“…the distinction between this and…proper teaching about homosexuality cannot be drawn sufficiently clearly in legislation to avoid harmful misinterpretation. That is a risk we cannot take.”

This was a response to a proposal presented to the British Parliament to “restrain local authorities from promoting homosexuality.”

But it didn’t come from the Labour Opposition; it came from a Conservative government spokesperson in the House of Lords. Nor was it made about Section 28 of the Local Government Bill, which stated that a local authority:

“…shall not intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality.”

This concern about ‘harmful misinterpretation’ was the official government response to the Earl of Halsbury’s 1986 Private Member’s Bill.

Yet a year later such concerns seem to have been forgotten. The Conservative government presented Section 28 to Parliament – with wording that was virtually identical to Halsbury’s.

So, why did the concerns vanish so rapidly?

To understand this we need to look at how both major parties handled the issue of LGBT rights. In short, the Conservatives felt that it was an issue with which to discredit Labour. Meanwhile, the Labour leadership under Neil Kinnock had become extremely uncomfortable with the Party committing to anything. *

Perceptions of LGBT Rights

Throughout the 80s, the tabloid Press had consistently linked the notion of LGBT rights with paedophilia and the spread of HIV. In 1984, for example, The Sun newspaper had labelled LGBT rights policies “sick nonsense.” On November 9th, 1986, another of Rupert Murdoch’s papers, The News of the World, declared:

“Some Labour councils encourage AIDS with grants to homosexual centres. So do Labour education authorities telling children that homosexuals living together are as stable as married couples.”

Research showed that the reality was entirely the opposite. Sex and sexuality education in schools impacted very positively on young people’s behaviours and LGBT centres were central in AIDS prevention work. But there were very few politicians willing to push these types of messages.