Talk:Derek Laud

Font problem
What's up with the font sizes, weight and colour? 109.149.209.212 (talk) 19:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Most popular?
What is the justification for the "most popular" statement at the start?

Notability
What is the justification for having articles devoted to Big Brother competitors? There are literary giants with less coverage on Wikipedia than this nonentity!

Why not? Wikipedia is not about taste... it's about information. 1000 years from now, people will want to see what was happing in popular culture right now.

Yeah... and they'll laugh at how we loved to see people thrown in a house and watched their every move... Deskana 21:03, 12 August 2005 (UTC)


 * How do you know this? Soul Embrace 03:07, 13 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Because people already criticise other people for watching the program. I can just imagine the people of the future thinking that. I watch the program. I think it's pretty sad that I do, really. But I loved seeing Eugene sit there talking to Kinga about amateur radio (I found his talk quite interesting) and see her ask him if she could put make up on him. -- Deskana 06:33, 13 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I really don't find that funny (or sad) at all. I think that finding interest in people and what they say and what they do is a good thing. The problem will come for future generations if they want more than an eviction such as an execution.  Perhaps, if they look back and see this dialogue, they might then stop laughing and think again. (... and I found Eugene entertaining too ;))Soul Embrace 18:32, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Claim that police were racist
A claim has been made that the police involved in the Derek Laud drunk-driving case in the USA have been investigated for racism. Can anyone cite sources for this claim?
 * The story was in the USA news. There was orignaly a link on the DS  site but the mssge board that it  was on was romoved when some people started posting untrue storys about derek  and sexual assault.
 * This news about the police was removed, and then later put back on 1 April 2006. Is the investigation still ongoing? I have been unable to track down any info about this investigation. can anyone possibly supply the link referred to above, or any news of the outcome of the investigation?--luke 08:40, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I am justified in removing the untruths and half truths as they are libellous?
I am Justfed removig the untruths and half truths as the are liblas.

The Story about Derek being arested for drunk drivg fials to mention that the police offcers who charged Derek with drunk drivig have been investergated for racism.

The story about Derek providing an alibi for his friends Neil and Christine Hamilton in their sexual assault case was worded in such away that might suggest that Hamilton  where guilty and the Derek had  given them a false alibi. This is what really happened: Derek was telling when he said that he was at a Diner Party with the Hamilton; the women who claimed that Hamilton’s had sexual assaulted her has since been proven to be lying so she could sell her story to the press.

I hope the above lends weight to my chnges, and that my version of the atical should be restored


 * I agree with your comment re the Hamilton Case. This must be reworded to make it absolutely clear that they were innocent and that Derek's alibi helped to get at the truth.


 * In view of what you say about the racism claim, we can include it to be worded in an appropriate way.


 * However, what about the other stuff which you deleted?

There is no reible source for the story aobut  Derek being involved with the cash for questions and 'cash for knighthoods' rows.


 * No evidence that he was guilty, but there is evidence he was investigated (earlier you said that the police were investigated for racism in the drunk-driving case). Derek Laud's name was mentioned in parliament in relation to cash for knighthoods but "came to prominence" is an exaggeration.

 You say that Derek Laud's name was mentioned in parliament; Can anyone cite sources for this claim?


 * It was in the version you deleted:
 * Hansard 19 May 1997 : Column 460

There is no reible source for the story about  Aldershot MP Gerald Howarth March 2005


 * Gerald Howarth was criticised for the remarks, but did not deny he had made them. The only point in question is whether Derek Laud actually said the words attributed to him by his friend Gerald. Derek Laud's words seem "in character" because, for example, he likened himself to an "African dictator" when he told Roberto on Big Brother "You’re sensitive, you brood too much. I could have someone executed in the morning and go out for a 3 course meal that night."

'''Gerald Howarth did not admit that he had made them and you have siad yourself that there is no everdence that Derek Laud actually said the words. So I am Justfed removig the untruths.'''


 * Report in The Voice

If you read that article you will see that it is hearsay:

'''Gerald Howarth has never admitted to making the remarks that that the article claims that he made so there is no evidence that Derek Laud actually said the words. So I am justified in removing the untruths.'''

