Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 16:43:00 +0100 From: Mark Watson STONEWALL NEWSLETTER PRIDE SPECIAL - JUNE 1996 FROM THE DIRECTOR'S DESK Dear Prime Minister, We were very disturbed to read reports of your criticism of awards given by the National Lottery Charities Board to a number of lesbian and gay groups. Although we have obviously disagreed on a number of issues concerning lesbian and gay rights we always thought that you, at least, would give us a fair hearing. We were also encouraged by some of the clear statements on behalf of the government. For instance during the debate on the Sexual Orientation Discrimination Bill, Baroness Miller of Hendon said in the House of Lords: "The Government's position is clear. We oppose unjustified discrimination against any person on grounds of their sex, race, colour, ethnic origin or for any other reason, irrespective of where that discrimination occurs..... Unjustified discrimination is offensive to decent people everywhere and it is to be condemned." (House of Lords, 14 July l995) Your dismissal, without it seems any investigation, of grants given to lesbian and gay groups suggests, at the very least, that you are willing to be careless of that principle, that you do not think that we deserve to treated equally. Stonewall has worked very closely with GALOP, one of the groups in receipt of a grant. GALOP is based in London and works closely with the Metropolitan Police to provide support and assistance to victims of homophobic violence. I enclose a copy of a national survey we have just produced which shows that 1 in 3 gay men and 1 in 4 lesbians have experienced at least one violent attack in the last five years. The figures for lesbians and gay men under 18 are much higher, half of this group had been the subject of a violent attack. It is prejudice that breeds this violence. A prejudice which your statements helped to endorse. I do hope that you will take the opportunity to condemn this prejudice and address the feelings of deep anger and dismay which your remarks have generated. Yours sincerely Angela Mason Executive Director Stonewall FEEDBACK Your views Schoolkids for equality We are Sharon, Kate, Amardeep and Emma who are students at Finham Park Comprehensive School. We have very strong views on how Homosexuals are treated. We think that they should be treated equally as Heterosexuals. We want people who normally discriminate against them to try and see it from their point of view. So we have asked our English teacher if we could have a debate, but she said that we could make a presentation. But in order to do this we need to have some information and facts. So we were wondering if you would be kind enough to send us some. We have sent a SAE so that you do not have to pay for it. Sharon, Kate, Amardeep, Emma Coventry This letter is typical of the many requests for information we receive from students. The next generation is on our side! A letter to Euan Sutherland... Congratulations on your success at Strasbourg! Thank you for your courage and tenacity in taking the case for an equal age of consent in the UK to the European Commisssion. Living in fear, as many of us have done in our youth, wrought great mental anguish leaving lasting scars in some cases. A positive outcome, thanks to your efforts and actions, would mark a significant milestone along the road to a fair and balanced lifestyle for us all. I wish you every success in your efforts - and great happiness and joy in your private life. John Glasgow ...and one to Chris Morris Having just written to Euan Sutherland we wished to send a similar message to you. We believe it is very brave and forthright of you to take the matter to the European Commission on Human Rights and we admire you immensely for the action you are taking. Even though you have the wonderful support and professionalism of Stonewall to back you up, it still takes a lot of guts to do what you are doing. For us to remember how we were at your age we need to go back many years, and we cannot imagine having had the courage to do what you are doing. This makes our admiration for you even greater. It is very easy for older people to sound trite, or condescending, but when we say how great it is to witness young people such as yourself boldly setting the agenda for the future we are being totally truthful. Thanks to organisations such as Stonewall things are gradually getting better, and thanks to people such as yourself the getting better gets better quicker. John and Richard Isle of Wight LISA AND JILL SET THEIR SIGHTS ON EUROPE "BR" case could make history Lisa Grant and Jill Percey, the lesbian couple who are suing Lisa's employer South West Trains for a free travel pass for Jill as Lisa's partner, now