Is Labour set to hang on in Gordon’s back yard?
January 26th, 2006-
Will fellow Fife-MP, Ming, get a Dunfermline headache?
In what must be one of the quickest by-elections ever to be called the voters of Dunfermline and West Fife will got to the polls on February 9 - just 34 days after 
the death of their sitting Labour MP Rachel Squire.
Clearly Labour has gone for a snap election with the aim of stopping any band-wagon effect from the Lib Dems or the SNP.
At the General Election there was a comfortable Labour win with the Lib Dems in second place. The votes split LAB 47.4: LD 20.1: SNP 18.9: CON 10.3.
There’s an added interest because the next door constituency is Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, the seat of Gordon Brown - now sharply down to 0.45/1 for the Labour leadership.
It is also near to North East Fife, the constituency of Ming Campbell, currently 0.75/1 favourite for the leadership of the Liberal Democrats.
At Livingston, just across the Firth of Forth, Labour held on last year in the by-election caused by Robin Cook’s death but saw a 10.2% swing to the SNP. The interesting thing about the coming by-election is that the Lib Dems are in second place - albeit a long way behind.
-
In better times for the Lib Dems you might have fancied a flutter on them overhauling Labour. But this looks like a Labour hold on a low turnout with a much reduced majority over, possibly, the SNP.
For there is little doubt that publicity hammerings, like the one the Lib Dems are currently going through, can undermine the morale of activists - and in a by-election they are crucial. Whether local-man Ming can do something is a moot point. A poor showing for the party on his door-step might just impact on his leadership chances.
In the by-election betting the best prices are Labour 1/5: Lib Dems 5.6/1 and the SNP at 6/1. Cameron’s Conservatives are 50/1 with the bookies but the party does not even get a Betfair listing. If you want to bet on them then take the 210/1 “any other party” option.
Lib Dem leadership. There’s been a sharp move away from Simon Hughes in the betting overnight following a story in today’s Sun about him having gay relationships. The main beneficiary seems to be Chris Huhne.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
There’s a a huge row in the local Conservative party. (Scroll down if necessary)
Chris Huhne is now second favourite on Betfair after punters read the Sun but more interesting than Simon Hughes’s sexuality is that Ming’s camp seemed to be spinning against Huhne before this story (”… not many dead”) emerged, perhaps on account of yesterday’s ICM poll showing Huhne roughly level with their man.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006040287,00.html
Will Hughes disclosure harm him? I don’t think so. This is not a bombshell, but a well-known secret. There are no Oaten-style perversities or betrayal of family. Hughes is not a biggot. He has lied about it before, but the public will understand that this is the kind of question you are allowed to not answer truthfully - it’s nobody’s bloody business!
Given the Lib Dems liberal attitude towards gays, I would expect short-term a small swing towards Ming’s safe hands, but that Hughes will come back strong as soon as hustings begins.
Ming’s long awaited list of supporters seems OK, but no surprises. We already knew that he had the support of 25-30 MPs.
Any spread betting quotes on LibDem performance in the byelection should be examined for a possible pseudo-arbitrage with Ming Campbell’s leadership price, at least if we take the view that a high LibDem vote will boost Sir Menzies.
Presumably all three leadership contenders will be on show in Dunfermline so we can see how the public reacts to them. Since Hughes is known as a crowd-pleaser, it may boost his chances, particularly if the LibDems flop which may be held against Ming.
It hardly shows great political antennae though, does it?
To publicly deny any such suggestions twice in the past week (and in staged newspaper articles where he presumably had time to decide on the best formulation of words), only to reverse such suggestions today looks a bit silly.
3 - A “well known secret” like Kennedy’s drinking?
5. Agree. He should have seen this coming when he decided to stand and come clean immediately.
6. Yes. Difference is that Kennedy’s drinking affected his ability as leader. Homosexuality does not.
It was a very well kept secret in Bermondsey. What a hypocrite.
7 - Sorry Jan, you got the wrong end of the stick. Whether it affected his ability or not has nothing to do with whether it was known to the wider party.
Alex: Two different arguments, I guess.
One thing is whether drinking/homosexuality is known to the wider party. I accept that Hughes sexuality was not known to everybody, but it seems the same can be said about Kennedy’s drinking.
The other point is whether this fact should be thought important with regard to leadership qualifications. Heavy drinking is, homosexuality is not.
I can only imagine that there is a story behind this new confession. Otherwise he surely wouldn’t have been foolish enough to give a story prompting the headline “Hughes- I’m Not Gay” only last week.
The most likely is that someone was about to sell a lurid story about him and to nip it in the bud Hughes entered a Faustian pact with the ‘Sun’. Unfortunately history tells us that these deals nearly always unravel and anyway a deal done with a ‘Daily’ is only a challenge to a ‘Sunday’. A good time to sell Hughes methinks. It looks like he’s history
Roger might be right, but it is also conceivable that Hughes eventually understood that the issue wouldn’t go away, and used the position of strenght given to him by yesterday’s good poll to deal with it.
11 - surely the difference between now and last week is that witch-hunting season has now officially been declared? Any stories about Hughes needn’t be ‘lurid’. Homosexuality is not synonymous with being lurid.
Is there a Livingston betting market? I predict a decent enough Lib Dem result if only because I rate Willie Rennie as a candidate. It is a genuine pity he is not standing in happier days.
11 - good time to buy him more like. This is a ridiculous drift for something that won’t matter to libdems. If anything I can see him attracting more support due to people wanting to make a point of saying it doesn’t matter to him.