I believe that Howarth's remarks were made at a meeting of The Freedom Association, and that they were recorded. The recording was passed to The Mirror. How can you use the word 'untruth' unless you know that the words were not spoken, or that they were spoken but you know them not to be true

'''How can you say that Gerald Howarth made the remarks unless you knowthat the words were  spoken, or that they were not spoken but you know.The law in the UK is innocent before proven guilty. So it is you who is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that  Gerald Howarth made  the remarks.


 * Here is the recording, which was later published by The Mirror on 21 March 2005
 * Gerald Howarth's anecdote

That recording is not a reliable source; it could be anyone. In fact the people in the recording sound like a group of bad acters trying to put on  BBC English accents.


 * The recording was covert but has been universally accepted. A transcript was published by The Mirror and furthermore Gerald Howarth apologised for his remarks. On what grounds do you believe everyone else is wrong to accept it? AFIK you're the only person to claim that the recording is fake.


 * On a general note you have deleted a substantial amount of uncontested information from the main article without any explanation. For example you asked for the sources for the claim that Derek Laud's name was mentioned in Parliament. The source was provided above (although as it happens it was in the article from the beginning) yet you continue to remove the information. Also, you said that Derek's alibi for his friends Neil and Christine Hamilton was worded in such away that might suggest that the Hamiltons where guilty and that Derek had given them a false alibi. The wording was changed to clearly take account of your point, yet you have again removed the information. And there are other instances where you have simply deleted information without any explanation or justification.


 * I see you had second thoughts on the above 2 specific items. But why have you deleted the information about Science and the BNP, The Monday Club etc? luke 18:57, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

The Mirro dos not always print the truth and furthermore you claim Gerald Howarth apologised; Can anyone cite sources for this claim?

In October 2001 Three MPs Andrew Hunter, Andrew Rosindell and Angela Watkinson, were ordered to resign from the Monday Club becouse of thier racists views. That does not single Derek out as an individual who did in fact supported repatriation of immigrants and the apartheid regime in South Africa.

As for Dereks nickname ;It is not non who nicknamed Derek "Golly and  many black  people are now recliamig words that in the past where assted with racsim


 * What is the point of debating this if you will not accept things which are accepted by everyone else? You are being unreasonable.


 * About the three MPs you mentioned: they were asked to leave the Monday club by Ian Duncan Smith because the Club's ethos was regarded as being completely incompatible with Conservative policy. You have misunderstood the situation - they were not asked to resign by the Monday Club but by the Conservative Party.


 * As to the nickname, you haven't explained why the information was removed. Nor about Science and the BNP. Nor several other items which you have also removed without explanation.


 * You seem to be trying to keep some established facts about Derek from being said. luke 22:21, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

When you say things which are accepted by everyone else what you really mean is things that are accepted by. Everyone who dislike Derek. I think you will find that a lot people do notaccepted  it.

About the three MPs:The link say Three MPs Andrew Hunter, Andrew Rosindell and Angela Watkinson, were ordered to resign from the Monday Club. It does not say that they where asked to leave the by the Conservative Party and I do not regard your word as aril source.

As to the nickname, I think you will find that I explained why the information was removed.

I have put back the section about Science and the BNP. What the other items which you have refer too; I will gladly explanation why I removed them as well.

I am not trying to keep any established facts about Derek from being said. What I am trying do is make sure that what is siad about Derek is the truth.


 * You objected to the inclusion of Gerald Howarth's anecdote, when you said "The law in the UK is innocent before proven guilty. So it is you who is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Gerald Howarth made the remarks." Despite the fact that you are the only person who seems to believe that Gerald Howarth is not the person on the recording, you still refuse to include the anecdote. And then, to cap it all, you insinuate that the police officers who arrested Derek in America were racist without giving any evidence apart from a link which you say has now disappeared. You are simply not being fair.


