Section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988 was a
controversial amendment to the United Kingdom
's Local Government Act 1986, enacted on 24 May 1988
and repealed on 21 June 2000 in Scotland, and on 18 November 2003
in the rest of the UK by section 122 of the Local Government Act 2003.
The amendment stated that a
local authority
"shall not intentionally promote
homosexuality or publish material with the
intention of promoting homosexuality" or "promote the teaching in
any
maintained school of the
acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family
relationship".
Some people believed that Section 28 prohibited
local council from distributing any
material, whether plays, leaflets, books, etc, that portrayed gay
relationships as anything other than abnormal. Teachers and
educational staff in some cases were afraid of discussing gay
issues with students for fear of losing state funding (see
Controversy over
applicability for more information).
Because it did not create a criminal offence, no prosecution was
ever brought under this provision, but its existence caused many
groups to close or limit their activities or self-censor. For
example, a number of
lesbian,
gay,
transgender, and
bisexual student support groups in
schools and colleges across Britain were closed due to fears by
council legal staff that they could breach the Act.
While going through Parliament, the amendment was constantly
relabelled with a variety of clause numbers as other amendments
were added to or deleted from the
Bill, but by the final version of the
Bill, which received
Royal Assent, it
had become Section 28.
Section 28 is sometimes referred to as
Clause 28 – in the United Kingdom, Acts of Parliament have sections, whereas
in a Bill (which is put before Parliament
to pass) those sections are called clauses.
Since the effect of the amendment was to insert a new section '2A'
into the previous Local Government Act, it was also sometimes
referred to as
Section 2A.
History
Background
Section 28 originated in the social transition in British society
from homosexuality as "illegal-but-discussed", to
"legal-but-not-always approved", following debate in the 1950s and
the 1967 decriminalisation of homosexual acts for those over the
age of 21 in the Sexual Offences Act 1967.
The 1980s were turbulent years politically in the UK, coinciding
with the large scale social changes of
Margaret Thatcher's Government (
see:
Thatcherism) and the rise of
AIDS. The spread of AIDS had also brought about
widespread fear, much of which was directed at gays and bisexuals.
Some believed that sexual orientation played a factor in the spread
of disease, and negative, often unfair sentiments toward the
homosexual community were a consequence. These sentiments
intensified already-existing opposition to school policies,
activities, and practices, which supporters claimed were efforts to
be inclusive of sexual minorities, and which opponents deemed as
the promotion of homosexuality.
Given the domination of central government by conservative
thinking, most gay rights activists were in the
Labour Party or the
Liberal Party. These campaigners and
their supporters progressively managed to raise these issues in
local party meetings, resulting in a number of local authorities
changing their policies to include the words "sexual orientation"
in a list of unacceptable discriminations. The large
Metropolitan Borough councils outside
the capital, the
Inner
London Education Authority and the
Greater London Council regularly took
out job adverts in the national press and elsewhere making a very
public statement about the unacceptability of homophobic behaviour
within their organisations.
In 1983 the
Daily Mail, a
British right-wing
tabloid newspaper,
reported that a copy of a book entitled
Jenny lives with Eric and
Martin – portraying a little girl who lives with her
father and his gay partner – was provided in a school library run
by the Labour-controlled
Inner London Education
Authority.
More and more councils began to adopt
wide-ranging anti-discrimination policies (particularly Ealing
, Islington
, Camden
and Manchester
who employed officers to counter
homophobia).
The attention to this, and work within the political parties by
activists, led to the adoption by the Labour Party Annual
Conference in 1985 of a resolution calling for the end of all legal
discrimination against lesbians and gay men. In addition, the
election to
Manchester City
Council of
Margaret Roff (November
1985) as the UK's first openly gay Mayor and
the publication of
Changing The
World by the GLC in 1985 all fuelled a heightened public
awareness of the issues.
But it was
not until 1986 that major controversy arose and widespread protest
demonstrations made a major contribution towards the subsequent
passing of Section 28.In autumn 1986 a group of parents in the
north-east London Borough of Haringey
began making complaints about a book that was
available to school children. What started out as a request for the
removal of one book, turned into a series of demonstrations (both
for and against) on the streets of Wood Green and Tottenham and
eventually on the streets of cities across the nation.
