David Laws, the scandal, his outing and his resignation.

David Laws, the now former Chief Secretary to the Treasury,  has been a naughty boy. He claimed £40,000 in expenses renting his second home (for those not familiar, MPs are allowed to claim expenses for, well, just about everything but including a second home closer to Parliament since they obviously have to spend some time in London). His landlord, however, turned out to be James Lundie who, in the wake of the Telegraph expenses exposure, was revealed to be David Laws’ partner. Parliamentary rules ban you leasing accommodation from a partner. And yes, David Laws has been outed as gay. In response to the outing, the scandal and his expenses, David Laws has resigned.

Let me say on the outset that I don’t particularly like David Laws. While he has a good record on gay rights, he is a classic Tory-Dem, leaning to the right far too often to suit my tastes. I also refuse the idea that I should support him because he is gay – there are plenty of objectionable gay people out there and our shared sexuality doesn’t mean I have to defend him. I also reject the hand wringing that with his resignation we have lost the highest ranking openly gay cabinet member. He was not – he was the highest ranking OUTED gay cabinet member. There’s a difference. Someone who is openly gay and gets such a high post makes something of a statement about the acceptability of GBLT people, our right to be at every strata of society etc etc. Someone who gets to such a post through the closet and then comes out when he gets there – or is outed – does not make that statement. Quite the opposite in fact.

It also has to be said that David Laws is a very rich man in his own right. He did not need to engage in this petty level of corruption, by any stretch of the imagination. It was corrupt, unnecessary and, given the circumstances, very shortsighted and rather foolish to say the least. It’s hard to have even the slightest sympathy for an obscenely rich man playing fast with tax payer funds to get even more obscenely rich. And that applies to all the MPs and their moats. he could have declared his partner and funded a second home with that £40,000 and it would have not only been within the rules but not even considered overly questionable (I think we can all agree that most MPs DO need accommodation in London and while he claimed a lot of money, I shouldn‘t think we could consider it an unreasonable amount).

However, I think this commentary by the Times does raise some interesting points though I do find it rather more forgiving of Laws than he deserves (though, in Laws‘s defence, he is actually resigning which is more than many of his money grabbing peers have done). There are any number of MPs merrily fleecing the tax payer WITHIN THE RULES by declaring their partners and buying/renting/acquiring property with their partner and claiming the cost of that. In fact, many of them have made a tidy sum by “flipping” properties

And then we look at Laws and yes, he could have done the same thing (and cleaned his moat). But it would have involved outing himself. It would have involved him standing up and saying “this is my partner. I am gay.” But that comes with cost – personal and political.

I still have little sympathy, I have little sympathy because the man is rich enough to not have needed to claim expenses for accommodation at all and not put himself afoul of any rules – or basic ethics. Still I can’t help but feel he has been put in an awkward position as much because of his need to stay closeted. I also think there have been far far FAR more extreme abuses of the expense system that are WITHIN THE RULES that have been committed and could easily be committed by someone who was not unwilling to declare their partner and sexuality to all and sundry

I don’t like the man and what he did was grossly wrong… but I do feel his actions have been treated as being far more reprehensible than the general tone of the MP expenses scandal and I just don’t see why they are.

Now, relatedly, I have seen some gay commentators say, basically, “why are these Lib Dem MPs being forced out of the closet?!” basically the implication being that because they are Lib Dem and the Lib Dems are a generally pro-gay party, why would they need the secrecy? Why did he have to be closeted?

To which I scratch my head, frown and wonder at these commentators. They are POLITICIANS dependent on votes of the public. And the public is homophobic, sorry, it’s true. And it doesn’t matter whether Cleggy runs around bedecked in rainbows with linked mars-symbols hanging from every extremity, being closeted is still ’safer’ for a politician than being open – and it was within living memory that a Lib Dem MP (and a bisexual one at that) was campaigning as “the straight choice” to play on that. Let us not forget that he was part of a cabinet surrounded by people who voted vehemently against our basic rights consistently as recently as last year and stretching back decades. These are people who held onto their seats and became prominent within the Tory party by openly espousing homophobia.

And even aside from the political ramifications, we have no idea what this, personally, is costing him. Being openly gay does make you a target. I’m sorry, but it does. I wish it didn’t, ye gods I do. But it makes you a target and not everyone feels they are ready to face that, some people feel they are never ready to face that. And given his high profile, it’s not possible for him to play the “partial closet” game of moving in and out of the closet depending on who is around us. When he was outed, he was outed to the whole country from now until forever, be that at home with his partner and close friends, or turning the wrong corner and finding yourself at a BNP rally.

We do not know his personal circumstances. We do not know how being outed has shaken his world. We do not know how his family have reacted, how his friends have reacted, how his partner’s family and friend’s have reacted.  We do not know what experiences he’s had, we do not know what internalised homophobia he has/is dealing/dealt with.

In short, we do not know how much coming out or being outed cost him. So can we please stop judging fellow GBLTs because they are not outing themselves on demand?