The organisers of London Pride have banned UKIP’s LGBT organisation from joining in the event on 27th June.
Liberal Democrat Peer Brian Paddick has said that this is the wrong decision. Pink News has the story:
Speaking to PinkNews, newly-appointed Lib Dem Home Affairs spokesman Lord Paddick said he supported the right of the UK Independence Party members to march.
The out politician, who ran for Mayor of London in 2008 and 2012, told PinkNews: “After years of campaigning to be acknowledged and accepted by society, the last thing LGBTI people should be doing is excluding a group gays and lesbians from Pride that has a legal right to exist.
“The police and organisers should be facilitating their right to peacefully and safely participate, not using understandable hatred of UKIP as an excuse to ban them.”
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Our kids need a lorra, lorra, larffs!!
West End Ward Tuesday Surgeries #dundeewestend
The Joy of Six 1275
Find Halloween and seasonal gifts in my Etsy shop today.
Pamela Manning
Simon R
Nonconformistradical
Peter Hirst
12 Comments
I think UKIP members should definitely be able to take part in the march, but I’m equally annoyed, perhaps more so, at the victim blaming aspect of it. Why do we ban people for their own safety? Ban the people making threats!
Absolutely agree. Pride should not be banning groups like this for the political opinions UKIP claims.
I oppose almost their entire platform, but UKIP policy stops short of calling for violence against the people it clearly has issues with and falls on the right side of the line that groups like the EDL are on the other side of.
All three of them are going to march?
3.9m voted for UKIP. It is inconceivable that there were no voters who identify themselves as LGBT in that many people. Being LGBT is not a homogenous political group, nor does membership of a political party make the individuals responsible or in agreement with every word their leaders or other members say.
This is a poor decision that will give more publicity to UKIP, and help strengthen UKIP’s narrative that they are ‘victims’ to the political establishment.
Free speech is of vital importance and is a key issue for Liberals. Engagement and debate with people might change minds. Banning people never does. There are legitimate reasons for some limits on free speech – on the John Stuart Mill principle of harm – but not because you disagree with someone’s politics. There is far too much threatening people going on and far too much bile being spewed out – including on this website – against people one disagrees with.
I despair of ever seeing polite but firm disagreement on the web. It seems that people who engage on the web far too often forget the basic norms of decency and manners.
In any event, UKIP will get far more publicity over a ban than they ever would being a small and relatively insignificant part of the Pride march.
100% agree, just because you oppose their policies and political stance is no reason to ban them.
I’m torn on this. I think it’s great that the Kippers have an LGBT group, and while I detest most of what UKIP stand for I think this does represent progress. But if the Kippers are there a whole load of other people will just not turn up – effectively inviting UKIP extends a ban to lots of other groups and invididuals who refuse to have anything to do with them. Are the Kippers worth more than them, and if so, why?
Jennie, you make a good point and I generally think groups have the right to invite or not invite whoever they like. Which is probably why I wasn’t too fussed either way, but mainly didn’t like the reason being used for excluding them.
I think I felt a bit pathetic saying my problem wasn’t really the exclusion but the excuse given, but I think that is actually closer to my real thoughts.
Anyway, I’m not expert, but banning people on safety grounds is such a cop out of an excuse.
I suggest that politics of *any* persuasion, will be the very last thing of interest to folks on the Pride march. And as a liberal Ukipper, I say to *all* of them have a fab day, and if you really must wear a tutu,…. you really must shave your legs. 🙂
@Jennie – What evidence do you have that “a whole load of other people will just not turn up” if UKIP are allowed to attend? Are we talking just the usual SWP “no platform” zealots or other people?
“Are we talking just the usual SWP “no platform” zealots or other people?”
You make a good point, and I suppose it speaks to a wider (and troubling), phenomenon, whereby one group of people decide unilaterally that banning someone is the appropriate way to deal with a view that they do not hold. This is a growing and worrying trend particularly in the college and university arena, where speakers are refused, rather than the liberal approach to listen, debate and argue the alternate view?
Jennie
“But if the Kippers are there a whole load of other people will just not turn up”
I seriously doubt that, also if the organisers had not even opened the can of worms of a ‘ban for your own safety’ then most people wouldn’t have noticed.
“effectively inviting UKIP extends a ban to lots of other groups and invididuals who refuse to have anything to do with them”
Not the case at all, anyone who chooses to boycott is not banned in any sense, they are free to turn up but chose not to.
If someone were to claim those who have a problem with LGBT people were claiming they were “banned” from the area during pride they would be rightly mocked for it. This childish “no platform” nonsense has got to stop.