Susanne Bosche Jenny, Eric, Martin ... and me, The
Guardian, January 31, 2000. Accessed online July 1,
2006.
A final factor was the tone taken by some activist groups such as
the
Gay Liberation Front, cited
by the Conservative MP
Jill Knight, who
introduced Section 28, and who in 1999 spoke about the purpose of
that section:
- Why did I bother to go on with it and run such a dangerous
gauntlet? I was then Chairman of the Child and Family Protection
Group. I was contacted by parents who strongly objected to their
children at school being encouraged into homosexuality and being
taught that a normal family with mummy and daddy was outdated. To
add insult to their injury, they were infuriated that it was their
money, paid over as council tax, which was being used for this.
This all happened after pressure from the Gay Liberation Front. At
that time I took the trouble to refer to their manifesto, which
clearly stated: "We fight for something more than reform. We must
aim for the abolition of the family..
- That was the motivation for what was going on, and was
precisely what Section 28 stopped. ... Parents certainly came to me
and told me what was going on. They gave me some of the books with
which little children as young as five and six were being taught.
There was The Playbook for Kids about
Sex in which brightly coloured pictures of little stick men
showed all about homosexuality and how it was done. That book was
for children as young as five. I should be surprised if anybody
supports that. Another book called The Milkman's on his Way explicitly
described homosexual intercourse and, indeed, glorified it,
encouraging youngsters to believe that it was better than any other
sexual way of life.
Legislation
As a consequence, many
Conservative backbench MP
became concerned that
left-wing councils
were indoctrinating young children with what they considered to be
homosexual propaganda.
In 1986 Lord
Halsbury first tabled a Private Member's Bill in the House of Lords
entitled An act to refrain local authorities
from promoting homosexuality. At the time, the
incumbent Conservative government considered Halsbury's bill to be
too misleading and risky. The law successfully passed the House of
Lords and was adopted by then-Conservative MP Jill Knight. However,
overshadowed by the
1987 general election,
Halsbury's bill failed.
On 2 December 1987 in Committee, Conservative MP
David Wilshire re-introduced an
amendment to the 1988 Local Government Bill for a
similar clause, entitled
Clause 28. The new amendment was
also championed by Knight and accepted and defended by
Michael Howard, then Minister for Local
Government. After being debated on 8 December 1987 it was presented
to the House of Commons on 15 December 1987, shortly before the
parliamentary Christmas recess.
Section 28 became law on 24 May 1988. The night before, several
protests were staged by lesbian women, including
abseiling into Parliament and a famous invasion of
the
BBC's Six O'Clock News, during which one
woman managed to chain herself to
Sue
Lawley's desk and was sat on by
Nicholas Witchell.
Controversy over applicability
After Section 28 was passed, there was some debate as to whether it
actually applied in schools or whether it applied only to local
authorities. Whilst head teachers and Boards of Governors were
specifically exempt, schools and teachers became confused as to
what was actually permitted and tended to err on the side of
caution.
A
National Union of
Teachers (NUT) statement remarked that "While Section 28
applies to local authorities and not to schools, many teachers
believe, albeit wrongly, that it imposes constraints in respect of
the advice and counselling they give to pupils. Professional
judgement is therefore influenced by the perceived prospect of
prosecution."
Similarly, the
Department for Education and
Science made the following statement in 1988 regarding Section
28:
- Section 28 does not affect the activities of school governors,
nor of teachers... It will not prevent the objective discussion of
homosexuality in the classroom, nor the counselling of pupils
concerned about their sexuality.
It is said that when Knight heard this, she was somewhat upset,
remarking that:
- This has got to be a mistake. The major point of it was to
protect children in schools from having homosexuality thrust upon
them.
In response to these criticisms, supporters claimed that the NUT
and Department of Education were mistaken, and the section did
affect schools.
Some local authorities continued to deliver training to their staff
in their education system on how to deliver their services without
discrimination against lesbians and gay men.
