Jul 12
R Batson wrote:R. Batson still does not seem to understand. Matthew Sephton gave his opinion as a result of false allegations by the Conservatives alleging homophobia. However, R.Batson is indeed correct that the conduct of the Conservatives fell below the standard of behaviour one might expect of adult and mature persons. Quite what Mr. Amer is doing is a matter for conjecture. However, I suspect he will now do as many want to be politicians do - show no interest in Grove Ward and the residents until the next elections in two years time. This does of course have the benefit that, we as residents, will have a two year respite from Mr. Amer and his ilk knocking on our doorsteps, and calling for public meetings.
I still can not believe this continues, so Matthew Sephton, chairman of LGBTory, whatever that is, wrote on some web site and I don't doubt that, he is surely only expressing an opinion and he was certainly entitled to do that. Who knows if a LibDem or Labour person wrote a view similar somewhere else and who cares. It all matters not and is below adult and mature persons to even engage in this rubbish. Mr Amer rightly is raising above such nonsense. This is a non issue in my view and I do not think I am missing the point. It always concerns me when people make remarks behind an Alias why would they need to do that.
I noted that Mr. Amer in his quest for self publicity chose to "call a public meeting" to criticise the policing of this borough and in particular Grove Ward. I would remind him that, we are very fortunate in this Borough. Our policing is second to none, and we should all be very proud of the work that the Police in this borough do for us. If Mr. Amer doubts that, I suggest he take a walk down Brixton High Street after 10pm and see the difference. Crime detection and crime prevention rates are among the best in London in our Borough.
As a result of this fiasco and the ludicrous allegations made by the Conservatives, I have been persuaded by my friends and fellow residents to take the following course. If Mr. Amer is allowed to stand again as a Conservative candidate in the next election, I shall stand as a direct challenge against him as a non party political candidate under the simple banner of "Honesty". Furthermore, were I to be elected, I would hand over all expenses/remuneratio
n to local charities. Perhaps Mr. Amer might wish to make a similar undertaking. I am sure that a "crime fighting" barrister has more than enough money from the State in a year.
Alan-Ball-of-Kingston
says...
3:08pm Mon 9 Jul 12
I did actually vote for Adrian Amer- he seemed to me to be the only candidate actually talking about crime and anti social behavior in Kingston. Yes we have a brilliant local police force but we can't avoid the facts that Kingston town centre is still very rowdy at night time, especially with all the students and nightclubs.
Mr Amer seemed to be the only person tackling those issues.
I wasn't able to go to his crime public meeting but I would have liked to have gone. It's nice for a politician to actually invite you to a public meeting (it's the first time I can remember it happening) to talk about local issues and I'm glad he raised the issue.
As for all this rubbish about the homophobic campaign. I don't know whether the Libdems ran a homophobic campaign or not but WELL DONE TO BOTH REBECCA AND ADRIAN for not commenting.
Congratulations to Rebecca for winning too.
The Sword of Truth
says...
4:10pm Mon 9 Jul 12
Insofar as his comments re Kingston town centre, I have to accept that there is an element of boisterous behaviour due to the large numbers of club goers and students. Both these elements do of course bring a great deal of money into Kingston, and support local employment. The Council have to do a difficult balancing act in the quid pro quo of allowing late night licences to certain establishments. In many ways it contributes to a vibrant and lively cosmopolitan atmosphere. When I first came to Kingston many years ago, the epicentre of Kingston was the marketplace and the public house now known as O'Neills. In many ways from recollection, it was somewhat of a ghost town late at night. On the rare occasions when I now venture forth at night into Kingston town centre, I am bound to say that I certainly have never felt threatened or intimidated by the younger element in the town. When I recently attended the Rose Theatre and then had a meal in the town centre, I walked back without trepidation, and was reassured by the evident watchful presence of our local police force. I feel very fortunate to live in this area, and am very proud of the many improvements that have been made to the town in recent years. I have friends in other areas of London who simply would not feel able to walk around their town centres late at night.
For the sake of accuracy, Mr. Amer and his Conservative colleagues do seem to have maintained silence since making their allegations of homophobia last week. I note that Rebeka Moll did comment as follows - Rebekah Moll said: "It feels out of the blue and it feels wrong to cast this.
"It is a shame that this has happened and that it was construed that way."
kingstonpaul
says...
1:39pm Tue 10 Jul 12
On the balance of probability, however, it's difficult to accept that use of the word 'straight' wasn't in some way a deliberate innuendo.
But as many have pointed out, the Tory reaction was dumb. And if I were a fan of conspiracy theories, I might even venture whether there was a hidden agenda behind the Tories 'outing' their own man. Hmmm....
Alan-Ball-of-Kingston
says...
4:17pm Tue 10 Jul 12
No wonder Adrian kept out of this rubbish- poor chap..
UKIP Surbiton
says...
1:29am Wed 11 Jul 12
The Tory campaign was low brow .. the crime issue is relevant , but other local issues such as the lack of school places are more important and should have been handled in a more mature and relevant manner . The fact that Mr Amer and his team shipped in all Zac Goldsmiths Richmond Park helpers was a sign of the times . Of course in 2015 all these Tories will be back in Richmond .
Agamemnon & Cassandra says...
11:37am Fri 6 Jul 12
It makes no difference whether the other parties were previously aware of that, but I suspect that they weren't. What does matter is the ability of a candidate to represent their ward. That is what people should be voting for, their private life shouldn't come into it.
No doubt we'll now have all the Gay rights campaigners huffing and puffing about it. But is is pleasing to see Mr Amer and Miss Moll keeping a dignified silence.
It's a storm in a teacup from people with their own agenda.