 * On the three MPs, the following proves that they were asked to leave the Monday Club by the Conservative Party because of the Monday Club's ethos:


 * BBC News 10 May 2002


 * Can you tell me why each of these items was removed: The quotation 'I've been working like a black,' details about Derek's appearance on Who wants to be a millionaire, and Derek's forcefully expressed objection to gay parenting and adoption? luke 14:09, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Derek did not forcefully expressed objections to gay parenting and adoption. What Derek said was, He said that he would like to be a father but gay men still face prejudice an that he did not think it would be fair o bring a child into that environment. A lot of gay men think the same way

What I am trying do is make sure that what is siad about Derek is the truth You on the other hand seem to be trying to conceal some important information about   police officers who arrested Derek  being investigated

Once again you you have got it wrong, The law in the UK is innocent before proven guilty. Derek I the person who is being accused So it is you who is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Gerald Howarth made the remarks. That recording is not a reliable source and does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Gerald Howarth made the remarks

I am not the only person who is Suspicious of the authenticity of the recording; many people who have taken time to listed to the recoding  have said the people in the recording sound like a group of bad acters trying to put on BBC English accents

On the Monday Club, the link that you posted proves that By an overwhelming majority, all Monday Club members agreed that that they should be committed to oppose any form of propagation of racial hatred.

On the other items:

I have put back the quotation 'I've been working like a black,' details about Derek's appearance on

I have put back ; the bit about Who wants to be a millionaire?


 * Gay parents: On one occasion in the house Derek said that he wanted to make clear his opposition to gay adoption "with all the force that I can muster" He seemed not to know that a law had already been passed and that joint gay adoption will come into effect at the end of this year. Some days later he argued at length with Makosi about the issue, maintaining that children would face prejudice at school if their parents were gay. I cannot understand why you removed the information about Derek's views, especially as you seem to agree with him.


 * Monday Club: The BBC News link includes the point that Monday Club members had overwhelmingly voted to oppose "any form of propagation of racial hatred", and it also confirms what I said about the MPs - that they were ordered to leave the Monday Club by the Conservative Party because the Club was considered too extreme. They were not expelled by the Monday Club for being racist, as you thought. Derek had been in a club which previously notoriously supported South Africa's apartheid regime, and it's also said that he had business dealings with racist South Africa through public relations companies.


 * Gerald Howarth: The foxhunting anecdote about Derek has been in the public domain since at least 1999 when he became Master of Foxhounds in May that year. He had been hunting since the early 1990's. Gerald Howarth was the latest in a long line of people to repeat the anecdote. You have previously asked for a citation for Gerald Howarth's apology over his remarks. You will see it in this newspaper article:


 * Surrey Hants Star from Google cache


 * MP rapped over ‘insult’ to police - by CLIFF MOGG


 * ALDERSHOT MP Gerald Howarth has been called on to apologise for a speech made to a private meeting of the right-wing Freedom Association.


 * Lib-Dem Adrian Collett, due to oppose Mr Howarth at the next General Election, described part of the speech as “grossly insulting” to the police.


 * He was shocked at Mr Howarth’s claim that the police felt so inhibited they found it much easier to arrest someone who was white, rather than black or Asian, because they did not want to be accused of racial discrimination.


 * “In all my dealings with the police I have found that the vast majority are keen to make sure people are treated fairly and equally,” said Mr Collett. “His comments don’t bear any relationship to the reality of modern day policing.”


 * Mr Howarth, whose speech at Birmingham last Saturday was secretly tape recorded and passed to the Daily Mirror, refused to respond to Mr Collett’s comments on Monday. He has, however, already issued an apology to anyone who might have been offended by what he said was a joke about his friend, black businessman and political lobbyist Derek Laud.


 * Mr Howarth, a member of the Freedom Association council, claimed his remarks about the police were based on a conversation with the chairman of Hampshire Police Federation. “My speech was a serious message about the threat to freedom from Mr Blair’s government,” he said. “I believe political correctness is causing a climate of fear in Britain today.”


 * Mr Howarth described as “garbage” the Mirror's call for Tory leader Michael Howard to sack him to prove the party is not racist.


 * You said that "many people who have taken time to listen to the recording have said the people in the recording sound like a group of bad acters trying to put on BBC English accents." Can you please cite any sources for your claim?


