The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
Guiltier than a party that hushed up a rape?
I don't think any of us can profitably try to make it a party issue, frankly.
I agree. I was replying to a post which did.
As I remarked earlier, I’m sure any of the parties could have held a “think about the greater good and your own long term interests” conversation. Until, it is to be hoped, today.
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
The Tories are ALWAYS assumed to be low-life, lying, cheating scum by "the court of public opinion". It's priced in.
Labour, on the other hand, are supposed to offer this wonderful new view, sat up their on their high horse, surveying the moral high ground....
You are right that the allegations against Labour are extremely serious, whereas the issues relating to the Conservatives are nothing more than recycled fluff -at the moment. The fact that the Conservatives are taking the sting is a drawback of incumbency.
The 'expenses scandal', duck house aside was viewed largely as a Labour scandal, and let's be honest, then as now, a lot from all sides were at it.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
Perhaps we need a new spreadsheet: faithful to spouse, hands kept to themselves, gets on with their work, doesn't abuse juniors.
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
Guiltier than a party that hushed up a rape?
The public are going to take a broad and unfair "All politicians are at it" judgment. In reality, I think:
(1) No leader or party can hope to keep the entire party, or even the entire Parliamentary party, free of dubious sexual activity and in some cases misuse of power. The actions of any individual Minister or party official can't reasonably be blamed on anyone except those individuals.
(2) However, anyone who is the subject of unwanted attentions beyond a trivial level needs to feel that by complaining they will deter the offender (with resignation or prosecution where appropriate) without any adverse consequences for themselves. None of the parties have up to now made this sufficiently clear.
I don't think any of us can profitably try to make it a party issue, frankly.
Sexual offences by UK nationals committed abroad can be prosecuted in the UK. So the police could act if the matter was reported to them.
They certainly can now Alastair but I am struggling to recall when that was changed. It might depend when this was. My recollection is that this was changed so the likes of Gary Glitter could be prosecuted for his appalling behaviour in the far east. If so that was a while ago.
The Guardian article, which I've just looked at, says the alleged assault was last year. Section 72 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 seems to have been overlooked by everyone.
If it was last year then there is certainly no bar to prosecution. In such circumstances I think a Party would have to be very careful about any investigation because it would be a police matter.
Yes, there is a bar to prosecution. Section 72 of the Sexual Offences Act only allows child sex offences committed overseas to be prosecuted in the UK (the list of offences subject to Section 72 can be found in Schedule 2). Rape of an adult overseas cannot be prosecuted in the UK.
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
The Tories are ALWAYS assumed to be low-life, lying, cheating scum by "the court of public opinion". It's priced in.
Labour, on the other hand, are supposed to offer this wonderful new view, sat up their on their high horse, surveying the moral high ground....
You are right that the allegations against Labour are extremely serious, whereas the issues relating to the Conservatives are nothing more than recycled fluff -at the moment. The fact that the Conservatives are taking the sting is a drawback of incumbency.
The 'expenses scandal', duck house aside was viewed largely as a Labour scandal, and let's be honest, then as now, a lot from all sides were at it.
My recollection of expenses scandal was that public blamed all sides pretty evenly. But relatively few big scalps came unstuck over it?
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
The public assume that MP's are at it like goats. They're only going to be concerned if there is evidence of assault, or if evidence of really weird stuff, like incest, emerges.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
Perhaps we need a new spreadsheet: faithful to spouse, hands kept to themselves, gets on with their work, doesn't abuse juniors.
Be a short list by the sounds of it.
The sad thing is that there are many decent MP's who would not even think of acting inappropriately but who are caught up in this firestorm
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
Guiltier than a party that hushed up a rape?
The public are going to take a broad and unfair "All politicians are at it" judgment. In reality, I think:
(1) No leader or party can hope to keep the entire party, or even the entire Parliamentary party, free of dubious sexual activity and in some cases misuse of power. The actions of any individual Minister or party official can't reasonably be blamed on anyone except those individuals.
(2) However, anyone who is the subject of unwanted attentions beyond a trivial level needs to feel that by complaining they will deter the offender (with resignation or prosecution where appropriate) without any adverse consequences for themselves. None of the parties have up to now made this sufficiently clear.
I don't think any of us can profitably try to make it a party issue, frankly.
Quite. I believe Cameron tried to set up such a non-party complaints system, but was rebuffed by Labour ?
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
Guiltier than a party that hushed up a rape?
The public are going to take a broad and unfair "All politicians are at it" judgment. In reality, I think:
(1) No leader or party can hope to keep the entire party, or even the entire Parliamentary party, free of dubious sexual activity and in some cases misuse of power. The actions of any individual Minister or party official can't reasonably be blamed on anyone except those individuals.
(2) However, anyone who is the subject of unwanted attentions beyond a trivial level needs to feel that by complaining they will deter the offender (with resignation or prosecution where appropriate) without any adverse consequences for themselves. None of the parties have up to now made this sufficiently clear.
I don't think any of us can profitably try to make it a party issue, frankly.
Quite. I believe Cameron tried to set up such a non-party complaints system, but was rebuffed by Labour ?
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
Guiltier than a party that hushed up a rape?
The public are going to take a broad and unfair "All politicians are at it" judgment. In reality, I think:
(1) No leader or party can hope to keep the entire party, or even the entire Parliamentary party, free of dubious sexual activity and in some cases misuse of power. The actions of any individual Minister or party official can't reasonably be blamed on anyone except those individuals.
(2) However, anyone who is the subject of unwanted attentions beyond a trivial level needs to feel that by complaining they will deter the offender (with resignation or prosecution where appropriate) without any adverse consequences for themselves. None of the parties have up to now made this sufficiently clear.
I don't think any of us can profitably try to make it a party issue, frankly.
I agree. The most systematic ofender seems to have been Rennard, who Cable has seen to bring back.
