Theresa May: I’ve changed my mind
May 21st, 2010 by Jane received 6 Comments »Tonight we witnessed quite an extraordinary event on national television: a Facebook campaign caused a senior government minister to announce that she had “changed her mind” concerning gay adoption rights. I am, of course, referring to Theresa May’s response when confronted by a teenager on Question Time regarding her gay rights voting record. This is very much welcomed by the campaign. We view this as an enormously positive step, and do not question her sincerity. Debate, discussion and disagreements are some of the best things about our society, and the ability to change one’s mind through this process is a very important part of good governance. That Theresa May has shown this willingness is undoubtedly a good thing.
This doesn’t stop us questioning her record, however, and we will continue to do so. Before being caught off guard on national television, we sent her an email informing her of our campaign and asked if she had any response. Though we would gladly have been informed about her new views, sadly she never replied. Her dismissal of previous votes as being ”some years ago” seems intriguing. Whilst we accept that she may have recently changed her mind, we question why she still voted against the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill as recently as 2008, giving lesbian couples equal fertility rights. This was a free vote: the fact that she voted against shows that, to a certain extent, she genuinely held these beliefs independently of any external pressure. More importantly, this was only 17 months ago. This was not the Theresa May under the party obligations of 1997, this was Theresa May the free agent of 2008. If she had held this perspective consistently for 11 years, including recent votes, why are we to assume she has changed her views? There is the full research of her voting patterns, which has been consistent over her time in parliament, on our website now: www.sacktheresamay.co.uk. The one time we see a change is over the issue of Civil Partnerships, when David Cameron extended the party whip and put extreme pressure on the front bench to vote in favour. Indeed, Theresa May did vote in favour, and we welcomed this. But it doesn’t change the fact that she was absent for many important votes (see our full documentation) and so we would still question her commitment to the cause of equality. The fact that she was absent for the vote on the Equality Bill in 2005 doesn’t speak well for her level of interest in this area.
David Dimbley first directed the question of Theresa May’s voting record at Shami Chakrabarti. She, it appeared, did not seem to be aware of Theresa’s voting record, saying only that the Home Secretary should “speak for herself”. What does this tell us? That we still have a lot to do to expose her voting patterns and promote this debate. May is aware of our petition, and is probably also aware that it’s gaining ground. To have taken this issue so far is already an achievement, and raising awareness through this campaign is one of the most important aims we have. It’s indicative of something very positive when the two people who seemed to know the most about what was being discussed – Theresa’s voting record – were two young people. They could quote the very Bills she had opposed. It goes to show that if young people believe in affecting change, it can be done through young people’s media.
For these reasons, we are calling for a full explanation of her views and an apology for her previous voting record in the form of an affidavit. We still regret her appointment, since, symbolically, she is not a positive candidate whom we can trust to continue the progress made over the last few years. We will continue to raise awareness and to call for her resignation. We will be telephoning her tomorrow to present our proposal.
Jane Cahill and Tommy Peto of SackTheresa
20th May 2010
[...] “Sack Theresa” website says: “Tonight we witnessed quite an extraordinary event on national television: a Facebook [...]
What nonsense to claim that a website has changed our views.. I personally am indifferent to the new Minister and time will tell if she has been good or bad in her position.
In relation to your claims I would ask who has not changed their opinion over time? Regardless of how you have come to the new conclusion, whether it be – debating with friends and realising that there is potentially a better way, or with age your firm views on a certian topic now seem to be not as important as they used to. I also find that ignorance can impact ones thoughts, if in this case she had not been exposed to gay people on a personal level it is easy to understand how ones prejudices could blind you from the truth, but by being exposed/ inroduced to a gay person or couple in a personal situation will undoubtedly changes ones views.
So instead of firing crazy headlines.. why not give this person the acknowledgement that she has indeed changed her views and welcome the decision. By deriding her change of heart makes it more difficult for others to publically change their opinions. I think we would all recognise that by being forced to change a decision/ opinion can be counter productive, the best way to to try and win the person over is to make then feel included in the decision process rather than force the decision upon them.
“For these reasons, we are calling for a full explanation of her views and an apology for her previous voting record in the form of an affidavit.”
This is bordering on the silly. There’s a fine line between constructive criticism and a witch hunt. Theresa May, as far as I am aware, does not owe this website anything.
People can change their opinions. Entire countries can change. Why, you might want to recall a country called South Africa that was quite keen on apartheid in the past and that changed. Presumably you wouldn’t launch a website proposing South Africa suffer sanctions based on past crimes now, would you?
May says she’s changed her opinions. Just wait and see how she performs when it comes to gay issues in the future rather than castigating her now. The focus is on her. If she steps out of line, then you get to nail her. Frankly, this website and the accompanying Facebook group reads like a pisspoor left-wing version of a Sun newspaper campaign.
We aren’t saying we don’t accpet her change of mind, of course we do. But she has only changed her mind on one issue e.g adoption. We want an apology with concerns her entire voting record e.g her repeated absence on votes concerning equality (she was absent for the Equality Bill vote in 2005, which basically outlines her remit). There are still many votes, e.g voting against equalising the age of consent which she has not apologised for and this means she remains inappropriate for the position.
Hello can I quote some of the information from this entry if I provide a link back to your site?