 * Drunk Driving: You haven't claimed that the police officers involved in Derek's drunk driving case were convicted, charged or even disciplined for any racist offence, and you yourself say you believe in innocent before proven guilty. Why, then, do you claim I'm concealing "important information about police officers." (You say that there was a racism investigation to which I have tried hard, without success, to find any reference.) I have however found web references that Derek was driving on the wrong side of the road, drunk, and without a driving licence when he crashed injuring four people. (It is reported that he said he couldn't take his chauffeur everywhere.) Are you saying his driving conviction was unfair?


 * Who wants to be a millionaire: Your change to the wording disguises Derek's blame for the mistake. Edwina Currie was misguided to accept Derek's suggested answer "Venezuela" rather than the correct answer of "Ecuador". They still had two lifelines to spare and Derek's answer, apparently given with confidence and without bothering to ask for help, cost their chosen charities at least £3000. luke 17:53, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes many people who have taken time to listen to the recording have said the people in the recording sound like a group of bad actors trying to put on BBC English accents. So can all Non Derek hates reading this please take time to listen to the recording and tell us what you think?

No I haven't claimed that the police officers involved in Derek's drunk driving case were convicted, charged or disciplined for any racist offence because unlike some people  who have tributed to the Derek page I only tell the truth.

What I have said is that the police officers who charged Derek with drunk driving have been investigated for racism. In fact they where still being investigates when the link about this story was posted on The DS sight this summer. If the investigation is still ongoing g that means that any reference that you have found about Derek’s alleged driving charge can not be consider reliable further more this web reference that you claim to have found is it from an official news site?
 * This news about the police was removed, and then later put back by 86.31.90.144 on 1 April. Is the investigation still ongoing? What are our sources for this fact? Any news of the outcome of the investigation? Anyone have any info please?--luke 06:39, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Who wants to be a millionaire: I reworded it to make it absolutely clear that Derek and Edwina Currie only had one wrong answer and the decision to give that answer was made by jointly

Gay adoption
You haven't replaced the information about Derek's homophobic attitude to gay adoption. Why was that. Please relace the information as you have not disputed the facts. luke 18:59, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

There is no info about adoption in the article now. If there is sourced information, let's see anout covering it in an NPOV manner. Thanks, -Willmcw 20:22, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Another way of looking at this is to read the discussion, as well as Derek's article in the Telegraph, and then to try and give a fair summary of his views on joint gay adoption. I wonder if you saw Derek on Question Time talking about Makosi and the Big Brother House. Did you see how David Dimbleby negatived his argument that Makosi entred Big Brother for the purpose of "one thing and one thing only" - staying in the UK - which Derek described as "reprehensible." The video is still online if you wish to see what happened

And what does that have to do with gay adoption? -Willmcw 23:49, 21 November 2005 (UTC) I went off-topic, sorry. Derek's views on joint gay adoption and parenting were removed without reason, and I think they are of interest (he is a potential parliamentary candidate) and should be included in the article--luke 18:02, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Golliwog reference
Just to let you know, I added a couple of links to show where the nickname came from. Please feel free to change the wording - it doesn't feel very NPOV to me but I couldn't think of better phrasing.

BBC Question Time BBC1 17 Nov 2005
video is online until 24 Nov 2005


 * removed source material -Willmcw 23:47, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Video is on Question Time page at BBC online luke 20:36, 21 November 2005 (UTC)


 * May I ask what the point of this is? Are you going to add a paragraph on his comments about Big Brother contestants? Or what? Unless these comments generated controversy, I don't see why they are noteworthy. -Willmcw 22:15, 21 November 2005 (UTC)


 * The excerpts are put here as a matter of record, and I may comment further on some of them. In the meantime Derek made a serious accusation against Makosi, couched in the most vicious terms, which - as I suggested earlier - David Dimbleby showed to be probably untrue. luke 22:51, 21 November 2005 (UTC)


 * The only purpose of this talk page is to discuss changes to this article. Since this source material is not being used, and is available elsehwere, I'm removing it from this page. Please, let's stick to our task - writing an encyclopedia. Thanks, -Willmcw 23:47, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

I think we should add some of Derek Laud's opinions given as a panelist on Question Time. For example he is in favour of less regulation of pub opening hours and says-

"I don't think - and I'm sure that nobody else here thinks - that we need the government to regulate what time of the day we should have a drink and I think as adults - and responsible adults at that - we should be able to determine that for ourselves."

