Saturday, May 29, 2010


I simply can't believe that it's happened again :-(. Three years after Lord Browne resigned as the chief executive of BP for lying about his gay private life, another stupid gay guy ends up resigning for a similar reason. This time it's Liberal Democrat politician David Laws who's resigned, all because he claimed expenses for renting a room in his partner's house. I'm not saying that he was wrong to resign, I'm sure that it's the right decision given that what he did is against the rules. But why did he pretend to himself that he wasn't in a gay relationship with his partner James Lundie? There are enough stupid people in the world! Someone like David Laws, who used to be an investment banker, really should know better. It really makes me ANGRY!


Anonymous said...

Wow! And here was I thinking that you were David Laws! Sorry....

Anonymous said...

I thought you'd post about this.
Now, am I missing something here? Laws didn't wanted to disclose his sexuality to everyone, much like you, isn't it?
Personally, I feel really sorry for him. I don't get the big deal. The money he claimed went to his partner's mortgage, which he could have claimed for anyway. MPs can claim up to £40000 a year for living expenses, he took that amount over many years. And unlike other expenses scandals, his motivations were not greed but personal reasons.

close encounters said...

I feel sad that he didn't feel able to reveal his sexuality or his relationship (such that it was) ... and sad that such a talented politician has been lost in such an avoidable situation ...

badabing said...

I'm trying to imagine what it must be like being Mr Lundie. Do you think Mr Laws has a really big dick or something ?

Your faith in the superior rationality and intelligence of investment bankers is touching but I don't think they are any less fallible than mere mortals. I also think that you are wrong about the attitude in the City and other traditional professions to woofterdom, particularly for men of Mr Laws' generation.

What is interesting here is that as a multi-millionaire Mr Laws presumably had no need to claim for accommodation. He could have avoided drawing any attention to himself by just not making a claim. He must then have made a conscious decision after the 2006 rule change to continue claiming and one wonders why he did this. Could it be that he continued to claim not because he needed or wanted the money but because by some perverse logic it confirmed he was not in a relationship.

GB said...

No eguinan, as I say in my blogger profile, I still work for the investment banking division of a bank in London.

That's not quite right, first anonymous commenter, whoever you are. All the readers of my blog know I'm gay, and everyone who knows me but doesn't know about the blog also knows that I'm gay. So in fact, I'm out to everyone :-).

Indeed close encounters, the part of me that isn't ANGRY feels the same way.

Actually I think you may be right, badabing, about Laws not wanting to confirm to himself that he was in a gay relationship :-(. However if you think about how old I am, given that I admit in my blogger profile that I got together with ex-boyfriend S in 1989, then in fact I'm probably of the same generation as Laws!

GB xxx

Hedgie said...

Thanks for blogging about this GB, and it's refreshing that you have such clear cut opinions about this. I think I tend to feel the same as you do.

I think there's a lot of spinning going on, and it's somewhat confusing that the gay bit is being used as a mitigating circumstance or to drum up sympathy for Laws. But the fact remains he broke the rules. As Badabing says above, he must have chosen to continue with the expense claims in 2006 when the rule changed and he only stopped doing so in Sept 2009 - i.e. at the very height of the MP's expenses scandal.

We're not talking about a blushing violet or victim type here - he's a senior politician (in the most gay-friendly party), multi-millionaire and had a very high-flying banking career. He knew exactly what he was doing.

Paul said...

I agree with your opinion that David Laws has behaved badly, but I can also empathise with his situation. He rented a room from a friend; two years later they became lovers; it was an easy way for him to subsidise his partner; five years later the expenses rules were changed, forcing him either to come out or hide his relationship; he chose the latter. I am pleased to read that he is now relieved that his life of deception is over. I have no idea what his family and friends thought about it all, but I expect that he is now kicking himself for not coming out years ago.
I hope this will be an example for other closeted gays.

Latelygay said...

Yes, I feel very angry about this also.

Laws has badly let down people like me who actually backed the Lib Dems at the election and view the coaltion as way of getting some of our money back, so to speak.

He looked very right for the role of Chief Secretary. Dammit!

Ten years ago I had to own up to my own lie and leave my wife. It hurt like hell and I live with the consequences to this day but I feel so much more liberated and the lying is over.

What a start to the new politics.

Hah, Business as usual!

Let it be writ above the door to the Palace of Westminster: "What a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive."

corve said...

I was shocked by this....shocked

Mark said...


I have read your blog quietly for a few years now and don't often share your opinions. I do howvwer enjoy what I know of you and woulod obviously be fascinated to meet you.

This time you are totally spot on! I am with Ben Sommerskill of Stonewall on this. Mr. Laws is a highly intelligent man with good insight. However he is opportunistic and took his eye off the ball and is now using his sexuality issues as a "smokescreen" to disguise the fact that he has been a really naughty boy.(!)

Anonymous said...

then in fact I'm probably of the same generation as Laws!

Probably? Surely you know your own age?

Latelygay said...

The saddest one was Mark Oaten's line about seeking rent boys to get over his depression about losing his hair. Yerrrsss!

Antony said...

I can understand your anger. I think he should have just come out and said "Yeah I´m gay. Yeah I did wrong. What would you the public like me to do?"

I personally would have chosen to keep him, not becaue of his sexuality, but because every one in politics said he was good at his job. And he must be as politicans don´t often give praise to others easily.


A x

Anonymous said...

Maybe you are right about Mr. Laws. But given you disclosed hostility to the LD party, I find it hard to believe that your outrage is purely moral,