There is also a genuine difficulty in investigating unwitnessed events years later. Not that they should be ignored, indeed other incidents may come to light, but hard to see a succesful proof.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
Perhaps we need a new spreadsheet: faithful to spouse, hands kept to themselves, gets on with their work, doesn't abuse juniors.
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
Guiltier than a party that hushed up a rape?
The public are going to take a broad and unfair "All politicians are at it" judgment. In reality, I think:
(1) No leader or party can hope to keep the entire party, or even the entire Parliamentary party, free of dubious sexual activity and in some cases misuse of power. The actions of any individual Minister or party official can't reasonably be blamed on anyone except those individuals.
(2) However, anyone who is the subject of unwanted attentions beyond a trivial level needs to feel that by complaining they will deter the offender (with resignation or prosecution where appropriate) without any adverse consequences for themselves. None of the parties have up to now made this sufficiently clear.
I don't think any of us can profitably try to make it a party issue, frankly.
Quite. I believe Cameron tried to set up such a non-party complaints system, but was rebuffed by Labour ?
Rebuffed by the 1922 committee.
Both, I think.
The 1922 refused to sign up to a 'voluntary code' if it wasn't a cross party system; Labour seems to have said no thanks, we have our own arrangements...
He said: “The Conservatives have always been a lot more keen to do things on a House and cross-party basis because they struggle to get things through their 1922 Committee….
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
Perhaps we need a new spreadsheet: faithful to spouse, hands kept to themselves, gets on with their work, doesn't abuse juniors.
Be a short list by the sounds of it.
Plus May would come bear top of it
You know, strangely, I am beginning to wonder if this all might bring May out of her deep despair and confidence loss. She may well conclude that she has not only a duty to carry on, but frankly she is the only one fit for high office.
The discussion of sexual etiquette in this era does sometimes make me feel like a total dinosaur. It seems every approach is a potential harassment situation, ignoring the fact that gaining any consent for anything in life starts, by very definition, as a non consensual action. How one gains consent is important, how one defers if consent is not granted perhaps even moreso. "Feeling awkward" after a misjudged approach perhaps isn't the most reliable measure that harassment has taken place. Hell, I'd hate to judge my own youth by that measure.
My eldest son is now 13 and I wish there was more discussion on what is objectively allowed when making an approach in this era rather than just what is not.
This is not, I fear, simply a man whinge. If the etiquette becomes too restricted, too exclusively verbal, and the nervous vacate the field even for a time, there remain mainly chancers, and how does that make women safer? I don't necessarily see greater female safety in evidence in modern life. Perhaps chart music reflects quite well how a very verbal etiquette around consent can actually be good for the players.
My hope is that the airing of what, on current facts, seem like the more minor matters in this sleaze wave (Green particularly), permits at least some discussion to be had on what actually IS allowable today.
1. Michael Fallon and now Damian Green - ha haha hahahaha hahahaha. I mean sad grey old men. For fuck's sake. 2. One happy by-product of the hollywood/showbiz revelations is that I hope it spells the end of bien pensant, sanctimonious luvvies telling us how we should live our lives.
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
Guiltier than a party that hushed up a rape?
The public are going to take a broad and unfair "All politicians are at it" judgment. In reality, I think:
(1) No leader or party can hope to keep the entire party, or even the entire Parliamentary party, free of dubious sexual activity and in some cases misuse of power. The actions of any individual Minister or party official can't reasonably be blamed on anyone except those individuals.
(2) However, anyone who is the subject of unwanted attentions beyond a trivial level needs to feel that by complaining they will deter the offender (with resignation or prosecution where appropriate) without any adverse consequences for themselves. None of the parties have up to now made this sufficiently clear.
I don't think any of us can profitably try to make it a party issue, frankly.
I agree. The most systematic ofender seems to have been Rennard, who Cable has seen to bring back.
There is also a genuine difficulty in investigating unwitnessed events years later. Not that they should be ignored, indeed other incidents may come to light, but hard to see a succesful proof.
Which is why the utter absence of a workable complaints system is such a disgrace.
When the first point of complaint if you're groped by the MP who employs you is that same MP, and the next their party, whose first instinct seems to be to bury the matter, it's hardly an acceptable state of affairs.
That’s pretty serious, junior staff members being harassed to the point of quitting their jobs. This is more like the sort of thing I was expecting to be honest, and is a clear abuse of position with young colleagues.
Hope the Tory MP isn’t a minister, as that’s probably a sackable offence. His constituency chair had better start looking for a new candidate for the next election too.
The discussion of sexual etiquette in this era does sometimes make me feel like a total dinosaur. It seems every approach is a potential harassment situation, ignoring the fact that gaining any consent for anything in life starts, by very definition, as a non consensual action. How one gains consent is important, how one defers if consent is not granted perhaps even moreso. "Feeling awkward" after a misjudged approach perhaps isn't the most reliable measure that harassment has taken place. Hell, I'd hate to judge my own youth by that measure.
My eldest son is now 13 and I wish there was more discussion on what is objectively allowed when making an approach in this era rather than just what is not.
This is not, I fear, simply a man whinge. If the etiquette becomes too restricted, too exclusively verbal, and the nervous vacate the field even for a time, there remain mainly chancers, and how does that make women safer? I don't necessarily see greater female safety in evidence in modern life. Perhaps chart music reflects quite well how a very verbal etiquette around consent can actually be good for the players.
My hope is that the airing of what, on current facts, seem like the more minor matters in this sleaze wave (Green particularly), permits at least some discussion to be had on what actually IS allowable today.
It is simply a matter of good manners. If an approach is made and the other person does not respond as hoped, then simply apologise and assure them that you have misread them or misunderstood them and then do not repeat the behaviour. This is not rocket science.
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
The Tories are ALWAYS assumed to be low-life, lying, cheating scum by "the court of public opinion". It's priced in.
Labour, on the other hand, are supposed to offer this wonderful new view, sat up their on their high horse, surveying the moral high ground....