This from a convicted drunk-driver--luke 18:33, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Maybe a paragraph on his political views would be appropriate. That could summarize pub closings, gay adoption, etc. -Willmcw 21:21, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Who Wants to be a Millionaire?
Derek's attitude, combined with his limited general knowledge, led to him and Edwina only winning £500 for each of their charities. Edwina had made it clear from the start of the question period that she didn't know the answer, and was reliant on Derek. I think the information in its present form should be removed,	because the revised version conceals Derek's culpability for their joint failure.--luke 18:26, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * That appears to be a conclusion that you are making personally. If some notable person has made that accusation then we can include it. However to draw our own conclusion would be inappropriate. Obviously he missed the question because he didn't know the answer and thought he did. Isn't that the way people usually lose quiz shows? -Willmcw 22:22, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't forget there were two lifelines remaining. You removed the unofficial tag from the main article. I will put up an official disputed tag if we are unable to agree, and then others can judge --luke 00:55, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
 * We seem to agree that the mistake was Derek's, in that he didn't know the answer and thought he did know. The question then arises whether DL should be held to account for his mistake. I think he should be held to blame because he is too often wrong on these matters, and should have realised his limitations and taken advantage of the lifelines he had available. Since it wasn't even his money, he should have been even more cautious. Do you have a view?--luke 04:56, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Fox hunting anecdote
Should this be re-instated? Only one Wikipedian has disputed the secret tape's authenticity.--luke 18:30, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't see the discussion of the tape. What are our sources for it? -Willmcw 22:24, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * It's discussed in detail under the section headed I am Justfed removig the untruths and half truths as the are liblas --luke 00:58, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

'Parliamentary candidacy'
Should we amend/rename the 'parliamentary candidacy' section, because the Evening Standard reported that his nominators withdrew their support and DL failed to turn up for a photo shoot. I don't think there's evidence that his candidacy was confirmed. It seems the drunk driving conviction intervened. Should we leave in that there have been claims of racism against the police officers involved?--luke 18:35, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Disputed issues
There has been a long-running exhaustive dicussion on several issues on this article, as can been seen from the history, and on this discussion page. The article carried an unofficial disputed tag for a while to indicate this. If any issues - either on this discussion page or the main article - are still disputed, we need to know precisely about the matters in dispute - so that they can hopefully be resolved in good faith. If the article is later reverted or 'vandalised' I will put up an official disputed tag--luke 18:26, 27 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I propose to include the now undisputed information that was previously deleted. Any comments please?--luke 17:30, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Text of 3rd draft revision (notes etc to be added)
Derek Laud (born August 9, 1964) is a British political lobbyist and former Conservative parliamentary candidate, who achieved celebrity status during his run as a contestant in the sixth (2005) series of the UK Big Brother TV series.

Contents
 * 1 Early career
 * 2 Parliamentary candidature
 * 3 Anecdote
 * 4 Big Brother contestant
 * 5 More recent events
 * 6 Circle of friends

Early career

Laud became a researcher working for Conservative Members of Parliament in the mid-1980s. He fought a seat in Wandsworth council's Graveney ward in May 1986, and won 937 votes, not quite enough to secure a seat. He gained notice as the only black member of the Monday Club, which supported repatriation of immigrants and the apartheid regime in South Africa.

During his career, Laud has written speeches for several well-known Conservatives including Margaret Thatcher, Michael Heseltine and Alan Clark. He is mentioned in John Major's autobiography. Moving on from Westminster, he was employed in the City of London in equity finance. He established a lobbying company Ludgate Laud in the early 1990s. As a parliamentary lobbyist Derek Laud was mentioned in the Commons by Labour MP Martin Linton in his maiden parliamentary speech.

Parliamentary candidature

For the 1997 General Election, Laud was selected as Conservative candidate for the seat of Tottenham, but stepped down shortly before the election citing "business reasons". There was press speculation that this referred to Laud's drink-driving conviction in the US.