Manchester City Council continued to
sustain four officer posts directly involved in policy making and
implementation, contributing to the 1992 report ("Section 28 of the
Local Government Act 1988: a Guide for Workers in the Education
Service, produced by Manchester City Council, May 1992.") which
proved that Section 28 did not prevent this work. Their pioneering
work was never once challenged by the act.
Certainly, before its repeal, Section 28 was already largely
redundant:
sex education in
England and Wales has been regulated
solely by the
Secretary
of State for Education since the
Learning and Skills Act 2000
and the
Education Act 1996.
Nevertheless, many liberal and conservative campaigners still saw
Section 28 as a symbolic issue and continued to fight their own
particular causes over it until its repeal.
Political response
The introduction of Section 28 served to galvanise the disparate
British
gay rights movement into action.
The resulting protest saw the rise of now famous groups like
Stonewall, started by, amongst other
people,
Ian McKellen, and
OutRage!, subsequently led by
Peter Tatchell.
While the gay rights movement was united over Section 28, gay
issues began to divide the Conservative party, heightening
divisions between party
modernists and
traditionalists. In 1999 Conservative
leader
William Hague controversially
sacked
frontbencher Shaun Woodward for refusing to support the
party line that Section 28 should not be repealed, prompting
pro-gay rights Conservatives, such as
Steve
Norris, to speak out against the decision. 2000 saw prominent
gay Conservative
Ivan Massow defect to
the Labour Party in response to the Conservative Party's continued
support of Section 28.
There is only one case of Section 28 being used to bring a case to
the courts against a council. In May, 2000 – the first and last
case of its kind – the
Christian
Institute unsuccessfully took
Glasgow City Council to court for
funding an AIDS support charity which the Institute alleged
promoted homosexuality.
Repeal
On 7 February 2000, the first attempted legislation to repeal
Section 28 was introduced by the Labour Government as part of the
Local Government Act 2000, but was defeated by a House of Lords
campaign led by
Lady Young.
In the
newly devolved Scottish
Parliament
the repeal process was more successful.
Various groups campaigned against the repeal. The Scottish
millionaire businessman
Brian Souter
privately funded a
postal ballot as
part of his
Keep the Clause
campaign, which returned an apparent 86% support for keeping
the clause, from a response from slightly less than one third of
the 3.9 million registered Scottish voters However, Section 28
(although, more accurately, it was Section 2A of the relevant
Scottish legislation) was successfully repealed as part of the
Ethical
Standards in Public Life etc. Act 2000 on 21 June 2000 with a
99 to 17 majority vote with only two abstentions.
On 24 July 2000 the Local Government Act 2000 was sent back to the
Lords with an amendment re-introducing repeal. Concessions were
made in the form of the new Learning and Skills Act 2000 which
emphasised
family values and which was
hoped would win over opponents. However, the repeal was again
defeated in the House of Lords.
Despite
successive defeats in the House of Lords of attempts to repeal
Section 28 in England
and Wales
, the Labour
government passed legislation to repeal this section as part of the
Local Government Act 2003
by a vote of MPs.
This passed the Lords and received
Royal
Assent on 18 September 2003 and the repeal became effective on
18 November 2003.
The
Conservative-run
Kent County Council however
decided to create their own version of Section 28 to keep the
effect of the now repealed law in their schools. This was replaced
with provisions stating that heterosexual marriage and family
relationships are the only firm foundations for society on 16
December 2004.
Support
Section 28 was supported by religious groups such as The
Christian Institute, the African and
Caribbean
Evangelical Association,
the Christian Action Research and
Education, the
Muslim Council of Britain, and
groups within the
Roman Catholic
Church and the
Church of
England. The Conservative Party, despite dissent within its
ranks on the issue, whipped its members in support of Section 28 in
2000, but in 2003, after further dissent from within the party,
allowed a free vote. In the House of Lords, the campaign against
the repeal of Section 28 was led by the late
Lady Young, who became
associated with opposition to legislation more tolerant towards gay
men and women. Newspapers that strongly supported Section 28
included
The Daily Mail and
The Daily
Telegraph.
