Gay Tory party declaired a triumph despite Stonewall protest

[andy]

[img2=left]http://www.gayspeak.com/forum/images/news/spiritbar.jpg[/img2]Spirit Bar in Canal Street was packed to its 650-person capacity on Tuesday night as the Tories held their first-ever official gay event.

The event was attended by many high-profile Conservative MPs and shadow cabinet ministers including shadow equalities minister Theresa May and party chairman Eric Pickles.

The event drew protests from Christian groups who held a protest along the entrance of Canal Street. Andrew Clarke, national campaign manager for Christian Watch, was among them:

"We are here this evening because we want the people to go back to biblical principles, we want to save peoples souls," he said.

"I’ve actually had a really enjoyable evening and we have had a lot of interesting conversations with people this evening.

"I don’t think that we are going to have any effect on the choices that gay people make, but our priority is to save people's souls, which is why we felt we had to come here today."

The event also drew lively protests from members of the gay community, fearful of what a Conservative government might mean for them.

Local resident Mathew Helbert told PinkNews.co.uk: "I find it offensive that the Tories are here today, we fought for so many years for equality which they tried to stop and now they’re here. I’m worried that if the Tories get back in to power then all of the good work that we have done will have been for nothing.

"The gay village wouldn’t have existed if they had their way."

Party chairman Eric Pickles told partygoers: "We’re very, very proud of this event tonight and I think that this has shown just how far the Conservatives have come.

"Next year I want to see another official gay pride night and I hope to see you all there!"

Openly gay shadow environment secretary Nick Herbert told the crowd he was "living proof" of the fact the party had changed.

He said: "I am lucky enough to be in David Cameron's shadow cabinet as an out gay man, I was elected as an out gay man, I have never experienced any prejudice or obstacle along the way."

Herbert added that the party was proof that "gay people are not the property of the left."

Party host and Conservative blogger Iain Dale told PinkNews.co.uk: "I’m really pleased that so many people have come and that people are having such a great time, I think that it is really important that we have events like this."

There was much speculation at the non-attendance of Ben Summerskill who was expected to speak at the event. Summerskill pulled out at the last minute, citing concerns over Tory allies in Europe.

"It’s a shame that he has made the decision not to come," Dale commented. "He’s behaved in a disgraceful way."

Also in attendance were Shailesh Vara, shadow deputy leader of the house, Margot James, the prospective parliamentary candidate for Stourbridge, Crispin Blunt, MP for Reigate and shadow immigration minister Damian Green.

The £15-a-head party was held outside the conference secure zone, allowing non-party members to attend.

"The interest in the Conference Pride party has been phenomenal," said party organiser Scott Seaman-Digby. "It has become the event to be seen at."

The bar served a number of cocktails specially created for the evening including one called ‘The Cameron PM'.

"There has always be an unofficial gay event at Conservative Conference," one reveller said, "but I think that having an official event and having such a large amount of support from leading people in the party means a lot to us and should mean a lot to the Conservatives."

[marshlander]

They have a lot of ground to make up before they can ever begin to address the damage of their last period of government. It's not enough to have a nice, self-congratulaTORY party to tell us how much they've changed. As a born again sceptic I shall need a lot more evidence before I can change my mind about them. What did they say to Christian Watch, who were there to "save souls"? What utter arrogance :mad:

[fredv3b]

They have a lot of ground to make up before they can ever begin to address the damage of their last period of government. It's not enough to have a nice, self-congratulaTORY party to tell us how much they've changed.

Who is they? Those in charge of the party now were not the last time they were in power. What good does it do us to blame Cameron and his crowd for the mistakes of their political forefathers? Surely, it is better for us that Cameron strengthens his grip on the party.

[marshlander]

You make it sound like you believe that power is where you can see it!

If the Tory speakers or their 'camp followers' did not challenge or even address the anti-gay protest in this situation of all situations they missed an opportunity to demonstrate the depth of their aspiration to credibility. I'm just wondering what, if anything, was said.

Whilst I may welcome an apparent change of heart I shall continue to reserve judgement until I see substantial evidence of change. It's the doing that counts. Mr Cameron's voting record on such issues makes interesting reading. This chart makes the voting records quite starkly apparent. The breakdown of these figures is here and clearly shows that when it comes to action on voting for glbt equality, the parties are not equally in favour.

[fredv3b]

You make it sound like you believe that power is where you can see it!

Yes and no. Obviously not all power is with Cameron, my point is though that we are better off strengthening the position of Cameron and Cameronites.

If the Tory speakers or their 'camp followers' did not challenge or even address the anti-gay protest in this situation of all situations they missed an opportunity to demonstrate the depth of their aspiration to credibility. I'm just wondering what, if anything, was said.

I've not heard about this, so can't really pass comment. However I do now that loyal followers are under strict instructions not to do anything that might overshadow the leaders speech in media coverage.

Whilst I may welcome an apparent change of heart I shall continue to reserve judgement until I see substantial evidence of change. It's the doing that counts. Mr Cameron's voting record on such issues makes interesting reading. This chart makes the voting records quite starkly apparent. The breakdown of these figures is here and clearly shows that when it comes to action on voting for glbt equality, the parties are not equally in favour.

As ever the Devil is in the detail, which I applaud the public whip website for giving access to, even if the ignore it in the headlines. For example, David Cameron voted against allowing unmarried couples (both homosexual and heterosexual) to adopt children. Frankly, this is not an equal rights issue, it would discriminate against unmarried straight couples just as much as un-civil partnered gay couples. As for the statistics covering the parties, it covers MPs, MSPs and the Lords, and goes back as far as 1998, as they say a week is a long time in politics. Of course, you are right the parties are not equally in favour of gay equality, which is why it is important that we make sure that they all are rather than wait for Labour governments with large majorities which don't think they have more pressing concerns given limited parliamentary time.