Anecdote

Derek Laud had long been an enthusiastic fox hunter and in 1999 he became the first black Master of Foxhounds for the New Forest Hunt. His hunting activity was the subject of an anecdote told by Aldershot MP Gerald Howarth in March 2005. Describing Laud as "as black as the ace of spades", Howarth said that hunt saboteurs had challenged Laud claiming that 100 years ago, the ancestors of the other huntsman would have been hunting him, and Laud had responded by saying "100 years ago my ancestors would have been eating you."

Big Brother contestant

At the end of one of the Big Brother tasks, Laud remarked, "I've been working like a black." He caused some controversy when, in the diary room during nominations, he remarked (perhaps half-joking, being black himself) of fellow housemate Science: 'In Science I have found the first black person who makes me want to become a member of the BNP.' In fact a glance at the BB6 nominations table shows that Science was the first black housemate who Derek nominated, and that his nomination wasn't until week 8. On one occasion later - when the housemates were seated around a table playing the part of WW2 spies - Derek asked Craig for a chocolate. Makosi offered to pass a chocolate over to him, and then Derek told Makosi to keep her "filthy black hands" off. He likened himself to an "African dictator" when he told Roberto "You’re sensitive. You brood too much. I could have someone executed in the morning and go out for a three course meal that night."

At various times during his stay in the Big Brother house Derek composed poems relating to his experience, and recited some of them to his fellow housemates and to Big Brother in the Diary room. He also sometimes made use of his knowledge of Shakespeare's plays.

Many quips, in the Big Brother House and otherwise, were made about Derek Laud's potential as a candidate for the Conservative Party leadership. There appears to be a call from some Conservatives for his selection as a candidate once more at the next election.

On at least two occasions during his time in the Big Brother house Derek, as a gay man, expressed very strong opposition to gay parenting and adoption, giving different reasons each time. For example he argued that the children of same-sex parents would be bullied at school, despite being told by Makosi that he was pandering to homophobia.

26-year-old model and Business Studies graduate Orlaith McAllister, another housemate, walked out of the series citing Laud's bullying behaviour as a contributory factor. Laud was the tenth person to be evicted from the Big Brother House after losing in a head-to-head with Eugene Sully, a housemate with whom he had become quite close and who Derek incorrectly predicted would be the winner of the show. Laud received 58% of the eviction vote.

During his eviction interview with Davina McCall, he told of his plans to publish a collection of children's stories which he had been writing before entering the Big Brother house.

More recent events

Derek partnered Edwina Currie on a charity edition of Who wants to be a millionaire? on 17th September 2005 when they won £1000 between their chosen charities. Derek was responsible for their wrong answer in Q7

During the Conservative Party conference in October 2005, Derek Laud endorsed David Cameron to be the next leader of the party, saying "Good looks are very important and David Cameron is very attractive."

Derek's political views, which some characterise as populist right-wing, tend to polarize people for or against him. On Question Time BBC1 TV (17 Nov 2005) Laud said, speaking in favour of longer pub opening hours: 'I think as adults - and responsible adults at that - we should be able to determine that (when to drink) for ourselves. ... I think that essentially what we've got to be doing here is to encourage people to take responsibilities for themselves and get the state out of our private lives.' About education in Britain he said: '44,000 people this year at 16 years old left school without a single GCSE - that is a national disaster. So where is Blair's radicalism? He will fall short of his place in history if he doesn't live up to the radicalism of Asquith in 1908 and Clement Atlee in 1945 and Thatcher in 1979 if he doesn't get this right. He has to take on these people who've got this taboo about the private sector having any part in education, and i deplore it.'

Circle of friends

During his time in the Big Brother house Laud formed friendships with fellow Big Brother housemates Lesley, Roberto, Kemal, Eugene and Kinga. He was visibly moved seeing Kemal's parents offering their support to their son in a video message to the BB House, and Kemal was a guest at Laud's 41st birthday party after they were both evicted. Derek offered help to Lesley during her troubles following a falling out with her family in late 2005

Derek has a wide circle of friends in the Conservative Party. In 2001 he provided an alibi for his friends Neil and Christine Hamilton when they were falsely accused by a member of the public, Nadine Milroy-Sloan, of sexual assault. (Ms Milroy-Sloan was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.)