In Scotland the most visible supporters of Section 28 were
Brian Souter and the
Daily Record newspaper.
The main argument used in support of Section 28 was the claim that
it protected children from 'predatory homosexuals' and advocates
seeking to 'indoctrinate' vulnerable young people 'into'
homosexuality. Various other arguments were also used in support of
Section 28 which are summarised as follows:
- The claim that promotion of homosexuality in schools undermines
marriage.
- Section 28 prohibited only the promotion of homosexuality and
did not prevent legitimate discussion.
- Section 28 did not prevent the counselling of pupils who are
being bullied.
- Proponents pointed to various polls in an attempt to
demonstrate that public opinion favoured keeping Section 28.
Opposition
Gay rights advocates, such as
Stonewall,
OutRage!,
The Pink Paper and the
Gay Times formed the major
opposition to Section 28 and led the campaign for its repeal.
Prominent individuals who spoke out for the repeal of Section 28
included
Sir Ian McKellen,
Michael Cashman,
Ivan
Massow,
Mo Mowlam,
Simon Callow,
Annette Crosbie,
Michael Grade,
Jane
Horrocks,
Michael Mansfield
QC,
Helen Mirren,
Claire Rayner,
Ned
Sherrin and
Alan Moore. A coalition
of comic book creators, including
Moore,
Frank Miller,
Robert Crumb,
Art
Spiegelman,
Neil Gaiman, and many
others, produced a magazine called
AARGH
and raised at least the equivalent of US$17,000 to contribute to
the fight against the legislation, according to Moore.
Boy George wrote a song opposed to Section 28,
entitled "
No Clause 28". The
band
Chumbawamba recorded a single
entitled "Smash Clause 28! Fight The Alton Bill!" which was an
attack on Clause/Section 28 and a benefit for a gay rights group,
it also featured 12 pages of hand printed notes relating to gay
rights. It was also opposed by some religious groups and leaders,
such as
Richard Harries,
Bishop of Oxford. Newspapers that came out
in opposition included
The
Guardian,
The
Independent and
The Daily
Mirror. Political parties that were opposed to Section 28
included the
Labour Party, the
Liberal Democrats and the
Green Party. In the House of Lords
the campaign for repeal was led by openly-gay peer
Waheed Alli.
The main point of argument claimed by opponents of Section 28 was
the claim that it discriminated against homosexuals, and that it
was an
intolerant and unjust
law. Various other arguments were also used against
Section 28 which are summarised as follows:
- Evidence was emerging that, by excluding gay support groups and
appearing to prevent teachers from protecting victims of homophobic bullying, Section 28 was actually
endangering vulnerable children.
- The claim that Section 28 made the assumption that homosexuals
were inherently dangerous to children, implying an association
between homosexuality and paedophilia, as
obvious from the "predatory homosexuals" argument of the supporters
of the law.
- Not only did Section 28 prevent the active promotion of
homosexuality but also it appeared to give a legal reason to oppose
it in schools and other forums if necessary.
- The claim that Section 28 was a law which gave an impression to
the public that the government sanctioned homophobia.
- The idea that homosexuality could be "promoted" implied that
homosexuality was a choice which people could be persuaded to make,
whereas sexual orientation may be biologically determined.
- It could lead teachers to confusion about what they could do to
support pupils who faced homophobic bullying and abuse.
- It was no longer relevant due to the Learning and Skills Act
2000 and the Education Act
1996.
In retrospect
Some prominent MPs who supported the bill when it was first
introduced have since either expressed regret over their support,
changed their stance due to different circumstances which have
evolved over time, or have argued that the legislation is no longer
necessary.
In an interview with gay magazine
Attitude during the
2005 election,
Michael Howard, then leader of the
Conservative Party, commented:
- [Section 28] was brought in to deal with what was seen to be a
specific problem at the time. The problem was the kind of
literature that was being used in some schools and distributed to
very young children that was seen to promote homosexuality. .... I
thought, rightly or wrongly, that there was a problem in those
days. That problem simply doesn’t exist now. Nobody’s fussed about
those issues any more. It’s not a problem, so the law shouldn’t be
hanging around on the statute book.
