What’s the price of a moral compass these days? It seems that one has been mislaid in Downing Street? Could a replacement still be claimed on expenses? Just over three weeks ago, indefatigable human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell submitted a petition to the Prime Minister via the e-Petitions system on the Number 10 website. Ahead of next year’s papal visit to Britain, the petition urged the Prime Minister to distance the Government from the pontiff’s extreme views on women’s reproductive rights, condoms, same-sex relationships and gay equality. Are these views blinkered, bigoted and reactionary in the extreme? Is the Pope a Catholic? However, any reasonable person wishing to add their name to Mr Tatchell’s eminently sensible petition cannot do so. The e-Petitions team told him: “I’m sorry to inform you that your petition has been rejected. Your petition was classed as being in the following categories: potentially libellous, false or defamatory statements.” Mr Tatchell emailed Downing Street again. He asked: “Could you please explain what is libellous, false, or defamatory in my petition? All the information my petition has cited about the views and actions of the Pope and the Vatican is factually correct. The truth is a legitimate and legal defence against charges of libel and defamation. With respect, Number 10 should not be prejudging and censoring petitions. If my wording is libellous or defamatory (which it is not, because it is true), then it is up to the Pope and the Vatican to bring charges against me.” More than two weeks later, he has still had no further reply from Downing Street. But they should not think that’s the end of the matter. Mr Tatchell intends to submit a redrafted version of his petition very soon. We await developments.