hope to have their case referred to the European Court of Justice. The case was heard by Southampton Industrial Tribunal on 1 May - two days after the European Court decided that it is sex discrimination to dismiss a transsexual (see right). Cherie Booth QC, representing Lisa Grant, argued that the same principle should apply in this case. South West Trains argued that there is no sex discrimination since lesbians and gay men are subject to the same unfavourable treatment! The tribunal seemed very sympathetic to Lisa and Jill's case and seemed to think that the decision in the transsexual case was indeed relevant. The Tribunal could now find in favour of Lisa and Jill, it could find for South West Trains - but we think that is unlikely - or it could refer the issue to the European Court of Justice for a ruling on whether it is sex discrimination for South West Trains to refuse to give Jill a travel pass just because they are both women. Following the decision in the transsexual case a case does now need to be referred to the ECJ to establish whether the same principle applies to sexuality discrimination. If this happens the case could be a landmark test case - if Lisa and Jill won, it would change the law overnight. Meanwhile the other claim against South West Trains, that they are in breach of contract by failing to follow their own equal opportunities policy, looks set to be heard by the High Court in July. "P" WINS HER CASE Transsexual breakthrough In a landmark case the European Court of Justice has ruled that it is unlawful under European law to discriminate against transsexuals. On 29 April the Court held that sacking a person who had undergone a sex change was sex discrimination contrary to the Equal Treatment Directive. The ruling has immediate effect throughout the public sector, and the government will now have to change the law to ensure that private sector employers also comply with it. A transsexual has already initiated proceedings against the armed forces in the wake of the ruling. The ruling is significant for lesbians and gay men because the Court agreed that "sex discrimination" should be given a broad interpretation. Traditionally in Britain lawyers have argued that it is not sex discrimination to discriminate against transsexuals (or homosexuals), so long as transsexuals (or homosexuals) of both sexes are equally badly treated. The Court rejected that argument in the case of transsexuals and we believe this makes it very likely that it will also reject the same argument in relation to lesbians and gay men. NEWS IN BRIEF SOD Bill The SOD Bill passed its final stages in the House of Lords on 1 May. Glenda Jackson MP has agreed to sponsor it in the House of Commons. She will table it on 12 July but sadly it is likely to be killed by a single word from the government benches: "object". Shop for Equality! Virgin Megastores hosted Britain's first ever lesbian and gay shoppers evening at their Oxford Street, London store on Thursday 4 July in aid of Stonewall. Hosted by Amy Lame, the evening launched a series of ventures between Stonewall and Virgin Megastores over the coming months. The big announcement of the evening was Virgin's sponsorship of the 1996 Stonewall Equality Show which will take place at the Royal Albert Hall on Sunday 27 October. Stonewall - the movie The second big announcement at the shopping evening was the news that Virgin will donate a pound to Stonewall for each copy of the film "Stonewall" they sell on video. This special promotion was launched by Angela Mason who received a huge pound coin from Simon Burke, Managing Director of Virgin Our Price. Book Now for Equality Show While Ian McKellen and Mig Kimpton work furiously on a cast list that will be even more impressive than in previous years, priority postal booking for Stonewall supporters opens on 15 July. All Stonewall supporters have a full month to book for Stonewall's annual extravaganza. Stonewall supporters can obtain booking forms by calling the Stonewall office. Public booking and booking by telephone will open on 12 August. From then on tickets can be booked by calling the Royal Albert Hall Box Office on 0171 589 8212. EUAN WINS THROUGH European Court of Human Rights to hear his case On 21 May the European Commission on Human Rights ruled that Euan Sutherland's complaint about the unequal age of consent should be heard by the European Court of Human Rights. Euan travelled to Strasbourg for the hearing accompanied by his father and Angela Mason. His barrister Peter Duffy argued that the unequal age of consent is a breach of article 8 (the right to privacy) and article 14 (the right to the protection of the Convention without discrimination on any grounds). He argued that it is particularly