You are right that the allegations against Labour are extremely serious, whereas the issues relating to the Conservatives are nothing more than recycled fluff -at the moment. The fact that the Conservatives are taking the sting is a drawback of incumbency.
The 'expenses scandal', duck house aside was viewed largely as a Labour scandal, and let's be honest, then as now, a lot from all sides were at it.
"The 'expenses scandal', duck house aside was viewed largely as a Labour scandal," Is that the case? The guy with the moat wasn't Labour was he?
Bit late to this but on topic, claims of knee-touching a decade or more ago and a possibly (as yet unverified) dodgy text message seem pretty thin grounds on which to disrupt a political career.
Parliament needs to get its act together. There is undoubtedly in it a structure that makes sexual harassment and worse more likely: significant power imbalances and a culture of corporate self-protection (both within parties and as a whole). These things cannot be ignored and any remedies need to take them into account. Nor can those factors easily be changed; they are intrinsic to what parliamentary politics is.
So how to deal with it? One part of it is culture change. It should not be difficult to create a culture where you simply do not ask your office staff to buy sex toys. But dealing with behaviour that demeans is on thing; the covering up of more serious cases, another. I'm not at all sure how you do deal with that. Transparency and independent complaints routes are the theoretical answer but these already exist and don't work well. Victims can already go to the police or press but they don't because of the nature of their career aspirations and the pressures of the system. Any internal process, whether within parties or parliament, is unlikely to have the teeth to operate effectively because to have those teeth would imply either intolerable restrictions on MPs independence, or giving the body the powers of the police - in which case, why not leave it to the police?
The danger of over-reaction is also present: alleged victims need to be taken seriously but an unsubstantiated allegation cannot be allowed to bring a politician down, otherwise the incentive exists for opponents or, more likely, lone riders with an eye to a payout and publicity, and perhaps with a perceived grievance settle, to do so.
Getting the balance right will be difficult if not impossible. For now, taking steps in the right direction would be a good start.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
So he’s suggesting that Miss Maltby’s claims are untrue?
Dare I suggest to him that the complaint is relatively minor, and a sincere apology will probably suffice. If he thinks that involving lawyers won’t make the story bigger, he might want to research the case of Barbara Streisand.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
Perhaps we need a new spreadsheet: faithful to spouse, hands kept to themselves, gets on with their work, doesn't abuse juniors.
Be a short list by the sounds of it.
Plus May would come bear top of it
You know, strangely, I am beginning to wonder if this all might bring May out of her deep despair and confidence loss. She may well conclude that she has not only a duty to carry on, but frankly she is the only one fit for high office.
All Saints Day tiday and All Souls tomorrow. The start of the month when we remember our dead. Another terror attack, 8 more innocents slaughtered, people injured, some of them children, families and friends in pain.
And we’re getting exercised by some middle aged man writing an email to a journalist asking for a drink. That is what the Delete button is for.
The rape allegations and their cover up are very serious, though. As is harassment of staff. As well as being gross.
None of this ought to be a party political matter, as @NickPalmer so wisely writes.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
The way things are going I doubt TM will resign within the next two years
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
DD has said he's stepping down after Brexit.
He said it would 'probably be Boris' that succeeds May, that does not mean he is not interested if Boris looks a less appealing prospect.
So he’s suggesting that Miss Maltby’s claims are untrue?
Dare I suggest to him that the complaint is relatively minor, and a sincere apology will probably suffice. If he thinks that involving lawyers won’t make the story bigger, he might want to research the case of Barbara Streisand.
He's banking on the possibility that she didn't preserve the text message. Then it's just 'She said/He said' - thinking that nobody will fund her to challenge the assertion that she has either exaggerated or lied and that he can afford the risk.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
The way things are going I doubt TM will resign within the next two years
Depends what the polling looks like after Brexit and her avoiding or surviving any no confidence vote.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
DD has said he's stepping down after Brexit.
He said it would 'probably be Boris' that succeeds May, that does not mean he is not interested if Boris looks a less appealing prospect.
Given what’s going on at the moment, I can’t see either the MPs or the membership choosing as their leader someone who’s not trusted by his own wife.
As others have said, this scandal might be the making of Mrs May, it certainly could give her some room for a post-budget reshuffle to bring in some new talent.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
The way things are going I doubt TM will resign within the next two years
The way things are going the next PM will be from a very short list of people who only have sex with their partners, don’t try to fondle others or send them creepy emails and don’t abuse their staff.
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
The Tories are ALWAYS assumed to be low-life, lying, cheating scum by "the court of public opinion". It's priced in.
Labour, on the other hand, are supposed to offer this wonderful new view, sat up their on their high horse, surveying the moral high ground....
You are right that the allegations against Labour are extremely serious, whereas the issues relating to the Conservatives are nothing more than recycled fluff -at the moment. The fact that the Conservatives are taking the sting is a drawback of incumbency.
The 'expenses scandal', duck house aside was viewed largely as a Labour scandal, and let's be honest, then as now, a lot from all sides were at it.
"The 'expenses scandal', duck house aside was viewed largely as a Labour scandal," Is that the case? The guy with the moat wasn't Labour was he?
In the end, the expenses scandal hurt all sides equally.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
The way things are going I doubt TM will resign within the next two years
The way things are going the next PM will be from a very short list of people who only have sex with their partners, don’t try to fondle others or send them creepy emails and don’t abuse their staff.
JR-M it is then!
It just shows how out of control this debate is that a discussion on Victoria Derbyshire is now blaming zero hour contracts
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
DD has said he's stepping down after Brexit.
He said it would 'probably be Boris' that succeeds May, that does not mean he is not interested if Boris looks a less appealing prospect.
Given what’s going on at the moment, I can’t see either the MPs or the membership choosing as their leader someone who’s not trusted by his own wife.
As others have said, this scandal might be the making of Mrs May, it certainly could give her some room for a post-budget reshuffle to bring in some new talent.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
The way things are going I doubt TM will resign within the next two years
The way things are going the next PM will be from a very short list of people who only have sex with their partners, don’t try to fondle others or send them creepy emails and don’t abuse their staff.
