02.08.2000

Section 28

Bulwark of bigotry

For the second time this year the House of Lords has voted to reject an amendment intended to repeal in England and Wales the notorious section 28 of the 1986 Local Government Act, which bans the 'promotion' of homosexuality in schools. The vote was 270 to 228, a majority against the government of 42.

These figures compare interestingly with the result in February, when peers voted by 210 to 165 to retain section 28. Since then Blair's reforms have radically altered the composition of the House of Lords, reducing, but not eliminating, the in-built Tory majority. Blair has created 30 new Labour and Liberal Democrat life peers, but the removal of all but 89 of the hereditaries has reduced the total number of peers from 1,138 to 695. Of these 199 are Labour members, 28% of the total compared with 15% of the pre-reform house, and 232 are Tories, a reduction from 41% to 33%. There are also 26 bishops - always likely to support the Tories, not least over section 28.

The unexpectedly large scale of last week's defeat seems to have persuaded the government to give up the fight to repeal the section during the current session of parliament. Blair is willing to drop the relevant clause rather than see the defeat of the whole Local Government Bill, which also contains measures to introduce elected mayors and reform local councils. Legislation to repeal section 28 will now probably be deferred until after the general election, when the government plans to further reform the House of Lords, finally removing the Tory majority and possibly introducing an elected element.

Section 28 was added to the Local Government Act by the Thatcher government in February 1988. It states: "A local authority shall not - (a) intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality; (b) promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptance of homosexuality as a preferred family relationship."

Lady Young, the Tory peer who leads the campaign against repeal in the Lords, presented her support for this iniquitous law as a "fight for the protection of children". In the real world, the effect of section 28 is to make teachers afraid to advise homosexual adolescents how to challenge the intense anti-homosexual prejudice of the majority of teenagers, or to take any measures to counter homophobic bullying in schools.

Schools supposedly take care to teach children to respect people of other religions, races and cultures than their own, and parents largely support this. But, when it comes to teaching respect and equal rights for homosexuals, the emotive combination of sex and children arouses the wrath of the dominant, ultra-reactionary, wing of the Tory Party. William Hague scents a populist cause and has jumped on the bandwagon. The defection of black millionaire Ivan Massow to Labour is a small price to pay. Hague is reconstituting the Tory Party as the guardian of the most backward, irrational and xenophobic sections of society - keep the pound, castrate paedophiles, roll back the homosexual tide.

As Lady Young herself said, "What adults do in private is for adults, but what we put in front of children is a matter for us all." This feeling of unease is exploited by hypocritically equating section 28 with family values. As we have previously commented, what the christian right and others of that ilk would really like to see is a return to the days when homosexuals were regarded as criminals, all sex outside marriage was frowned upon, and the church played an effective role in curtailing freedom and controlling how people lived.

There is no doubt that public opposition to the repeal of section 28 has been very effectively whipped up. Lady Young claims to have received more than 5,000 letters of support. A survey published in March of Tony Blair's own constituents in Sedgefield found that 71% of the 715 people questioned opposed repeal, and of these 63% were Labour voters. In a memo he wrote to his advisors on April 29, which was leaked to the Murdoch press, Blair commented that the government was "perceived as weak" on the family, "partly due to the married couples allowance and to gay issues".

Support for the section is, if anything, even stronger in Scotland, a situation which was both illustrated and reinforced by a powerful and well organised campaign financed by Stagecoach millionaire Brian Souter and supported by several bishops. This campaign organised an unofficial referendum on section 28 - which is known as 'Clause 28, section 2a' in Scotland. 82% of respondents - a staggering one million out of Scotland's five million population - voted for retention. This demonstrates the smug complacency of those who believe Scots are innately more radical and leftwing than the English. Despite the referendum results, the Scottish parliament voted for abolition earlier this year.

The retention of section 28 in England and Wales is an anomaly. Recent legal reforms have gone some way to overcoming the historical discrimination against homosexuals. To be openly gay is no longer to be an outcast. When the House of Commons voted in February to lower the age of consent for gay men to 16, Peter Tatchell of the campaign group Outrage called it the last lap in a 30-year fight for equality. The government was willing to use the parliament act to force this measure through despite determined opposition in the House of Lords, something it is unwilling to do in the case of abolishing section 28, partly through fear of unpopularity and partly through a genuine lack of time.

Homosexuality is now big business. The so-called 'pink pound' swells the coffers of countless pubs, clubs, publications and many retail outlets. Even her majesty's armed forces have been compelled to change. Homosexuality is no longer cause for dismissal from military service, and some gays who were discriminated against are starting to win compensation and/or reinstatement.

What is more, a report published last week on the official review of sex offences recommended reforms which would effectively equalise homosexual and heterosexual activities in the eyes of the law. Group sex will be equally legal for both, and sex in public and exploitative sex with youngsters and other vulnerable people would be equally illegal.

For many gays, the focus of the fight for equality is now the campaign for the right to legally marry, and London mayor Ken Livingstone has announced that he plans to set up registry offices where gay couples can have their marriages officially recognised, but these ceremonies would be largely symbolic, having no force in law. Nevertheless, be they symbolic or substantive, all such advances have been won, often at great cost and self-sacrifice, by militant homosexuals and their supporters, not least those on the left. They have not appeared out of thin air.

At present the bigots who advocate discrimination against gays and other reactionary ideas have a bulwark in both the established church and the House of Lords. If New Labour does win the general election, and does introduce further reform of the House of Lords, it is possible that Lady Young and her kind may find their scope limited. Under such circumstances, as the Weekly Worker has already warned, reactionaries, not least those within the Conservative Party, have every interest in moving to extra-parliamentary action. They would see themselves as being permanently marginalised by the new Blairite liberal establishment. So-called single-issue campaigns such as the News of the World's 'name and shame', the defence of section 28, opposition to the EU bureaucracy, 'defence' of the pound, the Countryside Alliance and the 'no' camp in Ulster already have a smell about them reminiscent of the Russian Black Hundreds, the French Poujardists and the Ku Klux Klan in the US deep south.