wrong that under Britain's laws on gay sex, a person who is under age is himself guilty of a criminal offence if he has sex. A law which supposedly exists to protect young gay men actually criminalises them. The British government for their part tried to argue that what was at stake was the right of parents to have their children grow up heterosexual! This is the eighth application concerning the age of consent and it is the first time the Commision has ruled that the case should proceed to the European Court of Human Rights. It will probaby take another two years before the case is heard. GAY MAN TO FIGHT DISMISSAL FROM SCOUTS A gay man who was thrown out of the Scouts after volunteering for 10-20 hours a week for the last 21 years has decided to fight the decision. Stephen Lack, an outreach worker with Lesbian and Gay Alliance Northampton, was thrown out of the Scouts after his sexuality came to light through an article in a social services newsletter about his appointment to his current day job. Dozens of scouts, parents and leaders have written to protest at his dismissal but the County Commissioner was adamant that he had to go and could not remain in the Scouts in any capacity. There is no complaint about Stephen Lack's actual behaviour. In fact the Commissioner had known he was gay for some time but says that by allowing it to become public Stephen Lack has brought the Scouts into disrepute. Stephen turned to Stonewall for advice. We suggested he see a lawyer and try to get it taken up as an employment discrimination case. If Lisa Grant succeeds in her claim that sexuality discrimination is sex discrimination (see p.3) then Stephen may also have a case notwithstanding that he was not paid as a volunteer. Stephen has also asked that Stonewall supporters send letters of protest to Mr Brian Mutlow, County Commissioner, Northamptonshire Scouts, Abington Vale Scouts Centre, 10 Bridgewater Drive, Northampton NN3 3AF. Please send copies of your letter and/or letters of support to Stephen c/o Stonewall. ARMED FORCES BAN: PREJUDICE PREVAILS Government whips to keep ban for as long as it can It was the most important debate on gay rights since the age of consent vote two years ago. On 9 May a proposal to lift the ban tabled by Edwina Currie, Michael Brown and Gerald Kaufman was defeated by 188 votes to 120. Once again it seemed we had won the argument but lost the vote. This time it was not a genuine free vote: the Conservatives imposed a three line whip and the debate was scheduled at very short notice on a Thursday evening when many MPs already had previous engagements; nearly the entire Welsh Labour Party was already in Wales for the Welsh Labour Party conference. It was hardly a decision of the whole house. Labour's position on the armed forces remains far from clear. It was agreed in Shadow Cabinet that the party would be given a free vote, and most of those who did vote voted to lift the ban, but Tony Blair abstained, Labour's spokesman on the armed forces John Reid spoke from the despatch box against lifting the ban, and all five Labour MPs on the Select Committee voted against lifting the ban. The next day Tony Blair told Radio 4 Today "I believe that homosexual people should not be banned or discharged from the military merely by reason of the fact that they are gay." However he then went on to say that any change would have to be negotiated with the armed forces "in a way that takes account of the concerns of the military". He refused to be drawn on what he would do should these objectives prove impossible to reconcile. The campaign now moves back to the courts; the four applicants will take their case to the European Court of Human Rights, while others now being discharged will challenge the ban under the European Community Equal Treatment Directive. How they voted Conservative (326 MPs): 180 MPs voted to keep the ban; 8 voted to lift it. The 8 who voted to lift the ban were: Sir Andrew Bowden, Michael Brown, Matthew Carrington, Edwina Currie, Jerry Hayes, Robert Hughes, Andrew Rowe, and Sir Nicholas Scott. Labour (274 MPs): 97 MPs voted to lift the ban; 8 voted to keep it. The 8 who voted to keep the ban were: Don Dixon, Bruce George, Terry Lewis, John Morris, John Reid, Peter Snape, John Spellar, and Dennis Turner. Liberal Democrats (25 MPs): 16 MPs voted to lift the ban; none voted to keep it. SNP Alex Salmond voted to lift the ban. HOUSING GUIDELINES The Housing Bill has shown how far the government, and Environment Secretary John Selwyn Gummer in particular, are prepared to go to avoid giving us any rights. Faced with Glenda Jackson's amendment to give lesbian and gay partners equal rights of succession in housing the government overturned the vote of the Standing Committee