Simon Hughes

[English assassin]

This is quite unbelievable. Twenty years ago a then unknown Liberal Democrat politician, Simon Hughes, took a safe labour seat. How? A rankly homophobic campaign against the openly gay labour candidate. (It wasn't subtle, unless you think putting out leaftets saying "Vote Hughes- the straight choice" is subtle.)

Nice people, the liberals, I've always said it. I wonder if their 1992 Cheltenham leafters claimed the voters had a "black and white" choice? But I digress.

Anyway, this man is now a candidate for leader of his party, and therefore presumably in some fantasy world, considers he would be a suitable prime minister. And perhaps as part of that he has recently finally admitted that the 1983 campaign was wrong.

Earlier this week, Mr Hughes apologised for homophobic elements of the by-election campaign which first shot him to political fame in a shock victory in 1983.

He told BBC2's Newsnight that he accepted some elements of his party's campaign to defeat gay rights activist Peter Tatchell had been "unacceptable", although he pointed out that Mr Tatchell blamed the media and Labour colleagues more.

And NOW he admits to having had "homosexual relationships" himself. http://politics.guardian.co.uk/news/...695212,00.html

So we have someone who wants to lead his party and country, who has so little moral sense that he allowed his campaigners to vilify a man for being gay, when he himself is also gay (or bisexual)

Word fail me. I have always hated the liberal democrats (in contrast to labour who I used to quite respect) but this is beyond the pale.

[Adrian II]

This is quite unbelievable.

I know what you mean, but people can learn from their mistakes. Hughes' personal history seems like a complicated affair of the kind that may teach people the true value of honesty and integrity. Then again, it may not. So how does he deal with it?

The 1983 campaign was a stink, but at least he now acknowledges that. And his avowed homosexual relationships are neither here nor there when it comes to fulfilling a role in public life; denying that would make us belated accomplices to his 1983 campaign.

I wonder what makes him unsuitable and unpalatable now as opposed to trenty years ago. Show me a politician who was not a jerk in some sense or other twenty years ago. At least Hughes has come clean, and what he says is essentially right: 'Nobody has a perfect life. I have never claimed I have. Very few people have simple lives. I believe that people have a right to a private life, providing that their private life does not impinge upon their public responsibilities.'

The words benefit and doubt come to mind. My own mind, I know; not yours probably.

[English assassin]

Just to be clear about this, this has nothing to do with the fact that he has had homosexual relationships. Its about the fact that he allowed those working for him to attack someone (in a way that would in any case be unacceptable) for something that he himself also did/does.

Contrary to your pessimistic view of politicians I think that is probably pretty rare.

As for how he deals with it, well, IMHO you deal with that by not doing it in the first place. OK, it is better that he is penitent than unrepentant, (though it might have been more convincing if he hadn't waited utnil it was all forced out in the leadership campaign) but better still would be not to be the sort of person did it at all. And, sure, people change, I dare say he wouldn't do it now, but I know I would not have allowed anyone to run a homophobic campaign for me when I was in my twenties, or however old he was, still less would it ever at any time have occured to me to attack someone for something I was doing myself.

And I think and hope I am in the majority of the human race on that.

I do find it hard to be wholly objective about this, and the reason is simply that I smarted through the 90s as a succession of Tory scumbags were outed (I mean Aitken, Archer, Hamilton, not the sex ones, I couldn't have cared less about those), and all the while we had the moral lectures from the LDs who "weren't like" other parties and who were "honest" and "constructive" and, blah blah blah, you know the script. And what would you know but in the last month we've had three of the most senior members of the party outed as an alcoholic, a user of rent boys, and an arrant hypocrite. They were as bad as anyone else all along, well who would have thought it?

Sorry but IMHO the whole party is a disgusting boil on the body politic, filled largely with the pus of middle class self loathing. If they were to disappear entirely to be replaced by Respect on the far left and Labour in the centre left I will be very happy.

[Byzantine Mercenary]

ive lost all support i had for the party untill they get their act together, for the record though i don't think there was anything wrong with Charles Kenedy being an alcoholic and if he can get himself on the wagon and back in charge i probably would support them again.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

I used to be involved with the LibDems.

low down scumbags.

[Adrian II]

I used to be involved with the LibDems.

low down scumbags.

Could you be a taff more specific?

[Adrian II]

Its about the fact that he allowed those working for him to attack someone (in a way that would in any case be unacceptable) for something that he himself also did/does.

And this is where it gets complicated. I confess I do not know enough about the case to go into detail. But precisely because of his own position as a closet homosexual at the time, Hughes may have succumbed to either a psychological need or a strong social pressure to go along with those who wanted to turn his campaign into a homophobic circus. His party of origin has a record on the subject, as you are no doubt aware. If so, then you are right that he should haev owned up earlier and even now he should not simply pass it off as a mistake. He should make it clear that he has sweated out the disease, not just suppressed it because is it not done anymore these days. You are fair to say that Mr Hughes still has some explaining to do.

Contrary to your pessimistic view of politicians I think that is probably pretty rare.

It isn't, not on the right side of the spectrum. I remember the Tories harping on 'moral basics' all the time during the nineties whilst ignoring them rather massively in office (insider trading, cash for questions, brown envelopes) and in their spare time (prostitutes, booze, adultery, strangulation sex, you name it).

Sorry but IMHO the whole party is a disgusting boil on the body politic, filled largely with the pus of middle class self loathing.

No benefit of the doubt there, eh?

[KukriKhan]

Originally Posted by English assassin
... is a disgusting boil on the body politic, filled largely with the pus of middle class self loathing...

Whatever one's thoughts on the topic, ya hafta admit: our EngAssassin can turn a phrase.

[econ21]

Like AdrianII, I don't blame Simon Hughes. I entered university in 1983 and homosexuality still seemed to be a taboo, with rare public declarations only coming from men such as Tatchell who were seen as wierd and commonly villified for their sexuality. In that kind of high pressure atmosphere for a gay man in politics, I can sympathise with Simon Hughes' situation. He's always struck me as decent bloke. Things have changed a lot since then, but I still think it would be impossible for a gay man to become Prime Minister.

But I do know what people mean about Liberal Democrat campaigning - it is amazingly two-faced and ruthless. Around 1984, I remember being canvassed by Chris Huhne - another present LD leadership candidate. Through the thin walls of university digs, I could hear him telling a flatmate, a Tory, how he should vote SDP to keep the crazy Labour Party out. He then he came to me and tried to tell me how important it was to vote SDP to get Thatcher out. I was gobsmacked at the apparent lack of principles, from a man whose writing on economics etc is rather good.

[InsaneApache]

Shock horror..politicians are duplicitous and mendacious ...well I'll go tut foot of our stairs*

*Yorkshirespeak translated as: gosh I am surprised.