JR-M it is then!
It just shows how out of control this debate is that a discussion on Victoria Derbyshire is now blaming zero hour contracts
In the guardian bbc world view ZHC are responsible for half the worlds ills.
So he’s suggesting that Miss Maltby’s claims are untrue?
Dare I suggest to him that the complaint is relatively minor, and a sincere apology will probably suffice. If he thinks that involving lawyers won’t make the story bigger, he might want to research the case of Barbara Streisand.
"So he’s suggesting that Miss Maltby’s claims are untrue?"
So he’s suggesting that Miss Maltby’s claims are untrue?
Dare I suggest to him that the complaint is relatively minor, and a sincere apology will probably suffice. If he thinks that involving lawyers won’t make the story bigger, he might want to research the case of Barbara Streisand.
He's banking on the possibility that she didn't preserve the text message. Then it's just 'She said/He said' - thinking that nobody will fund her to challenge the assertion that she has either exaggerated or lied and that he can afford the risk.
That’s a seriously naïve assumption on many fronts.
Thanks to Apple, I’ve got a copy of every text message and email I’ve sent and received since 2009.
The chances of some rich benefactor or pro-bono lawyer turning down the chance to see the deputy PM in court, with all the attendant publicity, is also unlikely to be zero.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
The way things are going I doubt TM will resign within the next two years
The way things are going the next PM will be from a very short list of people who only have sex with their partners, don’t try to fondle others or send them creepy emails and don’t abuse their staff.
JR-M it is then!
It just shows how out of control this debate is that a discussion on Victoria Derbyshire is now blaming zero hour contracts
Other than mrs green, in a weeks time would anybody really care if green had sent a flirty text message? Getting the lawyers involved seems PR mistakes 101.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
The way things are going I doubt TM will resign within the next two years
The way things are going the next PM will be from a very short list of people who only have sex with their partners, don’t try to fondle others or send them creepy emails and don’t abuse their staff.
JR-M it is then!
It just shows how out of control this debate is that a discussion on Victoria Derbyshire is now blaming zero hour contracts
The Tories are going to be judged in the court of public opinion on this one. Guilty as sin to be honest
The Tories are ALWAYS assumed to be low-life, lying, cheating scum by "the court of public opinion". It's priced in.
Labour, on the other hand, are supposed to offer this wonderful new view, sat up their on their high horse, surveying the moral high ground....
You are right that the allegations against Labour are extremely serious, whereas the issues relating to the Conservatives are nothing more than recycled fluff -at the moment. The fact that the Conservatives are taking the sting is a drawback of incumbency.
The 'expenses scandal', duck house aside was viewed largely as a Labour scandal, and let's be honest, then as now, a lot from all sides were at it.
"The 'expenses scandal', duck house aside was viewed largely as a Labour scandal," Is that the case? The guy with the moat wasn't Labour was he?
In the end, the expenses scandal hurt all sides equally.
Other than mrs green, in a weeks time would anybody really care if green had sent a flirty text message? Getting the lawyers involved seems PR mistakes 101.
This was the main thrust of my earlier comments regarding the court of public opinion !
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
Perhaps we need a new spreadsheet: faithful to spouse, hands kept to themselves, gets on with their work, doesn't abuse juniors.
Be a short list by the sounds of it.
Plus May would come bear top of it
You know, strangely, I am beginning to wonder if this all might bring May out of her deep despair and confidence loss. She may well conclude that she has not only a duty to carry on, but frankly she is the only one fit for high office.
Rejuvenation?
I think it will , a moral type figure of reassurance set against a morass of seemingly self indulgence.
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
The way things are going I doubt TM will resign within the next two years
The way things are going the next PM will be from a very short list of people who only have sex with their partners, don’t try to fondle others or send them creepy emails and don’t abuse their staff.
JR-M it is then!
It just shows how out of control this debate is that a discussion on Victoria Derbyshire is now blaming zero hour contracts
In the guardian bbc world view ZHC are responsible for half the worlds ills.
The other half being down to the tax efficient contracts they themselves use......
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
The way things are going I doubt TM will resign within the next two years
The way things are going the next PM will be from a very short list of people who only have sex with their partners, don’t try to fondle others or send them creepy emails and don’t abuse their staff.
JR-M it is then!
It just shows how out of control this debate is that a discussion on Victoria Derbyshire is now blaming zero hour contracts
Surely they mean unpaid internships? Something that still far too prevalent in politics (and the media) and result in a massive power dynamic.
Actually, unpaid internships may make things worse. If you’re unpaid, you’re pretty keen to get a paid job and not rock the boat or be seen as a trouble-maker. So it may, at the margins, make junior staff feel more vulnerable, more unwilling to speak up and increases the power imbalance.
Viewing people as disposable is not likely to engender respect for them, particularly if you’re the sort of person who takes a droit de seigneur approach to all females within reach.
Actually, unpaid internships may make things worse. If you’re unpaid, you’re pretty keen to get a paid job and not rock the boat or be seen as a trouble-maker. So it may, at the margins, make junior staff feel more vulnerable, more unwilling to speak up and increases the power imbalance.
Viewing people as disposable is not likely to engender respect for them, particularly if you’re the sort of person who takes a droit de seigneur approach to all females within reach.
Why are unpaid internships even legal in the first place? A person ought to be paid for doing a job.
Sexual offences by UK nationals committed abroad can be prosecuted in the UK. So the police could act if the matter was reported to them.
They certainly can now Alastair but I am struggling to recall when that was changed. It might depend when this was. My recollection is that this was changed so the likes of Gary Glitter could be prosecuted for his appalling behaviour in the far east. If so that was a while ago.
The Guardian article, which I've just looked at, says the alleged assault was last year. Section 72 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 seems to have been overlooked by everyone.
If it was last year then there is certainly no bar to prosecution. In such circumstances I think a Party would have to be very careful about any investigation because it would be a police matter.