It might be different if Peter Tatchell was a hostile witness, but newspaper claims about “hypocrisy” during the Bermondsey by-election won’t stick if the chief victim has no interest in pursuing it.
13 - I mean Dunfermline of course.
Interestingly after all the claptrap of yesterday the ‘rumours of three MPs defecting’ are now being downplayed.
Contrary to the outrageous spinning of one frequenter of this site the Guardian now describes yesterday’s defector thus: “Adrian Graves, a little-known activist…”
The article then goes on to say:
‘Tories often cite a handful of Lib Dems as potential recruits. All of those stress they are committed to their party and most of them, such as David Laws, the work and pensions spokesman, Nick Clegg, acting foreign affairs spokesman, and Jeremy Browne, MP for Taunton, are running Sir Menzies’ campaign.’
Of course they have padded the story out with more doom and gloom, but the nub of the story was that there was no story and that the papers yesterday were in the thrall of the Tory spin machine.
But of course the potential now is that it backfire in the end, because now you have woo at least one of our MPs - or you look very silly.
I think Roger is right. Given all that has gone on in the past two and a half weeks the party membership desperately wants a safe choice - so it’s now faced with the unknown Huhne or the elderly Ming with all the health questions.
My position is about the same on both men - so I’m not “talking my book” but assuming Hughes comes 3rd - my guess is that a large proportion of his second preferences will go to Huhne.
17 - Not sure about the ‘health questions’ thing, Mike. The terrible truth is that while it would be tragic and clearly we all hope he is fine, a recurrence of Ming’s health problems wouldn’t be electorally damaging - possibly quite the reverse. I know that sounds awful and it is not a reason to vote for Ming but nor is it a reason to vote against.
Why the hell did he come up with that “I’m straight” garbage last week? No-one thougt anything of the fact that Simon was gay as we all just thought it was an open secret. Most people actually half believed him last week because it should have been a non-issue to Lib Dems (and most voters). But by being shown to lie about the only question he’s been asked this election means he’s totally unsuitable to become leader.
And then there were two. It’s like an Agatha Christie novel!
The Lib Dems are providing good fun in the office if nothing else.
Just been skimming over the bitchfight last night. Amusing. Shows that most politics is crappy childishness at its worst.
Hughes gay? Well I never
Bugger blogger…. Guido’s server is down…
What next, Mike? Did ‘Ming the Merciless’ earn his nickname in an S & M dungeon in Cowley Street
1 David, I make him absolutely right to be incandescent.
Dunfermline is a mere tremor that will (IMHO) continue to grow over the coming months.
Someone (with a bigger wallet me !)will eventually challenge current policy on either race,gender or ageism grounds.
I hope they are successful.
19. Don’t these Lib Dems just love a 2 Horse Race!
11 Roger,
Like you I couldn’t give a stuff about his private life but in denying it only to have to retract it a few days later smacks of ineptness (to best !)
I totally agree it smacks of a ‘forced’ interview.
I’m sure almost all Hughes supporters will forgive his sexuality, and that the majority will be prepared to set aside his lack of familiarity with the facts last week.
Their activists are brutally cold hearted political operators though and will realise that he has further damaged the party in the public eye and has undermined his own authority.
A sell !
16 Paul, when it comes to looking very silly ……………
i understand the NotW had him done like a kipper if he didn’d come clean.
Someone should have warned the Lib Dems that if you stand for leadership of a party the NotW will try and find things about you!
tsk.
Re Dunfirmline - while I wouldn’t expect a LibDem victory, I would still expect them to maintain second place if only on account of the fact that I think they probably have greater resources to throw at this fight than the SNP as well as (as Paul Lloyd rightly admonished me in his own inimitable style last week) a very seasoned campaigner.
Is there a heterosexual LD MP out there?
28. Hemmings!
28 - John Hemmings has been doing a good job covering his tracks if he isn’t.
29/30 True!
Then considering many MPs seem to use internet sex service, shouldn’t they open a special one in Westminster?
Floating voters have very short memories. Oaten won’t be an issue in 3 weeks, let alone 3 months. What % of floating voters could name Geoffrey Robinson? 1%?
Suppose the LDs choose Ming.
It may be that every time Ming is mentioned, it is preceded/followed by a comment on his health. Even if it says something flattering, ‘Clear of eye today, Mr Campell said…’ Repeated often, even the most dis-interested observer will note that this man is not the robustest.
As has been pointed out, the Sun is at its most powerful with a drip, drip approach.
The tories were quite properly punished for picking IDS, who a blind man could see was over-promoted. Any issue can be knocked on the head. But a recurring one…..?
Andrea will have to revise his figures again…are we in for an “outing” season, I wonder?
The most damaging part for Hughes is the “no I’m not” “oh yes you are!” aspect.
Otherwise, it seems to be a controlled explosion of an otherswise potentially damageing story. (I agree that he had no choice but to come clean).
I agree with James on Ming’s health. There is no danger for us in it. Other he is well (excellent). Or he is unwell and retires (very sad) and some sympathy from the electorate. It is just a pity we didn’t go for a coronation.
Andrea, I’m not sure what you’re basing your “many” on - I remain optimistic that they’re not all reduced to trawling dodgy sites to meet new “friends”.
33. ref coronation - who’d have thought that even the Lib Dems could make such a mess of the seemingly straightforward assassination of a leader. I wonder if those who wielded the knives are regretting it yet.