and instead published new guidance for local authorities. Circular 7/96, "Local Authority Joint Tenancies", encourages local authorities to grant joint tenancies to adults who share accommodation as "friends or unpaid live-in-carers", provided they are assured of the "likely continuance of such a partnership" and "there are no adverse implications for good use of authorities' housing stock." Local authorities are also asked to grant a new tenancy where a member of a household dies and another member of that household does not have the right to succeed, but "had been living with the tenant for the year before the tenant's death, or had been looking after the tenant, or had accepted responsibility for the tenant's dependants." The circular carefully avoids all mention of same sex partners as poor Mr Gummer cannot bear the thought never mind the words. We hope the circular will be a marginal improvement, but it does nothing for similar cases in the private rented sector, and, of course, it is the worst authorities who are most likely to ignore it. Lady Hamwee, a Liberal Democrat, is now proposing a further amendment in the Lords which would give statutory rights to succession for all tenants. CRIMINAL RECORDS Besides wanting a national database of men convicted of soliciting or gross indecency (see opposite) Michael Howard has had another bright idea that would affect men convicted or cautioned for these offences. He now proposes to privatise criminal record checks and to greatly extend the class of employers who have a right of access to criminal records when making recruitment decisions. We are very concerned about this proposal because gross indecency is a uniquely gay offence - so thousands of men with a conviction or even a caution for gross indecency will effectively be outed to prospective employers. Yet another argument for repealing the offence of gross indecency - but in the meantime we must react quickly and object to these proposals! HOWARD'S PLAN TO PUT GAY SEX OFFENDERS ON A REGISTER Michael Howard has published wide-ranging proposals to deal with sex offenders in a consultation paper, Sentencing and Supervision of Sex Offenders, published in June. Although promoted as an attempt to deal with paedophiles, the proposals actually deal with a wide range of sex offenders including gay and bisexual men convicted of victimless, consenting offences such as gross indecency, buggery and soliciting. We set out the main proposals here and then tell you how you can make your objections known. A national register of sex offenders Howard proposes that convicted sex offenders should be required to notify the police of any change of address. We would not object in principle if this only applied to those convicted of offences such as rape or sex with children. As defined however it also includes those convicted of gross indecency, buggery and soliciting whatever the age of the other party! Hundreds of gay and bisexual men are convicted of gross indecency every year. In 99.9% of cases these are public sex offences, not offences involving sex with children. Gross indecency is always a consenting offence - the Court of Appeal has said so. Buggery is also a consenting offence - without consent it is rape. No case is made why men convicted of such offences should have to tell the police whenever they move home so that their whereabouts can be kept on a national database. The government will probably argue that it is necessary to include these offences because in a very small number of cases they represent age of consent offences. However sex with boys aged under 16 can always if appropriate be charged as "indecent assault on a boy under 16", which would remain in the list of sexual offences included. Note that the government is considering making the requirement to register retrospective. This means it could apply to men who were convicted of these offences in the past. If so thousands of gay and bisexual men with previous convictions would be affected. Extended supervision of jailed sex offenders Howard proposes that the courts should have the power to require extended periods of supervision in the community in the case of sex offenders who are sent to prison. It is also suggested that ex- prisoners might be electronically tagged. The list of sex offences is the same. The paper says it does not need to be narrower because it is only in the case of very serious offences that a sentence of imprisonment will be imposed in the first place. We do not agree. A young gay man could be sentenced to prison just for having sex with his boyfriend aged 17. Far from being a serious offence this should not be an offence in the first place. A ban on seeking employment involving access to children Howard proposes to