Yes, there is a bar to prosecution. Section 72 of the Sexual Offences Act only allows child sex offences committed overseas to be prosecuted in the UK (the list of offences subject to Section 72 can be found in Schedule 2). Rape of an adult overseas cannot be prosecuted in the UK.
That's right. schedule 2 only allows rape to be prosecuted if the victim was under 18 at the time. It fits with my recollection that this was about Gary Glitter and other paedophiles who were going abroad to commit their crimes.
It is cases like this that keep the legal profession so happy.
A woman who was badly hurt when she was pulled off her feet by an Alsatian is suing her friend for £115,000 in damages.
Kay Benstead, 60, broke her arm and hip when she was pulled backwards by the dog, Lily, during a walk through Trent Park in Enfield.
She has now taken Lily’s owner, Anne Finnie, to court, claiming she never agreed to take control of the large dog’s lead but “had no choice about it”.
At Central London county court Mrs Benstead argued that Mrs Finnie, 76, thrust the lead into her hand without consent. Mrs Benstead said she would never have agreed to take charge of Lily on her own.
John Mann just said a complaint was made against a labour MP over an incident abroad and nothing has happened because the police said it was abroad. This seems to equate to the story in the papers today
Mr. Eagles, you're confusing morality and competence.
As an aside, I'm watching the latest LindyBeige video, and at 21 minutes in there's an interesting observation on Soviet show trials, the implication being many went meekly to their unfair fate because they thought Communism was so great it was worth taking a hit for the cause.
John Mann just said a complaint was made against a labour MP over an incident abroad and nothing has happened because the police said it was abroad. This seems to equate to the story in the papers today
That does reveal something of a loophole (and also potentially a gross failure to act by the Party concerned).
Bit late to this but on topic, claims of knee-touching a decade or more ago and a possibly (as yet unverified) dodgy text message seem pretty thin grounds on which to disrupt a political career.
Parliament needs to get its act together. There is undoubtedly in it a structure that makes sexual harassment and worse more likely: significant power imbalances and a culture of corporate self-protection (both within parties and as a whole). These things cannot be ignored and any remedies need to take them into account. Nor can those factors easily be changed; they are intrinsic to what parliamentary politics is.
So how to deal with it? One part of it is culture change. It should not be difficult to create a culture where you simply do not ask your office staff to buy sex toys. But dealing with behaviour that demeans is on thing; the covering up of more serious cases, another. I'm not at all sure how you do deal with that. Transparency and independent complaints routes are the theoretical answer but these already exist and don't work well. Victims can already go to the police or press but they don't because of the nature of their career aspirations and the pressures of the system. Any internal process, whether within parties or parliament, is unlikely to have the teeth to operate effectively because to have those teeth would imply either intolerable restrictions on MPs independence, or giving the body the powers of the police - in which case, why not leave it to the police?
The danger of over-reaction is also present: alleged victims need to be taken seriously but an unsubstantiated allegation cannot be allowed to bring a politician down, otherwise the incentive exists for opponents or, more likely, lone riders with an eye to a payout and publicity, and perhaps with a perceived grievance settle, to do so.
Getting the balance right will be difficult if not impossible. For now, taking steps in the right direction would be a good start.
Body cams. Seriously, in 10 years time these will be so discreet that you won't know if a potential victim is wearing one or not. Problem sorted (though at the expense of bringing other problems with it).
I'm on the train to that London, going to an industry reception at Westminster late this afternoon. With my MP and his colleagues pressing the government this very afternoon to release the studies showing that my industry will be knackered with no deal, I wonder what the main topic of conversation will be...?
Other than mrs green, in a weeks time would anybody really care if green had sent a flirty text message? Getting the lawyers involved seems PR mistakes 101.
I think you're right. The only person to have got his response right so far is Kevin Spacey despite how it looks at the moment
Other than mrs green, in a weeks time would anybody really care if green had sent a flirty text message? Getting the lawyers involved seems PR mistakes 101.
I think you're right. The only person to have got his response right so far is Kevin Spacey despite how it looks at the moment
New allegations this morning announced just now on Victoria Derbyshire programme
Mr. City, indeed. Suddenly "The worst thing I ever did was run through a wheat field" sounds rather better than it did.
I touched a woman's leg or I ran the worst campaign in history and lost Dave's majority to an economically illiterate, terrorist sympathising Trot?
Yet still got more seats than any other Tory leader in the past 25 years apart from Dave in 2015 (including Dave in 2010)
Simple question, do you think the 2017 general election result enhanced Mrs May and the Tory party?
The 2010 enhanced Dave and the Tory party, as they made the transition from opposition to Government.
A coalition government. The 2015 campaign was far better than the 2010 campaign though the 2010 to 2015 government without a majority was probably a better government than that from 2015 to 2017 with a majority ironically.
Actually, unpaid internships may make things worse. If you’re unpaid, you’re pretty keen to get a paid job and not rock the boat or be seen as a trouble-maker. So it may, at the margins, make junior staff feel more vulnerable, more unwilling to speak up and increases the power imbalance.
Viewing people as disposable is not likely to engender respect for them, particularly if you’re the sort of person who takes a droit de seigneur approach to all females within reach.
Why are unpaid internships even legal in the first place? A person ought to be paid for doing a job.
Because if they were paid the job/internship simply wouldn't exist in the first place.
Mr. Eagles, you're confusing morality and competence.
As an aside, I'm watching the latest LindyBeige video, and at 21 minutes in there's an interesting observation on Soviet show trials, the implication being many went meekly to their unfair fate because they thought Communism was so great it was worth taking a hit for the cause.
The classic on this is Koestler's brilliant Darkness at Noon, in which a passionate revolutionary is persuaded to "confess" and be executed in return for a secret record that he was really innocent. Sober, unsatirical and bleakyl real, it remains a masterpiece of a horrible time.
Mr. Eagles, you're confusing morality and competence.