33. Peter, I’ve to revise it….but then all these LD MPs are a bit confusing. I’m still to understand if Hughes is gay or bi…not that it matters.
Hughes was in a “U turns” week…from “I’ve done anything in 1983″ to “Sorry Peter Tatchell” and from “I’m not gay” to “I’ve had gay sex”.
Then in both stories he seems to find justification: “the campaign was run by my agent” in the first and “there’re lots of closet gay MP in the House too” in the second
35 “it seems to be a controlled explosion of an otherswise potentially damaging story” (spelling corrected) applies equally here.
33 Isn’t the danger that if Ming Campbell is forced to retire through ill health in the nearish future, the electorate will feel that yet another LibDem has been less than frank?
OT: Hamas seems to have won elections in Palestine
38 - hardly, Fiona! It says that he has fought cancer on his website.
33 - Yes a coronation is starting to look like it would have been a good idea. The notion that a contest would showcase how good your party’s senior figures are is looking misguided.
All people are now asking is “is this bunch of rattling skeletons in closets the best they have?”
I still think Huhne is your best bet but you could really have done without a contest.
33 - surely there is at least one danger: that any future downturn may affect his leadership ability or simple availability in the same way as the drink is said to have done for Charles Kennedy.
42 Well they could all become ill, John L. ((Even David Cameron cathces a cold now and then). And if anyone of them were to become seriously ill I am sure they would stand down.
Please Guido 20. Todau is not the day to use that b*****r language - particularly as you are now a Lib Dem member.
40- I appreciate that, Peter- it has been widely reported in the press.
My point was that if MC is forced to retire in the short term, sadly the inference may be drawn that he and/or his advisers were disingenuous about the prognosis, either deliberately or through understandable wishful thinking. In the saddest possible circumstances, there would have to be another election or coronation against a sub-text of “what will we find out next?” Clearly from a personal point of view I hope this is entirely hypothetical. However, it is a risk.
45 - We could only expect sympathy. And the next leadership contest will involve a completely new slate of candidates I would have thought.
As a Conservative activist may I just say that the ‘Lib Dem leadership Show’ just gets better and better?
Last nights QT was just such a perfect showcase for shallow, soundbite politics that I has laughing all the way down the A303.
The over-riding impression is of a bunch of second-rate has-beens who have assasinated their leader and now realise that they just don’t have a decent alternative to choose from.
Hughes looks at best a fool today - he has demonstrated perfectly the Lib dems knack of being two faced and at worst he has added to the impression that they Lib Dems aren’t to be trusted.
As has been said here many times before the vast majority of the electorate vote emotionally, with their hearts not their heads.
Our leadership contest was the leanch pad for a (long overdue) serious Conservative renaissance - this leaderhsip contest in contrast is proof that the Lib dems gains in 1997 and 2001 are unsustainable.
Two points occur to me:-
I don’t think the damage to Simon Hughes is so much caused by the revelation of homosexual experiences as by the admission of bisexuality. That is what some people are (still) prejudiced against - and there’s no one out there telling them that such a prejudice is shameful.
If leadership elections cause all this angst, where is the candidate, purer than the driven slush, who wants to put their head over the parapet against Gordon Brown now?
So basically 3 out of 5 of the candidates have been outed as liars - no wonder the Sun is saying “give us a ring Ming”…
Swinging both ways is something the Lib dems have become particularly good at
22/41 - it was catch 22 for the LDs tho. The Conservatives got away with a coronation in 2003 because of the history of leadership elections in over the previous decade and change. It was easier to install a known quantity as leader with memories of the blood (as well as not neccessarily correct leaders) and wailing induced by said contests. There was no appetite for another contest, the second in that Parliament.
The LDs do not have this same history. If they had installed Ming, then the press would have been constantly insinuating that the LDs were not neccessarily a democratic party, not allowing their members a say, would the country be treated similary, etc ad nauseum.
However, by having an election, they have, instead, allowed skeletons to be dragged and bedrooms to be spied into. Devil and the Deep Blue sea for the LDs on this one, really….
50 - ouch, Roger, very ouch
The admission is extremely damaging in the current context. First, the ridiculous and very recent lies. Second, as has already been said, the suspicion that he’s trying to nip in the bid some lurid story. Third, who would you rather have heterosexual Ming with a stable background or newly admitted gay Hughes who gets up to god knows what. If he was an open gay with a partner it would be quite different. MC has it in the bag now.
IA. I’m sure NO ONE cares whether Huughes is bisexual. I have a horrible feeling he’s the one who decided to put that about because he thought it was less bad that being simply gay and if so it wouldn’t say much for his liberalism or his judgement
21: I’ve been waiting for the S&M scandal as well, as then the Lib Dems would’ve had the holy trinity of rum, sodomy and the lash…
(first post here btw so hi all)
I largely agree with Marcus - this is entertainment at its best! I was only joking when I said the other day that perhaps all the candidates would be forced to step down due to scandals..but it seems to be coming true. I think Hughes looks very shifty now, having lied only last week about his orientation. He is not off the hook as a hypocrite re. Bermondsey either, which was surely prototype for hundreds of cynical and hypocritical Lib Dem campaigns since. Surely someone else must now be tempted to throw their hat into the ring, or is ot too late?
You Tories you crack me up, your sayting Cameron when confonted with the taking some Calss A drugs line from newspapers was truthful!!