make it a criminal offence for certain sex offenders to seek employment involving access to children under 18, and possibly also to seek to foster children. The list of sexual offences for the purpose of this offence is confined to "those convicted of offences against children". However the paper does not define what this means. As "children" in terms of "access to children" are defined as children under 18, "offences against children" might well include consenting sex with a 17 year old. Juvenile sex offenders Howard suggests that the proposals for supervision and sentencing of sex offenders generally should also apply to juveniles. Since young gay men are themselves committing an offence if they have sex before they are 18, and since their partners are also likely to be under 18, they could be hard hit by this proposal. How to protest: It is essential that as many people as possible respond to the consultation paper and protest about the proposals. Comments should be sent by Friday 9 August to Mr K Hopley Action Against Crime Unit Home Office 50 Queen Anne's Gate London SW1H 9AT Please make these points: * Gross indecency, buggery and soliciting should not be defined as sexual offences for these proposals because they are victimless offences. * Where sex with a boy under 16 is considered abusive it would not normally be charged as gross indecency but as indecent assault. * If these offences are included there should be an additional requirement so that the proposals would not apply to victimless offences, for example a requirement that the other party was under 16. * If the other party was 14 or over it should also be a requirement that the younger person actually complained of the offender's behaviour, or that the offender had abused a position of authority over the young person. This could also apply in the case of unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 16. * The meaning of "offences against children" in the new criminal offence of seeking employment with access to children should be subject to the same requirement. * The proposals should not apply retrospectively and they should not apply to juveniles. Please write to your MP too! PRIDE REPORT Stonewall had its biggest contingent ever on Pride this year - accompanied by a samba band. At the Pride Festival, Stonewall worked with Canadian Club, Beefeater Gin, Kahlua and Courvoisier to reach even more lesbians and gay men than ever with the message of equality for us all. In a specially designed marquee on the edge of the main arena, Stonewall joined forces with these Allied Domecq brands and Zone FM to present its major campaigns and to raise funds for its work. Many thanks to Allied Domecq for their support - and to all those volunteers and supporters who marched with us at Pride and who helped out at the Festival. We also attended Pride Scotland and we will be taking part in the gay Mardi Gras in Manchester this August. THERE IS A GAY VOTE "Think pink before you vote" was our slogan at the last election. Final results from our supporters survey suggest that lesbians and gay men are indeed more likely to vote for parties they see as supportive of lesbian and gay rights. Out of 2,000 Stonewall supporters and Gay Times readers, we found that 10% voted Conservative, 49% voted Labour, 14% voted Liberal Democrat, and 27% said it varied or they didn't vote. Even allowing for the fact that Labour are currently well ahead in the opinion polls one would have expected more people to vote Conservative. Only 2% of lesbians said they vote Tory compared with 12% of gay men! Even among high earners, who would generally be more likely to vote Tory, only 12% of those on 40-50,000 pounds a year and only 20% of those on 50,000 pounds or more said they vote Tory. SEMINAR SELLS OUT The Stonewall Immigration Group held a one day seminar on immigration rights for same-sex couples in the EC on Friday 5 July. The main questions put to our guest speakers were: * What rights can we assert under current EU law? * How can we achieve the right to move freely within the European Union with our non-European partners? * Will the intergovernmental conference make things better or worse? * What will be the effect of gay marriage in the Netherlands? * Can we claim the protection of the European Convention on Human Rights? Guest speakers included many prominent immigration lawyers and European lawyers. The seminar was sold out and it was such a success we hope to repeat it again next year. PHOTO STORY On 8 May the South African Parliament voted overwhelmingly for the new constitution which prohibits discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation. To celebrate this historic victory a delegation including Ian McKellen, Peter Tatchell, Angela