29 April - Twelve years of progress
Is there anything to add to the LGBT+ Motion report? Let’s see.
Labour Leader Stefano Borella spoke for ten minutes and five seconds in
support of his LBGT+ Motion beginning with the attitude of his Italian Catholic
father and ending with a heartfelt plea that he would be supported by the Conservative Group.
Along the way he revealed that he was born in 1974 and attended two different
Catholic schools in Welling and encountered some less than progressive priests
during his formative years. The gay role models of the day, Larry Grayson, John
Inman, Kenneth Williams and Frankie Howard were totally unlike him who is a
football cricket and golf enthusiast and far from being camp. He had no role model.
The country gradually became more tolerant and his father too eventually providing Stefano
with family support that others might not have received. But his earlier years were not so amenable. Hence his enthusiasm
for ensuring that everyone is given all the support needed at every stage of their lives.
Councillor Nicola Taylor who organised
a Gay
Pride event in Erith last year seconded the Motion. She was unhappy with
half of LGBT children being bullied (Just Like Us Charity survey) and few
schools providing any reporting procedures. Depression, mental health and
suicide are too often the consequence. She asked that the Motion be passed unamended to send a clear message to schools and the LGBT community.
Conservative Patrick Adams put forward an amendment which was “one
of constructive refinement” and an update to the five year old Labour proposal.
To the surprise of many It was seconded by a “delighted” Labour Councillor Chris Ball (Erith). He referred to a similar
Motion before the Council in 2012
and noted how many of the older Councillors have gone or maybe their attitudes have changed.
Councillor Chris Taylor (Conservative) backed the Motion which was a rather
different stance from 2012 when he (with my own approval) said such matters were
nothing much to do with Bexley Council.
The
Motion was opposed only by Councillor Felix di Netimah (Independent, Crayford). He said
that the Motion divides people who take a more traditional view and those from
Christian and other religious backgrounds might feel excluded. “A Council should
not be choosing political and cultural positions which are divisive and this is very divisive.”
As a cricket enthusiast he objected to batsmen being referred to as batters and
similarly “parents who do not want their children exposed to a particular
ideology should not be regarded as the problem”.
He said he would be voting against the Motion. He did and then left the Chamber.
Note. Having been readmitted (with monetary compensation!)
to Surrey Cricket Club after being kicked out last year because of their
administrative cock-up I too have difficulty with batter; old habits die hard. But
logically it is correct. We have bowler, spinner, wicket keeper and fielder so why not batter?