Come on ALL poiticians lie if its something they know will damage them, everyone and I mean everyone knows he did and MAYBE still does it. Just because the Aussie man has “kept his powder dry” and his papers are leaving DC alone, for now.
Please lets not get too rightious, Blair lied about WMD, your saying thats less serious then about being gay, yet he kept his seat and is still leader. Lets get a bit of perspective.
56 Nominations closed last night.
57. The difference being DC has never said ” I didn’t take… ”
nor has he denied a fact in the last two weeks nor deliberately and disgracefully smeared a rival in a by election with a fact that applies to himself.
57 - Cameron was smart when answering the questions something that the Libs have singularly failed to be.
And it’s a bit much for a Lib Dem to be lecturing others on being self-righteous.
[55] Welcome aboard, Ed - hover your cursor over the smileys to see how they’re done
[54] I think people prefer MPs who are in stable relationships - there’s a lot of denial about what the job does to people’s private lives - “blaming the victim” sells newspapers.
The Telegraph are hillarious in their stirring - calling Simon Hughes’s announcement the “latest revelation to rock the Liberal Democrat leadership contest”.
As if anyone didnt know!
60. sorry that was ‘rightious’ wasn’t it? maybe he meant something else.
I agree 50 Unlike the good old tories at least the libs under hughes are sticking to their name in every sense of the word.
But on a serious note Surely the LD trust element has evaporated
Kennedy - Stood as potential pm with the knowledge of a drink problem
Oaten - Stood For Leadership in the knowledge of the rent boy dealings
Hughes - Lied to the public by initially Denying homosexuality.
Surely this is their biggest crisis in recent times!
59. I am with you on the thrust of your point (oops) Jamie, but to be fair to Hughes it wasn’t a smear about Tatchell, was it? It was true. The disgraceful part was that, as you say, he used Tatchell’s sexuality for his own political benefit despite being gay himself. If he was a Tory he would have been hounded out of public life by now.
How times have changed…Hughes never forced to admit bisexuality despite 22 years in parliament and a previous leadership attempt. This is different to the Cameron issue though as it’s about what your identity rather than what you’ve done in the past, and there is no answer other than no for people not ready to come out. Hughes says he has considered getting married; why should this be a lie? There will be short-term movement away from him, but unless Ming jumps on him (ok, rephrase, attacks him on personal issues) he should recover ground in hustings.
Big Mak. I’m sure you’re right about all politicians being hypocrites but that doesn’t really tell us where this might lead. It’s a shame if he pulls out because of this nothingness but unfortunately I think that’s the most likely outcome.
Because of the circumstances of the contest and the way it’s progressed any skeletons however trivial or any hypocricy will be blown out of proportion. And it’ll be hard to cope with the pressure he’ll now be put under. I reckon 50/50 he’ll pull out by next week.
49 - Who was the fifth candidate?
Special Bets - think if Hughes had done this earlier - it could have been his Cameron/Paxman moment… missed opportunity…
http://specialbets.blogspot.com/2006/01/now-simon-hughes-is-forced-to-tell.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4646010.stm
For once I disagree with Mike and what seems to be the general consensus on here - I don’t think this will damage Hughes too much and am just waiting for the “Hughes Still in the Race” backlash.
6.5 on Betfair is generous in my mind. I say buy.
*sits back and waits to be proven wrong*
55 - Ed, didn’t Oaten pay for his rent boy to humiliate him? Doesn’t that count for something?
P.S. Nice to see the Telegraph still justifying my decision to stop buying it.
59 & 65 - Hughes never actually attacked Tatchell for being gay in any way whatsoever. He may have been the beneficiary of homophobic opposition to Tatchell, largely stirred up by the Labour dissidents, but he didn’t actually attack Tatchell for being gay.
And just to drag back things to the actual topic. I think Dunfermline will be a fairly comfortable Labour hold probably over the SNP (especially given the recent job losses which they should benefit electorally from). As I said I’m going up for a vist on Saturday so I’ll hopefully find out more.
Can someone actually point to text where Hughes “lied”? I know he said he wasnt gay, but he hasnt admitted that he is gay now either, just that he has had some relationships with men aswell as women (á la Portillo). I know that in some bigots’ minds this means he is gay forever, but back in the real world it doesnt at all. I cant see yet how what he has said is inconsistent with the admitted covering up of last week…
70 AT. The funniest thing I’ve read on the web since Guido’s “For Palestine!” at the start of the week
“Ed, didn’t Oaten pay for his rent boy to humiliate him? Doesn’t that count for something?”
Hughes is mean?
74. Revisionist history that, I’m afraid. You can believe it if it makes you feel better, but is not true.
47 - Marcus, the political rollercoaster goes down and then it goes up again. At the very least this is all coming out three years before the next election, when to Josephine Public it will be old news.
I wouldn’t want to be in your shoes, with the most enormous thermonuclear split in the offing when Cameron’s “policy commission” comes up with its output. Its one thing to adapt policy to your principles, but Cameron is hell-bent on ditching all the Tory principles in sight in his head-long rush to rebrand to get himself elected.
“Just what is the Conservative Party for?” … the showdown, when it comes, will make Thatcher’s defenestration look like a Sunday School picnic.
Sam - 74 - Doesn’t that kinda go against what Hughes himself said on Newsnight on Monday?
I also note that the Telegraph calls them “gay affairs” despite the fact that an affair is quite obviously when you cheat in marriage or a long-term relationship… I.e. innuendo of being “gay” is “cheating”. The right-wing press is really showing it’s true colour in the feeding frenzy here.
