“Homophobic, bigoted old farts”: top Tory’s verdict on colleagues

From Pink News:

Conservative London Fire And Emergency Planning Authority chairman [and London Assembly member] Brian Coleman has claimed that he has been passed over for a senior post due to homophobia by fellow Tories.

Mr Coleman, who is gay, claims that Local Government Association (LGA) Conservative group leader David Shakespeare promised to make him chair of the LGA fire services management committee, the Local Government Chronicle reports.

Mr Coleman, a Conservative London Assembly member and Barnet councillor, claims that he was then denied the post due to pressure on Mr Shakespeare by “bigoted” Tory councillors.

He said: “David Shakespeare said the job was mine but went back on his word after lobbying by a group of homophobic, bigoted old farts.”

Share:
This entry was posted in Opposition watch and tagged . Bookmark the permalink or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/3345 for twitter and emails. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

11 Comments

  • Greenfield
    Posted 30th August 2008 at 8:52 am | Permalink

    No surprises there then.
    Tories alive & well – unfortunately.

  • eastender
    Posted 30th August 2008 at 9:00 am | Permalink

    You leave out the word “homophobic” and you’ve got taxi-man bob down to a tee

  • John
    Posted 30th August 2008 at 10:54 am | Permalink

    Does one get paid to be chairman of the LGA fire services management committee?

  • Posted 30th August 2008 at 11:32 am | Permalink

    In fairness, we can’t accuse Coleman of being a mad, old kleptocrat on one hand, then believe (and cite) what he says when it suits us on the other.

  • Posted 30th August 2008 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    I believe that the LGA is chaired by Sir Simon Milton, so a sprinkling of salt may be required.

    Ben

  • Posted 30th August 2008 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

    Coleman? They were worried his taxi bill would break the bank, surely?

  • Posted 30th August 2008 at 7:21 pm | Permalink

    So he’s been passed over for promotion and is blaming it on discrimination? Nothing to do with descriptions of him along the lines of “Brian is snobbish, rude, and ill-informed as his remarks show. He is often billed as ‘controversial’ – presumably on account of such insults – but there is a great difference between controversial and ignorant“, “He’s done a pretty good job at convincing most people who watch London politics that he is a dangerous idiot” or even “What a tedious cock.

    That a bunch of Tory cllrs may be bigoted old farts may or may not be true (I suspect it is), but a refusal to give Coleman a role isn’t indicative of him being anything other than himself from what I can tell.

  • Posted 30th August 2008 at 7:21 pm | Permalink

    Oh yeah, three links triggers the spam trap. Ah well, it’ll show up eventually.

  • Jay Entee
    Posted 30th August 2008 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

    Julian H, of course we can. This is politics.

  • Posted 31st August 2008 at 4:38 am | Permalink

    Chris,

    Coleman? They were worried his taxi bill would break the bank, surely?

    I was about to type “he was hardly going to walk into the job”, but then was nearly struck dead by the horrified realisation that I was making an in-joke about the transport habits of a London AM.

    If I wanted to compound my problem then I could add ‘that really does put the ‘eek’ into geek’.

    Ben

  • Posted 31st August 2008 at 9:22 pm | Permalink

    I’m not convinced that LDV is well advised to take Brian Coleman’s side in any dispute, let alone this.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but will not publish personally abusive comments. Our comments policy is published here, please respect it and all readers of the site.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Do you agree to the T&Cs?