Mason and representatives from Liberty, Gays and Lesbians In Zimbabwe and LGCM went to South Africa House to congratulate the High Commissioner Mendi Msimang, who expressed his support for the principle of equality (photo sadly not available on Internet). WISH YOU WERE HERE? (Pictured: new postcard) The Stonewall Immigration Group is launching an awareness campaign. Since the launch of our campaign to change the immigration rules we have had 13 successful applications and none have failed. However despite intensive lobbying we have seen no softening of the Home Office position and doubt whether anything will now change until after the general election. We have therefore decided that our focus between now and the election will be awareness of the Group. In the past many couples who faced immigration problems often only found out about the group after things started to go wrong. In the last month we have seen three couples who entered into marriages of convenience - one was arrested and his lesbian wife was threatened with criminal charges, another was blackmailed for 11,000 pounds and a third had paid 3,000 pounds and his "wife" then disappeared. All three would have much better advised to have applied on the basis of their long-term and committed same-sex relationship. We have therefore produced 40,000 postcards and 2,000 posters featuring two couples from the group who are currently applying to stay here based on their relationship. We will be distributing the postcards and posters to every lesbian and gay venue in the UK over the next few weeks. If you would like some please get in touch. Mark Watson, Chair, Stonewall Immigration Group Stonewall Campaign Groups Stonewall Parenting Group The Parenting Group now meets monthly in congenial surroundings at The Link, near Camden Town, London. Meetings take place alternately on Saturday and Sunday afternoons. Meetings are open to anyone interested in parenting issues. The first part of the meeting gives plenty of time for socialising. Children are welcome - it's an opportunity for them to meet and socialise as well as the grown ups. An enjoyable lunch is followed by a meeting which is usually organised around a topic. So far we have discussed schools and the draft Adoption Bill. We submitted comments on the draft Bill calling for same sex couples to be allowed to adopt and for same sex partners to be allowed to apply for parental responsibility just as step parents will be allowed to under the new proposals. The Parenting Group and children marched with the Stonewall contingent at Pride. Future plans include a summer outing and a children's Christmas party. Stonewall Pensions Campaign The Pensions group successfully lobbied the Inland Revenue to make it clear to trustees that pension schemes do have discretion to pay a survivors pension to same sex partners. We now intend to produce a simple guide with a model clause and nominations forms. Several trade unions are working with us to help change company schemes. For those in the private sector only a change in policy is required. For the big public sector statutory schemes the rules will have to be changed by Parliament, but as new agencies are being set up to adminster these schemes it is important to keep the issue high on the agenda. Many employers schemes could be affected if Lisa Grant wins her equal pay case against South West Trains (see p.3). If your scheme excludes same sex partners but includes common law partners, please let us know. Stonewall Immigration Group The Stonewall Immigration Group campaigns for equal immigration rights for same-sex couples. The Group meets on the third Saturday of each month and offers free legal advice and information to lesbians and gay men with immigration problems which they would not face if they were heterosexual. For more information on any of these groups please write to Mark Watson at Stonewall or call him on 0171 336 8860 from 2-5pm. Stonewall 16 Clerkenwell Close London EC1R 0AA Tel: 0171 336 8860 Fax: 0171 336 8864 E-Mail: info@stonewall.org.UK ISSN 1358-6807 Stonewall staff Angela Mason Executive Director Anya Palmer Deputy Director Mark Watson Development Worker John Nicholls Head of Fundraising Mig Kimpton Events Producer Millie Patrick Office Manager Mark Roche Administrator Stonewall Board Gill Butler Andy Elvers Lee Marshall, Treasurer John Miskelly, Deputy Chair Rebecca Rendle Dr Peter Rivas Elaine Willis, Chair Stonewall Group Board members, plus: Louise Ansari Michael Cashman Cordelia Ditton Simon Fanshawe Edmund Hall Rob Hayward Anne Lawrence Gerard Lemos Ian McKellen Lucy Scher Mark Washer Mark Watson Stonewall 16 Clerkenwell Close London EC1R 0AA Tel. 0171 336 8860 Fax. 0171 336 8864 mark@stonewall.org.uk http://www.tyger.co.uk/sig/