59 & 60 - So your saying because he lied well or he was smart with the answer it dosn’t matter that he was still lieing. NICE.
I’m sure that the electorate would be happy to have a guy who lied well, dosn’t matter what he did, just as long as he lied well about it.
We know every party and every politcian lie,lets no kid each other. I am not saying the Lid Dems are better than the others, but don’t give we “war & peace” on how Dave is so different. We all know that the press will turn on his, eventually it comes to us all.
79 - That Tatchell has come out (no pun intended) for Hughes strongly suggests that you are wrong and Sam is right. Tatchell would hardly be likely to endorse somebody who ran a homophobic campaign against him unless he is unbelievably forgiving, and he is not known for that quality.
76 - Mark - in the public’s eyes, it doesn’t matter. Hughes’ answer will either be viewed as a flat lie, or it will be viewed as a Clinton/Blair dodge - i.e. playing with the semantics for spin’s sake
imho, I don’t give a flying rats, and in this case, the only mistake he made was to constantly deny this. Maybe he felt he couldn’t come out about being gay or bi until he had slain the dragon of the Bermondsey debacle - can you imagine the backlash had this come out and he had not appeared contrite already over this incident?
76. I agree, but i still think it won’t do the party much good. It will probably be portrayed as another “skeleton out of the LD closet” (even though there is no reason why it should).
Roll on March so we can put this behind us and move on (and hopefully forwards!)
Disturbing possible win for Hamas in Palestine.
68. The 5th (or 1st)candidate was Charlie Kennedy !
Isn’t Hughes on QT tonight? That will be interesting!
80 - “the showdown, when it comes, will make Thatcher’s defenestration look like a Sunday School picnic” - you hope.
Unfortunately Tabman, you just don’t know the Tory party that well.
I do, and I can tell you that even if Cameron were to plan a 98% top rate of income tax and re-nationalise BT he would still be supported.
Conservatives have just had enough of being in opposition, much like Labour in 1992 every activist I know said after May ‘never again’.
But in any case Cameron isn’t suggesting anything that we haven’t been quite happy to sign up to as recently as 1996.
The Conservative Party is full of moderates and always has been.
85: Oh yeh, like Cameron and drugs you mean. Oh, no that is different isnt it - because it’s Dave.
79 - what’s your evidence? The best anyone has ben able to come up with was a leaflet with the byline ‘it’s a straight choice’ which was presenting the elections as a choice between hughes and left-wing Tatchell. Many have misreported this as being ‘he’s the straight choice’ about Hughes - but it wasn’t.
74, you are talking complete b******. The Liberal Gay group admitted to making anti-gay comments about Tatchell because he had gone back in the closet, which they felt was hypocritical (anyone see the irony there?). There was also an official Simon Hughes election leaflet saying he was the ‘STRAIGHT CHOICE’ (as against the nasty homo on the otherside, implicitly). He publicly apologised for that recently, saying ‘it was wrong’. There is no more whitewashing the past. Hughes admitted it. End of story.
The man who told the world ‘I’m not gay’, and is then contacted with proof that he frequents gay sex lines, now changes his mind and says actually I am gay, I lied, and even better, said “I hope that any colleague in any party at any time who might not have been entirely honest for good reason or who may have made a mistake is accepted back at the right time.” In other words if you are a Lib Dem and you are dishonest (for 25 years in Simon’s case), then you will be accepted back at the right time.
In Hughes case, the right time is immediately after he has admitted he lied (and not through any real honesty, but because he had been caught red-handed ‘Welcome to Man Chat’ ‘Hi, I’m dirty Simon, and I’m into sandals and squeezing the rich’ ‘Ooh Simon, you sound kinky).
80 - Tabbers you really must stop believing everything you read on Conservativehome! The idea of a thermonuclear split is nothing more than wishful thinking.
89 - Marcus (and any other Conservatives) might like to take a look at Rob Knight’s article.
“I do, and I can tell you that even if Cameron were to plan a 98% top rate of income tax and re-nationalise BT he would still be supported.
Conservatives have just had enough of being in opposition, much like Labour in 1992 every activist I know said after May ‘never again’.”
Marcus - that tells me just about everythign I need to know. It translates to:
“We’re so desperate at being displaced as “the natural party of government that we will say and do anything to get elected.”
Its now wonder politics and politicians get a bad name
You’d be far far better deciding what on earth it is you actually believe in. The public recognise a fake when they see it - and “reward” it accordingly.
93 - Max, its not just Conservativehome. There have been articles on Tory disquiet in the Times, Telegraph and Mail in recent days. Hardly hotbeds of left-wingery.
89. “I do, and I can tell you that even if Cameron were to plan a 98% top rate of income tax and re-nationalise BT he would still be supported.”
Well that shows the party has principles!
94 - Tabman - maybe you should do and have a word with your Scottish and Welsh colleagues before lecturing the Tory party on ‘principle before power’.
Again 91, you are wrong. The Straight Choice did refer to Hughes (not actually straight at all we have discovered) compared to Tatchell (definitely not straight).
There is cast iron proof.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=374935&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
‘A Straight Choice’
A Liberal 1983 by-election leaflet carried an article entitled “A Straight Choice”.
“That’s an unacceptable form of language,” Mr Hughes said.
“Those are the sort of things that shouldn’t have happened, and I accept that. ”
It is directly and unequivocally referring to the leaflet. He said it was wrong, he said those things shouldn’t have happened.