I'm not, competence begets good morals.
If you're incompetent, you're having to live with the consequences of your mistakes, which leads to you comprising your morals to get you out of the hole you find yourself in.
Actually, unpaid internships may make things worse. If you’re unpaid, you’re pretty keen to get a paid job and not rock the boat or be seen as a trouble-maker. So it may, at the margins, make junior staff feel more vulnerable, more unwilling to speak up and increases the power imbalance.
Viewing people as disposable is not likely to engender respect for them, particularly if you’re the sort of person who takes a droit de seigneur approach to all females within reach.
Why are unpaid internships even legal in the first place? A person ought to be paid for doing a job.
I agree when people are doing a job. There is a case for them when you are giving students some experience in a job over the holidays, as I have done. There the amount of actual work someone can do is limited and there is quite a lot of training involved or programmes designed to give students an insight into how to present, do interviews, prepare a CV and so forth.
Unpaid jobs are also tough on people who do not have family resources to help them survive.
Mind you, they have been around in some form for a while. I had to do a year’s pupillage without being paid. I financed myself through teaching and a scholarship from my Inn.
Mr. City, indeed. Suddenly "The worst thing I ever did was run through a wheat field" sounds rather better than it did.
I touched a woman's leg or I ran the worst campaign in history and lost Dave's majority to an economically illiterate, terrorist sympathising Trot?
Yet still got more seats than any other Tory leader in the past 25 years apart from Dave in 2015 (including Dave in 2010)
Dave in 2010 gained 96 seats (on a notional basis, after boundary reviews - or 108 if you use the raw figure from 2005). That's more than any other party leader at any other election since WWII, apart from Blair in 1997.
Theresa May lost seats. In an election she didn't need to call and did so principally to capitalise on what at the time was a commanding lead in the polls.
So he’s suggesting that Miss Maltby’s claims are untrue?
Dare I suggest to him that the complaint is relatively minor, and a sincere apology will probably suffice. If he thinks that involving lawyers won’t make the story bigger, he might want to research the case of Barbara Streisand.
True enough - but there is no winning either way for Mr Green. Silence implies there was substance to the claim. Words are important in politics but they are also ephemeral. They can be misheard or misunderstood - sometimes maliciously, sometimes genuinely.
My reason for suggesting payment was perhaps inadequate before was that perhaps some who would rise above this and take politics on to a more worthy plane are being put off by the relatively modest pay, leaving room for some who are less worthy.
It has often been said pay peanuts you get monkeys. I have never ascribed to that view as my experience in local goverment is if you pay handsomely all you get are greedy monkeys.
It seems that under the present system we are in deed getting monkeys, the little ones who bare their backsides to the great hilarity of nine year old kids.
Mr. City, indeed. Suddenly "The worst thing I ever did was run through a wheat field" sounds rather better than it did.
I touched a woman's leg or I ran the worst campaign in history and lost Dave's majority to an economically illiterate, terrorist sympathising Trot?
Yet still got more seats than any other Tory leader in the past 25 years apart from Dave in 2015 (including Dave in 2010)
Simple question, do you think the 2017 general election result enhanced Mrs May and the Tory party?
The 2010 enhanced Dave and the Tory party, as they made the transition from opposition to Government.
A coalition government. The 2015 campaign was far better than the 2010 campaign though the 2010 to 2015 government without a majority was probably a better government than that from 2015 to 2017 with a majority ironically.
You still haven't answered my question.
David Herdson's post at 10.04 might give you some help.
So he’s suggesting that Miss Maltby’s claims are untrue?
Dare I suggest to him that the complaint is relatively minor, and a sincere apology will probably suffice. If he thinks that involving lawyers won’t make the story bigger, he might want to research the case of Barbara Streisand.
True enough - but there is no winning either way for Mr Green. Silence implies there was substance to the claim. Words are important in politics but they are also ephemeral. They can be misheard or misunderstood - sometimes maliciously, sometimes genuinely.
My reason for suggesting payment was perhaps inadequate before was that perhaps some who would rise above this and take politics on to a more worthy plane are being put off by the relatively modest pay, leaving room for some who are less worthy.
It has often been said pay peanuts you get monkeys. I have never ascribed to that view as my experience in local goverment is if you pay handsomely all you get are greedy monkeys.
It seems that under the present system we are in deed getting monkeys, the little ones who bare their backsides to the great hilarity of nine year old kids.
Other than mrs green, in a weeks time would anybody really care if green had sent a flirty text message? Getting the lawyers involved seems PR mistakes 101.
I think you're right. The only person to have got his response right so far is Kevin Spacey despite how it looks at the moment
Other than mrs green, in a weeks time would anybody really care if green had sent a flirty text message? Getting the lawyers involved seems PR mistakes 101.
I think you're right. The only person to have got his response right so far is Kevin Spacey despite how it looks at the moment
I think you mistyped there, I think you meant to say Michael Fallon...As Kevin has managed to do so much damage with his response he has not only caused the cancellation of Netflix biggest show they are also having to stop production of the current season....
Mr. Eagles, you're confusing morality and competence.
I'm not, competence begets good morals.
If you're incompetent, you're having to live with the consequences of your mistakes, which leads to you comprising your morals to get you out of the hole you find yourself in.
I'm not at all convinced. The world is full of incompetent people who are good, and competent people who are bad.
Actually, unpaid internships may make things worse. If you’re unpaid, you’re pretty keen to get a paid job and not rock the boat or be seen as a trouble-maker. So it may, at the margins, make junior staff feel more vulnerable, more unwilling to speak up and increases the power imbalance.
Viewing people as disposable is not likely to engender respect for them, particularly if you’re the sort of person who takes a droit de seigneur approach to all females within reach.
Why are unpaid internships even legal in the first place? A person ought to be paid for doing a job.
I agree when people are doing a job. There is a case for them when you are giving students some experience in a job over the holidays, as I have done. There the amount of actual work someone can do is limited and there is quite a lot of training involved or programmes designed to give students an insight into how to present, do interviews, prepare a CV and so forth.