In February, 2006,
Conservative
Party Chairman
Francis Maude told
Pinknews.co.uk that the policy, which he had voted for, was wrong
and a mistake.
In 2000,
David Cameron (at that time
an unelected Conservative party member) repeatedly attacked the
Labour government's plans to abolish Section 28, publicly
criticising then-Prime Minister
Tony
Blair as being "anti-family" and accused him of wanting the
"promotion of homosexuality in schools". In 2003, once Cameron had
been elected as Conservative
MP
for Witney, he continued to support Section 28. As the Labour
government were determined to remove Section 28 from law, Cameron
voted in favour of a Conservative amendment that retained certain
aspects of the clause, which gay rights campaigners described as
"Section 28 by the back door". This was unsuccessful, and Section
28 was repealed by the Labour government without concession
(Cameron was absent for the vote on its eventual repeal). However,
in June 2009, Cameron - now the leader of the Conservative party
and campaigning to be the next Prime Minister - formally apologised
for his party introducing the law, stating that it was a mistake
and had been offensive to gay people.
See also
Notes
- Local Government Act 2003 (c. 26) - Statute Law
Database
- Local Government Act 1988 (c. 9), section 28.
Accessed 1 July 2006 on opsi.gov.uk.
- on the site of South Bank University. Accessed 1 July
2006.
- Section 28, Gay and Lesbian Humanist. Created
2000-05-07, Last updated Sunday, 2006-02-12. Accessed 1 July
2006.
- Sexual Offences Act 1967 (c.60), 1 November
2009
-
http://www.manchester.gov.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?categoryID=200041&documentID=398&pageNumber=2
- Quoted in Hansard,
[1], 6 December 1999, Column 1102.
- NUT on the Web
- Clause 28, or section 28, anti-gay law, by Brian
Deer
-
http://www.manchester.gov.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?categoryID=200041&documentID=398&pageNumber=2
- Anti-gay legislation repealed in Scottish
parliament
- Gay Times - Kent's Section 28 U-turn - Media
Cuttings - Queer Youth Network - The UK Alliance of LGBT Young
People, LGBT, Gay Youth, London, Manchester, Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual, Transgendered, Gay Youth UK, Homophobia, Equality,
Message Boards, News, The Queer Youth Alliance, Queer Youth Radio,
Report as the Queer Youth Alliance claims victory in Kent when Kent
County Council finally scrapped it's anti-gay 'Section 28'
policy
- Apologetics | Section 28
- master pdf sheet.xls
- Ipsos MORI - Public Attitudes To Section 28
- Ipsos MORI - Public Attitudes (In Scotland) To
Section 28
- MORI - Research Review
- The Local Government Bill [HL]: the 'Section 28'
debate [Bill 87 of 1999-2000]
- Blather: The Alan Moore Interview: Brought to Light
- deep politics / AARGH
- Johann Hari - Archive
- Channel 4 - profile of David Cameron
- The Guardian - David Cameron's history on Section
28
- Daily Mail - Cameron apologises for Section
28
- The Independent - David Cameron apologises for
Section 28
References
- (Full text of the section)
- (Newspaper clippings from 1989 demonstrating use of Section 28
to close LGBT student groups and cease distribution of material
exploring gay issues)
- (article on Section 28 and the book that caused the
controversy, Jenny
lives with Eric and Martin, by author, Susanne Bosche)
- (History of Section 28 with notes on attempted legislation that
led up to the final amendment)
- (Notes and links on Section 28 from a humanist perspective,
with notes on usage of the Section 2a name.)
- (Potted history of Section 28 from 2000)
- (USSU National Policy Issues detailing notes on heightened
violence against gays and lesbians in the lead-up to Section 28
enactment)
- (Report of gay Conservative Ivan Massow's defection to the
Labour Party)
- (Nicholas Witchell's encounter with Section 28 protesters)
- (Statement by the NUT on the controversy of applicability of
Section 28)
- (Knight's response to the controversy of applicability of
Section 28)
- (Brian Souter's Keep the Clause campaign runs
unofficial poll to discredit reformers)
- (Summary of points in support of Section 28)
External links