Get your head out of the sand, your buddy Simon is a Liberal liar, not afraid to deny things one week and then admit them the next, and not afraid to campaign against others who are gay when he himself likes men.
83 - he didn’t lie well, or lie nicely, DC refused to answer the question. Hughes said he was not Gay for years, only to appear in the Sun next to a banner saying “I’m Gay Too”, and “I regret my lies”. Different kettle of fish
82 - And use of term gay affairs….. yes, unfortunate choice of words, may be a subconscious prejudice on the part of the journo/editr rather than a deliberate homophobic slur, although surely any discussion of sexual pecadilloes of any MP are always classed as affairs, and as such it is force of habit?
92 - “The Liberal Gay group admitted to making anti-gay comments about Tatchell”
I think you are a bit confused, Matthew.
84. James. Hughes apoligised to Tatchell 2 days ago on Newsnight. He said he wasn’t confortable with that campaign and that the campaign was run by his agent and party organizers.
You LDs are just unbelievable!
92 “There was also an official Simon Hughes election leaflet saying he was the ‘STRAIGHT CHOICE’ (as against the nasty homo on the otherside, implicitly). ”
No there wasn’t. there was a leaflet which included the byline ‘it’s a straight choice’ BETWEEN Hughes and left winger Tatchell. Quite a different implication from the one that is bandied about.
There was loads of homophobia in that campaign, but it came primarily from the dissident Labour campaign.
95. 96. Chaps, give it a rest. I know you are traumatised by what is happening in your own party, but fantasising about Tory splits is not going to help. You are shouting into the ether.
97 - Max, are you trying to say that because we have entered coalition adminisstrations we have “abandoned our principles”? Last time I looked plural governments was straight in our book.
98 - I can’t find the link, Matthew - but there is a website with the leaflets on and it says, clearly, “THE straight choice”.
I’m not confused. The gay Liberals said they wore badges mocking Tatchell for being gay.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermondsey_by-election%2C_1983
One Liberal campaigner, John Hein (who subsequently refused to join the Liberal Democrats and became a member of the continuing Liberal Party instead), wrote in the usenet newsgroup uk.politics.electoral on May 19, 1997:
As a member of the Liberal Gay Action Group which produced and wore the ‘I have been kissed by Peter Tatchell’ and ‘I haven’t been kissed by Peter Tatchell’ badges, I think I should explain why the badges were produced and worn. (Although I wasn’t there on the day that they were worn and had I been, mine would have read ‘I wouldn’t want to be kissed by Peter Tatchell’).
We were furious at the way in which Peter was attempting to go back into the closet (something which he has since admitted was wrong). This was our protest.
Ok not anti-gay in intention (perhaps), but they had the effect of appealing to homophobes (which I believe constituted the majority of the population in 1982).
103 - its an awful big fantasy given the amount of press coverage its getting, fred
ok, here’s Hughes apoligising to Tatchell.
http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/content/news_syndication/article_060124hughes.shtml
http://uk.gay.com/headlines/9515
101 - I happen to think Hughes was stupid to say that and that he was trying to put to bed a niggling issue. The fact he has said it, though, doesn’t provide any more evdience than previously existed.
He did a similar stunt a few years ago with tower Hamlets when the local Lib Dems were, wrongly, accused of putting out a racist leaflet. He has a tendency to panic and say things to get out of a tricky question.
Looking at the literature from the by-election it is clear that the Liberal campaign was aimed clearly at portraying Labour as extreme left-wingers and Simon as the local campaigner. You really have to work hard to find any homophobia in their literature. In contrast the dissident Labour campaignwas much mreo personal.
102, you really should give it up. Hughes has already said the leaflet in question was wrong. Why are you still defending it?
202. Sam, there were the “I’ve kissed my Tatchell bedges” too.
Everytime we talk about that by-election, I start to lose respect for some LD posters.
94 - The only reason that yourseldfand others are bad mouthing the tories is because for the first time in 3 elections we are seen as a threat and a force to be reckoned with, as opposed to the prehistoric right wing bandwagon we’ve been cast as by TB previousley.
He can’t do that anymore, it’s stumped Tony Blair as he can no longer refer to pre ‘97′ in order to attack the tories, as cameron does not represent that. Remeber at present we are up in the polls with no concrete agenda, once the policy’s are in place, we could see a tired labour party divided through Blair, there for the taking!!
104 - Is this how plural governments are supposed to work?
Wherever Charlie Kennedy is. He must be laughing his head off. The lib dems are becoming a joke.
104- The policies you have implemented whilst in co-alition don’t seem terribly liberal. Scotland is about the least economically Liberal country in Western Europe. And what about greater centralisation of services - hardly the new localism we’ve been promised?
Of course you have to compromise with other parties to enter a co-alition but I fail to see why thats any better than compromising with the electorate to get into power in the first place.
The Southwark & Bermondsey thing has been done to death for 20 years. Do a search on google groups if you need to read all about it again. It has been used by the London Labour party for decades as anti-LD propaganda, despite the fact that it was obvious the main source of hate was the dissident Labour campaign. Hughes was unhappy that his campaign didnt do more to rise above the frenzy and try to dampen it down, which is why he apologised - not because his campaign was actively involved in stirring it up. And he didnt like the wording of the leaflet (even though it is a standard election phrase to use) because it could be misinterpretted.
Plowing on about this here now will certainly cause a ton of “new” posters to pile in to this thread and take this site back into the bile it was in last week…
110.”Everytime we talk about that by-election, I start to lose respect for some LD posters. ”
ok, I’m a bit exagerating.
