ONE can, of course, be forgiven for being confused about the moral values of former transport minister, Steven Norris, the re-tread runner once again hoping to be Tory candidate for London's mayoralty.

For, with his strongly heterosexual record as an admitted serial adulterer, he raps party leader William Hague for sacking a spokesman who opposed the Shadow Cabinet's decision to try and save Section 28 of the Local Government Act introduced under Margaret Thatcher to prevent councils promoting homosexuality.

Mr Norris, who, I suspect, is after London's sizeable 'pink' vote, says Section 28 is "totemistic, homophobic and unworthy of the Conservative government that introduced it."

But never mind the possibility that the Tories' substitute for Lord Archer as potential London Mayor could be a pro-gay randy straight at odds with his party boss, the question here, surely is what duty it is of councils to spend public money on promoting in schools and elsewhere a minority's sexual proclivity and what duty it is of the Labour government to repeal this law so they can do so.

Moral considerations apart - though, really, it is impossible to set them aside on an issue such as this - what can be valid about using public funds to promote sex, whatever sort it may be?

I am firmly convinced the law as it stands is in line with public wishes, but, as we have already been shown by the government, which has a clear homosexual streak in the make-up of the Cabinet, in this and its determination to lower the age of homosexual consent, there is an arrogant disdain for morality in the Labour hierarchy - and in dissident sections of the Tories who also dare not say boo to the gays that most of us do not want to know about.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.