Leeds MP in Twitter row over gay marriage debate

Greg Mulholland, MP for Leeds North West, used colourful language in a Tweet to Leeds University student Jonathan Pryor, while calling him “disingenuous” and “manipulative”.

The MP was responding to a tweet from Mr Pryor which stated: “After abstaining, voting for a wrecking amendment, then trying to abolish marriage, I’m glad @GregMulholland1 finally voted the right way.”

A number of users on the social networking site have since responded to the row, prompting Mr Mulholland to issue a statement today.

He said: “As I have said to constituents and in parliament, whilst the principle of equal recognition is one I fully support, the Marriage Bill is flawed and is not equal in several ways, as it continues to deny same sex civil partners the same pension rights as others, it provides two different definitions of civil marriage not one, it allows civil partnerships only for same sex couples and it prevents humanists and some religions having civil marriage ceremonies. So it is unequal on four counts and I have called for that to be changed,

yet for that some people including Mr Pryor have condemned me.

“Sadly, there have been some who have taken this opportunity to act on their own personal or political agendas and used it as an excuse to personally attack me and other MPs. Then intolerance shown by some of both sides of this debate is sad.

“Despite my continually explaining to Jonathan Pryor and others my clear position, which is for a much more radical change and the proper separation of civil and religious marriage, he has continued to cynically misrepresent my views and to wrongly and unfairly suggest I am anti gay rights.

He added: “I will continue to take difficult decisions according to my own conscience and my liberal beliefs and I will continue to make the case for a proper, radical, liberal reform of how the state recognises relationships that would lead to genuine equality for all couples, all

religions and belief systems and all individuals none of which is the case in the current Bill.”