Unpaid jobs are also tough on people who do not have family resources to help them survive.
Mind you, they have been around in some form for a while. I had to do a year’s pupillage without being paid. I financed myself through teaching and a scholarship from my Inn.
Could be worse, you could have been charged for pupillage. Articled clerks (of solicitors) certainly had to pay at one stage.
Mr. City, indeed. Suddenly "The worst thing I ever did was run through a wheat field" sounds rather better than it did.
I touched a woman's leg or I ran the worst campaign in history and lost Dave's majority to an economically illiterate, terrorist sympathising Trot?
Yet still got more seats than any other Tory leader in the past 25 years apart from Dave in 2015 (including Dave in 2010)
Dave in 2010 gained 96 seats (on a notional basis, after boundary reviews - or 108 if you use the raw figure from 2005). That's more than any other party leader at any other election since WWII, apart from Blair in 1997.
Theresa May lost seats. In an election she didn't need to call and did so principally to capitalise on what at the time was a commanding lead in the polls.
Seat gains are irrelevant, otherwise Hague in 2001 did better then Major in 1992 or Kinnock in 1992 better than Blair in 2005, it is actual seat numbers which counts
I don't think the Green revelations will affect May's position too much, she is still likely to depart soon after the Brexit negotiations are complete. However the chances of David Davis succeeding her as leader have increased as we know he has not been named on the spreadsheet and nor was Jacob Rees Mogg, so the latter's chances have also improved.
It looks like TM needs to conduct a cabinet reshuffle once the extent of issues are out in the open and hopefully she will bring in new faces and give an opportunity to others to shine.
I do not see David Davis as PM but JRM could come through but expect it will be someone off the radar at present
Davis is the most likely next PM at the moment in my view, JRM could be a future Tory opposition leader but not next PM.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
The way things are going I doubt TM will resign within the next two years
The way things are going the next PM will be from a very short list of people who only have sex with their partners, don’t try to fondle others or send them creepy emails and don’t abuse their staff.
JR-M it is then!
It just shows how out of control this debate is that a discussion on Victoria Derbyshire is now blaming zero hour contracts
When I worked in a fast food restaurant 30 years ago, the manager used to oblige certain staff with favourable shifts, in return for reciprocal favours. It was a pretty raunchy workplace. I think everything was consensual.
I can see how ZHC could allow for the same, but in a more abusive way. Power is relative, and even an office manager has status.
Fleas have smaller fleas, on their backs, to bite 'em, They, in turn, have smaller fleas, and so on, ad finitum.
Mr. Eagles, you're confusing morality and competence.
As an aside, I'm watching the latest LindyBeige video, and at 21 minutes in there's an interesting observation on Soviet show trials, the implication being many went meekly to their unfair fate because they thought Communism was so great it was worth taking a hit for the cause.
The classic on this is Koestler's brilliant Darkness at Noon, in which a passionate revolutionary is persuaded to "confess" and be executed in return for a secret record that he was really innocent. Sober, unsatirical and bleakyl real, it remains a masterpiece of a horrible time.
A brilliant book.
And referring back to the discussion the other day, Koestler was not a particularly nice human being. Treated his wife appallingly and Michael Foot’s wife claimed that he raped her.
Mr. Eagles, you're confusing morality and competence.
I'm not, competence begets good morals.
If you're incompetent, you're having to live with the consequences of your mistakes, which leads to you comprising your morals to get you out of the hole you find yourself in.
I'm not at all convinced. The world is full of incompetent people who are good, and competent people who are bad.
Some top Nazis were very competent in their evil schemes.
Bit late to this but on topic, claims of knee-touching a decade or more ago and a possibly (as yet unverified) dodgy text message seem pretty thin grounds on which to disrupt a political career.
Parliament needs to get its act together. There is undoubtedly in it a structure that makes sexual harassment and worse more likely: significant power imbalances and a culture of corporate self-protection (both within parties and as a whole). These things cannot be ignored and any remedies need to take them into account. Nor can those factors easily be changed; they are intrinsic to what parliamentary politics is.
So how to deal with it? One part of it is culture change. It should not be difficult to create a culture where you simply do not ask your office staff to buy sex toys. But dealing with behaviour that demeans is on thing; the covering up of more serious cases, another. I'm not at all sure how you do deal with that. Transparency and independent complaints routes are the theoretical answer but these already exist and don't work well. Victims can already go to the police or press but they don't because of the nature of their career aspirations and the pressures of the system. Any internal process, whether within parties or parliament, is unlikely to have the teeth to operate effectively because to have those teeth would imply either intolerable restrictions on MPs independence, or giving the body the powers of the police - in which case, why not leave it to the police?
The danger of over-reaction is also present: alleged victims need to be taken seriously but an unsubstantiated allegation cannot be allowed to bring a politician down, otherwise the incentive exists for opponents or, more likely, lone riders with an eye to a payout and publicity, and perhaps with a perceived grievance settle, to do so.
Getting the balance right will be difficult if not impossible. For now, taking steps in the right direction would be a good start.
Having a complaints procedure that isn't a joke would be a useful first step.
As it is, aggrieved parties with anything short of a criminal complaint have little recourse except the press - which is no good for MPs, either.
The discussion of sexual etiquette in this era does sometimes make me feel like a total dinosaur. It seems every approach is a potential harassment situation, ignoring the fact that gaining any consent for anything in life starts, by very definition, as a non consensual action. How one gains consent is important, how one defers if consent is not granted perhaps even moreso. "Feeling awkward" after a misjudged approach perhaps isn't the most reliable measure that harassment has taken place. Hell, I'd hate to judge my own youth by that measure.
My eldest son is now 13 and I wish there was more discussion on what is objectively allowed when making an approach in this era rather than just what is not.
