Interviewer: “Rape is rape, with respect”; Ken Clarke: “No it’s not”

Ed Miliband called on David Cameron to sack Ken Clarke today after the justice secretary's remarks about rape in a BBC radio interview this morning.

Ed Miliband called on David Cameron to sack Ken Clarke today after the justice secretary’s remarks about rape in a BBC radio interview this morning. At Prime Minister’s Questions, Miliband asked Cameron “to take this opportunity to distance himself”, said “the justice secretary should not be in his post by the end of today”, and urged Cameron to “get rid of his justice secretary”.

Clarke made his controversial comments in an interview with Victoria Derbyshire on BBC Radio Five Live.

To the shock of his interviewer, he spoke about “serious rape… rape in the ordinary conversational sense”, claiming it was different from “date rape”.

Then, when Derbyshire said “rape is rape, with respect”, he replied:

“No it’s not.”

Listen to the key excerpts:

And speaking on Boulton & Co. on Sky News this lunchtime, shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said:

“You cannot suggest that there is somehow a category of rape in which somehow the woman is willing. Unless he changes his view very rapidly of course he’s got to go.”

63 Responses to “Interviewer: “Rape is rape, with respect”; Ken Clarke: “No it’s not””

  1. Justine Deeken

    Interviewer: “Rape is rape, with respect”; Ken Clarke: “No it's not”: Clarke made his controversial comments in … http://bit.ly/kUBSix

  2. graeme

    What struck me was how utterly feeble Miliband was at PMQs. Cameron came from that exchange rather well, when he shouldn’t have, and Miliband looks increasingly like a lame duck.

    Clarke will survive this – especially seeing as Ed the Duck “demanded” his sacking.

  3. Ed's Talking Balls

    Prison works.

    This insensitive gaffe has understandably attracted widespread criticism. But surely this isn’t the main reason why Clarke should go. The far bigger issue is his department’s policy, entirely contrary to his party’s manifesto, which advocates shorter sentences for criminals.

    That policy is more likely to do serious harm to the public than crass statements made in radio interviews.

  4. mr. Sensible

    I didn’t hear the program this morning, and so I will admit that I am playing catch up to an extent.

    However, Ken Clark has just given an interview to Nick Robbinson and, by the looks of it, he’s trying to do a U-turn and we can see the skidmarks from here.

    No ifs, no buts, rape is rape.

    On the question of sentencing, I support to a degree the principle of reduced tarrifs in exchange for an early guilty plea for the reasons he gave, but 50%? I don’t think so. I think reductions should stay as they are now (
    33%) for early guilty pleas, and then reduce on a sliding skale the longer it goes on.

    I’m afraid this seems to be rather symptomatic of this government’s attitude towards the issue of women and equality. I’m not quite sure what Theresa May is actually doing in her job as equalities minister, but in recent weeks we’ve had the universities minister saying that equal opportunities for women has lead to declining social mobility, we’ve had ‘Calm Down Dear’ gate, and now this. Add this to the fact that the Coalition’s cuts in general are having a disproportionate impact on women and the poorest in society.

    We talk about the Lib Dems asserting themselves within the coalition, but judging by what’s happening I think Theresa May needs to do likewise.

  5. RedfishUK

    So Anon, you *know* that rape by a stranger is worse than rape by someone you know (Date Rape)?
    Just because you assume that with rape by someone you know there will be less violence used and the circumstances are somehow more ambiguous. After all if it’s only Date Rape the victim by definition knew their attacker therefore no doubt you feel the victim is somehow to blame?
    How about taking into account the trauma of having to face your attacker on a regular basis, the fact that it could easily happen again, the abuse of power or privilege on the part of the perpetrator (which would make the offence more serious if it was a theft or some other crime)

    By all means feel free to spend your pathetic existence spouting your boring shite on this and no doubt loads of other sites, but perhaps it would be better if you kept your pathetic opinions to yourself on serious issues in the real world.

Comments are closed.