Laud is content to be referred to by his friends as "Golly", a fact he mentioned in the BB6 House. Derek is also a friend of the former Champion boxer Chris Eubank, who appeared on Celebrity Big Brother in 2001. According to regular contributors to the Big Brother TV shows, he is also a friend of Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall but does not like to mention it.--luke 22:55, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Need for proper references
This should be an interesting and important Wikipedia article, however there is a shortage of citation and references for the key sections of the text.

I note from the talk page, that there's been a debate over sources and information, but these haven't been added in to the main text.

As an aside, the talk page needs tidying up urgently. I'm not sure how and where all the colours have come from.

Jpmaytum (talk) 22:02, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Information disputed by subject
I've removed reliably sourced information disputed by the subject in a twitter conversation. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 09:30, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Reverted, the information removed is properly sourced and relevant, and Laud has described himself as a member of the Club in an article which he wrote for the Daily Mail. Rangoon11 (talk) 20:30, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Should add that Laud himself, of course, has a COI in terms of this article. If he has issues with the contents of this article then he is welcome to come to this page and discuss them, but he will need to provide reliable sources in the usual manner.Rangoon11 (talk) 20:43, 24 November 2012 (UTC)


 * It's our responsibility as editors to get the article right - see WP:BLP - whether the subject himself shows up on the talk page to discuss it or not. It is not the purpose of Wikipedia to force subjects to become editors. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * No but nor should we be taking instructions from the subject themself on what the article should or should not include. If they take issue with the contents then there are routes available for them, but properly sourced material should not be removed following comments made by the subject on Twitter. Rangoon11 (talk) 23:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Laud is now threatening me with legal action on twitter. I have strated a discussion at ANI. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 08:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 13:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Derek Laud. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120305114059/http://www.newcityinitiative.org/people.html to http://www.newcityinitiative.org/people.html
 * Added tag to http://articles.nydailynews.com/1997-03-05/local/18031136_1_david-thompson-accident-civil
 * Added tag to http://www.stanhopecapital.com/team/partners?1=1&blockid=277997
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090721064208/http://www.locatetv.com/tv/who-wants-to-be-a-millionaire/339795 to http://www.locatetv.com/tv/who-wants-to-be-a-millionaire/339795
 * Added tag to http://www.bbc.co.uk/cultureshow/videos/2008/07/s5_e5_bbderek_extra/index.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Monday Club
It is completely untrue he was a paid up member of the Monday Club. He wrote a paper for them, but was never a member. At that time he was involved with the No Turning Back Group of MPs, most of whom were members of the government. He was a consultant at SNI and Michael Colvin MP and Neil Hamailton MP were not retained by SNI whilst Laud was there. Nor did Laud make any suggestions whatssoever that either men should be retained by SNI. You wrongly atribute Laud as working for the 'Apartheid South Africa'. Laud was invloved in Financial Services Regulation at SNI at the time and was there as Head of the Financial Services Divison and had no day to day involvement with South African accounts.Clients of the firm then (due to his contacts, included, The securities and investments board, FIMBRA, LAUTRO and IMRO. Godfrey Jillings, then CEO of FIMBRA can varify these facts.

Michael Colvin was in fact a Director of Ludgate Laud and that might be how this confusion has arisen. You also wrongly state that Laud is a lobbyist. Laud left the lobbying sector in 1997. Laud has been in Private Equity Finance and Private Banking since that time. One way of varifiying these facts might be to consult those (when living) that you write about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hammell11 (talk • contribs) 13:08, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * This being a biography of a living person, it is very important that the information presented in the article is correct. You bring up a number of concerns, which certainly should be addressed if they are valid, but please know that Wikipedia's policies of verifiability and no original research means that editors cannot simply consult other people on information, and instead sources must be reliable and published. — ChromeGames923 (talk · contribs) 01:35, 26 November 2020 (UTC)