95 Steve, the highest compliment I can pay is that you rival Jack W in the pbc revelry stakes :P. My word, you’re on cracking form this morning @80.
105 - I’m happy to accept John Hein’s statement that a few gay blokes wore silly badges.
My comments about the official campaign and the literature stand though.
I am happy to withdraw them, and apologise to anyone who can produce a leaflet that claimed that Hughes was “THE straight choice” though.
76 Pretty feeble Clintonesque defence Mark.
Why not stop digging and throw the spade out?
Tabman at 94 (and other Liberal Democrats) for one last time I am going to explain to you why Camerons announcements on policy so far have not in any way changed or even altered Conservative principles.
Conservative policy has *always* supported the principle of progressive taxation. We have always tried to reduce the burden of tax but the preferred method was to increase the threshold - taking the lower paid out of income tax altogether.
Until the concervation movement became radicalised in the 1960’s Conservatives were the party of the environment - there is nothing ‘new’ in our desire to keep our country clean and unpolluted. The language has changed -we now also use words like ’sustainable’ but the sentiment has always been there.
On everything else, the NHS, reforming the police, education and so on Cameron has done nothing other than restate policy positions we have always held.
We have begun to fight back the unfair impression made by you and other opponents over the years since 1997 that the Conservatives are ‘extreme’.
… and you don’t like it.
115 - point taken!
11 - Pudsey, we’re simply pointing out that Cameron’s verbless rhetoric and the actions he has taken do not match up.
No-one would be happier than I were a Liberal party to govern the country, although for partisan reasons I would be disappointed were it to wear a blue rosette rather than a gold one.
However, there are a huge number of people in the Conservative Party who aren’t liberal; they’re conservative (hint - party name), and want the party to represent their views. Some of them even post on here.
Cameron has to decide what he is. if he’s a Liberal, then he needs to show it. If he’s not, then he’s the same old same old. He can;t have it both ways.
106. Ha ha yes, front pages all round, isn’t it? and we are plummeting in the polls too, aren’t we? and several of our MPs are thinking of defecting aren’t they?
If “The Straight Choice” was intended to be a homophobic anti-Tatchell slogan, why did Lib Dems use it in other by-elections?
http://www.geocities.com/byelections83/brecon85/libbre852b.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/byelections91/kincardine91/libkin919.jpg
The fact is it’s straight out of the toolkit - get the barcharts out and squeeze out everyone except the Lib Dem and the incumbent party with “two-horse races” and “straight choices”.
I had also heard that some gay Liberals were responsible for nasty campaigning (e.g. the “I’ve (never) been kissed by Peter Tatchell” badges) but they hardly did this under the direction of Simon or the official campaign.
111. No we are “bad mouthing the tories” because we don’t believe that Cameron actually represents what he says he does.
The LD posters on here believe quite strongly in their libeal principles, and frankly to find Cameron using liberal ideas solely as a means to power is slightly offensive.
120 - Marcus, you truly are a satirist of the highest order!
“Conservative policy has *always* [your emphasis] supported the principle of progressive taxation. ”
Corn Laws! What a good wheeze!
“Until the concervation movement became radicalised in the 1960’s Conservatives were the party of the environment - there is nothing ‘new’ in our desire to keep our country clean and unpolluted. ”
Let’s keep the oiks off our estates!
Today Simon Hughes has made public what has been widely known to those involved in politics. It has laid bare 20 odd years of breathtaking hypocracy. Yes Bob Meluish and co spread plenty of dirt on Peter Tatchell but this was taken up with alacrity by the campaign headed by Simon Hughes and he now acknowledges that this is true. He has to take responsibilty for this. I cant help noticing that even the Tory party has accepted that an individual’s sexuallity has no bearing on their suitabilty for public office. Yet those great guardians of liberty and freedom in the Liberal party seem to struggle with this. The nasty, unprincipled and typical “Liberal” campaign in Bermondsey put back the cause of “gay” equality by a number of years. The Liberal party’s main principle is the acquisition of power at what ever cost fortunately most people in this country can see through the facade.
Sorry MBK @ 85, just read yours - No plagiarism intended @ 119 !
Fully endorse those sentiments !
123 - M(E)Ps, yes I believe so.
The Lib Dem Twelved Days of Christmas.
“On the Twelth Day of Christmas my True Love sent to me…….
Twelve Lords imbibing,
Eleven rent boys telling,
Ten gays denying,
Nine journos digging,
Eight hit men missing,
Seven Mayors exposing,
Six MPs plotting,
Five Sexual Deviants.
Four dodgy gifts,
Three jammed guns,
Two drunken Leaders,
And a cartridge in a Great Dane.”
89 Er Marcus….easy boy !!
131 - Doh! He’s given the game away …
Well speaking personally I think this has shoved me over the edge into voting for simon, as the only cogent way to wave two fingers at the latent homophobia of it all and i won’t be alone. However only a fool thinks this isn’t damaging.
1. everyone I know was aghast at the “I’m not gay” interview as it was obvious it wouldn’t last the campaign
2. some paper somewhere obviously has something on him and its going to come out. (sorry)
3. This whole “Lib Dem crisis” thing is feeding on its self and making us a laughing stock.
IF we get through Sunday without another tabloid pasting and perhaps fresh allegations then I shall thank the baby jesus. But I’m not holding my breath.
130 - it would be disloyal of me to admit I laughed at that Sean, particularly the last line.
