Section 28

This was due to uncertainty around what constituted the "promotion" of homosexuality, leading many teachers to avoid discussing the topic in any educational context.

[9] In England and Wales, homosexuality was decriminalised for men over the age of 21 under the Sexual Offences Act 1967,[10] following recommendations made in the Wolfenden report in 1957.

Five years prior to the enactment, a similar BSAS poll had found that 61% of Conservative and 67% of Labour voters believed homosexual activity to be "always or mostly wrong".

[17] Despite growing levels of homophobia in 1980s Britain, several Labour-led councils across the country introduced a range of anti-discrimination policies[18] and provided specialist support services for their LGBT constituents.

The copy found by the Islington Gazette was actually located in an Inner London Education Authority teachers’ resource centre, and there was no evidence to support the newspaper's claim that it was seen or used by children.

However, the book's portrayal of a young girl living with her father and his male partner provoked widespread outrage from the right-wing press and Conservative politicians.

[25] Prior to the introduction of Section 28, Conservative politicians became concerned about the future of the nuclear family[26] as fewer people were getting married and divorce rates were increasing.

2) Act 1986 which stated that sex education should “encourage … pupils to have due regard to moral considerations and the value of family life”.

[28] During this time, Conservative backbench MPs such as Jill Knight also believed that schools and Labour-run local authority areas would provide materials that would ‘promote homosexuality’ to children.

If it were to do so, I think it should certainly be confined to schools because otherwise there would be a real danger that some organisations which do good work in helping those with homosexual orientation, psychologically and in other ways, would be very much impeded.A spectrum of literature across the ages was cited (in support of these compromise amendments) by Lord Peston.

[38]Wilshire added that "there is an awful lot more promotion of homosexuality going on by local government outside classrooms", and the tempering amendments of that day's final debate were defeated by 53 votes.

The night before, several protests were staged by lesbians, including abseiling into Parliament and an invasion of the BBC1's Six O'Clock News,[40] during which one woman managed to chain herself to Sue Lawley's desk and was sat on by the newsreader Nicholas Witchell.

The statement asserted that the legislation restricted “the ability of local authorities to support schools in respect of learning and educating for equality”, had an adverse impact on schemes designed to curb discrimination and made “it difficult for schools to prevent or address the serious problems that arise from homophobic bullying.

"[44] A government circular also stated that Section 28 would “not prevent the objective discussion of homosexuality in the classroom, nor the counselling of pupils concerned about their sexuality.

[47] Glasgow City Council countered this by arguing that the funding granted to PHACE West was for the purpose of preventing the further transmission of HIV/AIDS, and that the organisation was not promoting homosexuality.

[49] In 1999, Conservative leader William Hague controversially sacked frontbencher Shaun Woodward for refusing to support the party line for Section 28's retention.

[51] His dismissal also prompted Steven Norris and Ivan Massow to speak out against both Hague's decision to sack Woodward, and against Section 28.

[58] As the impact of organised opposition within the House of Lords diminished following the death of Baroness Young, the legislation was subsequently passed with a majority of 180 to 130 in July 2003.

[61] The guidance distributed to local schools by Kent County Council was eventually quashed by the Equality Act 2010.

The Secondary Heads Association and NASUWT objected to repealing the legislation, stating in July 2000 that "it would be inappropriate to put parents and governors in charge of each school's sex education policy.

[67] One of Section 28's most prominent supporters in Scotland was the businessman Brian Souter, who led the country's Keep the Clause campaign.

[69] The poll's result was dismissed by the Scottish Executive and acting Local Government and Communities Minister Wendy Alexander MSP,[70] and received further criticism from LGBT rights campaigner Peter Tatchell.

[71] In contrast, Nicola Sturgeon of the SNP responded to the poll by stating that “the result confirmed that many Scots were concerned about repeal” and claimed that the debate regarding Section 28 was “difficult.”[72] Those who advocated for the repeal of Section 28 argued that the legislation actively discriminated against LGBT people, and put vulnerable young people at further risk from harm by failing to offer appropriate pastoral support or address homophobic bullying.

[74] They also stated that Section 28 contributed to the further stigmatisation of LGBT people, particularly gay men, by framing them as inherently “predatory and dangerous to be allowed around children.”[75] Section 28's implementation served to “galvanise [the disparate British LGBT rights movement] into action”, leading to the formation of campaign groups including Stonewall and OutRage!.

[77] Other organisations that supported repealing the legislation included Gingerbread, the Family Planning Association and the Terrence Higgins Trust.

[86] In 2000, one year prior to his election to the House of Commons, Conservative Party member David Cameron repeatedly attacked the Labour Government's plans to abolish Section 28, publicly criticising then-Prime Minister Tony Blair as being "anti-family" and accusing him of wanting the "promotion of homosexuality in schools".

Following this, the Department for Education announced its own investigation into the schools in question, stating that education providers were prohibited under DfE guidance from discriminating “on the grounds of sexual orientation.”[93] Several academic studies on the impact of Section 28 show that it has continued to impact LGBT teachers and pupils in the years following its abolition[94][95] For example, a 2018 study by Catherine Lee[96] found that only 20% of participating LGBT teachers who had taught under Section 28 were open about their sexual orientations to their colleagues, compared to 88% of participants who qualified following Section 28's repeal.

[97] In 2016, research by Janine Walker and Jo Bates found that Section 28 still had a lasting effect on school libraries; the availability of LGBT literature, resources and student support was very limited, and participating librarians lacked the knowledge required to appropriately support LGBT young people.

[98] A book chapter written by John Vincent stated that while conducting his research, he had met British library workers who assumed Section 28 was still in place.

[100] Recent British policy approaches to the provision of healthcare and pastoral support for young trans people, including a statement made by the acting Minister for Women and Equalities Liz Truss in 2020,[101] have also drawn comparisons to Section 28.