RE leaflet:
http://5thnovember.blogspot.com/2006_01_01_5thnovember_archive.html
Scroll down to the last entry on Tuesday 17th - the linkback isn’t working (blogspot seems to be having some problems today)
If the man in question has apologised for the tactics, and Tatchell has accepted these apologies, then there is the evidence. If it wasn;t Hughes’ campaign, would Tatchell not first say “But it wasn’t your lot, it was the other lot”???? He is hardly backward in coming forward, afterall
130. Lol!
133. Amen to that!
Tabman you are displaying a large dose of ignorance by quoting the Corn Law issue at me!
The Whig (Liberal) governments of 1830-4 and 1835-41 were challenged by many different groups of agitators including the Chartists, the Anti-Poor Law movement, the Ten Hour Movement, and the Anti-Corn-Law League.
It was the desire to repeal the Corn Laws by free trading merchants that set in train what became the modern Conservative Party under Robert Peel.
135 - well, have you ever been driven to apologise for something which you didn’t do wrong, to close an argument down? I don’t think Simon should have apologised for the leaflet, as it happens, because it reflects badly on the rest of the campaign team. But if it was intended as homophobic, how come it was a Liberal slogan used elsewhere?
In fairness BV, it would be just as easy to compose something similar for Labour or Conservatives.
137 - and the Peelites remained Tories did they, Marcus?
135: Because “the other lot” ceased to exist in 1984 and are irrelevent now. Nobody cares about them.
Wonderful stuff Marcus. It is a pity we will never be able to do the experiment to see what would happen if Cameron proposed a top rate of 98% - I think at least half the party would quit.
Likewise your quote about the Tories being so desperate they would do anything is a bit “unguarded” isn’t it?
142 - Hmm. You don’t have Adrian Sanders’ e-mail address do you by chance?
“I do, and I can tell you that even if Cameron were to plan a 98% top rate of income tax and re-nationalise BT he would still be supported.”
I have my doubts about that.
I thought (with my Private Eye reading hat on) that today’s Sun article was close to hysterical. One of the headlines in particular almost rivalled Supercaligoballistic etc..
For me as a LibDem our recent activities have long since passed through the tragedy line into comedy.
98 et al
As an openly gay man, one who has been a good terms with both Mssrs Tatchell & Hughes for over 15 years, I have always opposed the ‘outing’ of closeted gay people unless they are guilty of hypcritical homophobia. Frankly there is no evidence at all that that is the case with Simon Hughes. Indeed, over his 22 years in Parlaiment he has consistently champion LGB rights & equality. The homophobia during the 1983 bermondsey by-election campaign came principally from the outgoing Labour MP Bob Mellish who stood as an independent. Posters should also recall that it was Michael Foot of all people who disowned Tatchell at the Despatch Box in the Commons - is Michael now to be considered a homophobe?
The evidence now quoted against Hughes is a leaflet from the 1983 by-election which has been described as proclaiming him as being THE straight choice. This is not true, the offending piece of 1983 Bermondsey literature was reproduced on Guido’s site - it clearly describes the election as being A straight choice, as opposed to any candidate being THE straight choice. Mysteriously it has now been removed, perhaps because it does not conform to the hysterical rants that we are now witnessing on this and other sites.
As an openly gay LibDem candidate in the last election, my own election leaflets referred to the election as ‘a straight choice’ between myself and my Labour opponent, Kate Hoey. Presumably posters on here believe I was guilty of latent homophobia against myself?
“It was the desire to repeal the Corn Laws by free trading merchants that set in train what became the modern Conservative Party under Robert Peel”.
The Conservative Party throughout the 1830s and the early part of Peel’s 1841 government were committed to Protection, although Peel was moving in favour of a moderate duty. He and the young Gladstone reduced corn duties, and made moves towards free trade, but Peel did not become explictly committed to free trade in this area until 1845. His failure to consult his backbenchers and to carry the party along with him set the stage for the great split.
146: LOL
146 - good post, Bullseye, but it won’t budge the fixed minds of our right-wing friends, I’m afraid. They can’t understand the distinction between bisexuality and being gay, and are quite happy to taint a gay man’s relationships as ‘affairs’.
And I’m afraid they have will never be able to tell the difference between the definite and indefinite article. After all, that’s why they elected Cameron.
146 - Presumably posters on here believe I was guilty of latent homophobia against myself?
Clearly. In retaliation you should be, erm, “inned”.
[94] Tabman wrote The public recognise a fake when they see it - and “reward” it accordingly.
So that’s why Blair is still PM, is it?
[130, 154]
And, yes, let’s have the other two…
bv - to be honest, I think the whole thing is a witchhunt, open season on the Lib dems right now, and I say that as a Conservative. These issues have emerged before, but not on the samy level of intensity or ferocity they do right now.
But, bearing in mind how CK left office, and the recent history of the press in this country once blood in scented, any candidate putting their name forward must have realised they would be under intense scrutiny and investigation, every word they have said and pronouncement uttered being dragged over the coals. I imagine that many a LD right now feels exactly as many a conservative did for most of the 90s
141 - so that would stop Tatchell from “righting a wrong”??? His whole ethos in public life has been driven by this very nature, yet you are saying that if Hughes was blameless he would let Hughes take the can? I don’t think so.
146 Quite right bullseye. Although you can still see one of the bermondsey leaflets on the Guido site if you scroll down far enough.
The text reads: “This election is a STRAIGHT CHOICER