This is not, I fear, simply a man whinge. If the etiquette becomes too restricted, too exclusively verbal, and the nervous vacate the field even for a time, there remain mainly chancers, and how does that make women safer? I don't necessarily see greater female safety in evidence in modern life. Perhaps chart music reflects quite well how a very verbal etiquette around consent can actually be good for the players.
My hope is that the airing of what, on current facts, seem like the more minor matters in this sleaze wave (Green particularly), permits at least some discussion to be had on what actually IS allowable today.
It is simply a matter of good manners. If an approach is made and the other person does not respond as hoped, then simply apologise and assure them that you have misread them or misunderstood them and then do not repeat the behaviour. This is not rocket science.
Indeed. I feel that ought to suffice at most times and in most circumstances. Perhaps best to trust the moral compass if it looks right to me, rather than worry about whether the magnetic pole has shifted. If that ends up making me a dinosaur, so be it.
Comments
As I remarked earlier, I’m sure any of the parties could have held a “think about the greater good and your own long term interests” conversation. Until, it is to be hoped, today.
The 'expenses scandal', duck house aside was viewed largely as a Labour scandal, and let's be honest, then as now, a lot from all sides were at it.
Be a short list by the sounds of it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-5034919/Deadly-form-PLAGUE-continues-spread.html
But relatively few big scalps came unstuck over it?
I believe Cameron tried to set up such a non-party complaints system, but was rebuffed by Labour ?
This is just bizarre.
There is also a genuine difficulty in investigating unwitnessed events years later. Not that they should be ignored, indeed other incidents may come to light, but hard to see a succesful proof.
The 1922 refused to sign up to a 'voluntary code' if it wasn't a cross party system; Labour seems to have said no thanks, we have our own arrangements...
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/revealed-backbenchers-blocked-bid-to-shield-staff-from-sex-pest-mps-a3671276.html
A Labour source said they changed procedures in 2014 to improve how claims of harassment, bullying and discrimination were dealt with.
He said: “The Conservatives have always been a lot more keen to do things on a House and cross-party basis because they struggle to get things through their 1922 Committee….
Rejuvenation?
My eldest son is now 13 and I wish there was more discussion on what is objectively allowed when making an approach in this era rather than just what is not.
This is not, I fear, simply a man whinge. If the etiquette becomes too restricted, too exclusively verbal, and the nervous vacate the field even for a time, there remain mainly chancers, and how does that make women safer? I don't necessarily see greater female safety in evidence in modern life. Perhaps chart music reflects quite well how a very verbal etiquette around consent can actually be good for the players.
My hope is that the airing of what, on current facts, seem like the more minor matters in this sleaze wave (Green particularly), permits at least some discussion to be had on what actually IS allowable today.
2. One happy by-product of the hollywood/showbiz revelations is that I hope it spells the end of bien pensant, sanctimonious luvvies telling us how we should live our lives.
Oh.
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/925649592288448512
When the first point of complaint if you're groped by the MP who employs you is that same MP, and the next their party, whose first instinct seems to be to bury the matter, it's hardly an acceptable state of affairs.
Hope the Tory MP isn’t a minister, as that’s probably a sackable offence. His constituency chair had better start looking for a new candidate for the next election too.
Is that the case? The guy with the moat wasn't Labour was he?
Parliament needs to get its act together. There is undoubtedly in it a structure that makes sexual harassment and worse more likely: significant power imbalances and a culture of corporate self-protection (both within parties and as a whole). These things cannot be ignored and any remedies need to take them into account. Nor can those factors easily be changed; they are intrinsic to what parliamentary politics is.
So how to deal with it? One part of it is culture change. It should not be difficult to create a culture where you simply do not ask your office staff to buy sex toys. But dealing with behaviour that demeans is on thing; the covering up of more serious cases, another. I'm not at all sure how you do deal with that. Transparency and independent complaints routes are the theoretical answer but these already exist and don't work well. Victims can already go to the police or press but they don't because of the nature of their career aspirations and the pressures of the system. Any internal process, whether within parties or parliament, is unlikely to have the teeth to operate effectively because to have those teeth would imply either intolerable restrictions on MPs independence, or giving the body the powers of the police - in which case, why not leave it to the police?
The danger of over-reaction is also present: alleged victims need to be taken seriously but an unsubstantiated allegation cannot be allowed to bring a politician down, otherwise the incentive exists for opponents or, more likely, lone riders with an eye to a payout and publicity, and perhaps with a perceived grievance settle, to do so.
Getting the balance right will be difficult if not impossible. For now, taking steps in the right direction would be a good start.
Given May will likely depart in under 2 years this 'someone off the radar' better enter the Cabinet and come on the radar pretty soon.
Dare I suggest to him that the complaint is relatively minor, and a sincere apology will probably suffice. If he thinks that involving lawyers won’t make the story bigger, he might want to research the case of Barbara Streisand.
All Saints Day tiday and All Souls tomorrow. The start of the month when we remember our dead. Another terror attack, 8 more innocents slaughtered, people injured, some of them children, families and friends in pain.
And we’re getting exercised by some middle aged man writing an email to a journalist asking for a drink. That is what the Delete button is for.
The rape allegations and their cover up are very serious, though. As is harassment of staff. As well as being gross.
None of this ought to be a party political matter, as @NickPalmer so wisely writes.
Some degree of perspective in reporting would be a good thing.
As others have said, this scandal might be the making of Mrs May, it certainly could give her some room for a post-budget reshuffle to bring in some new talent.
JR-M it is then!
No comment: he has a libel lawyer now
Thanks to Apple, I’ve got a copy of every text message and email I’ve sent and received since 2009.
The chances of some rich benefactor or pro-bono lawyer turning down the chance to see the deputy PM in court, with all the attendant publicity, is also unlikely to be zero.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/925657396021690368
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/925657753883996160
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_parliamentary_expenses_scandal
Viewing people as disposable is not likely to engender respect for them, particularly if you’re the sort of person who takes a droit de seigneur approach to all females within reach.
A woman who was badly hurt when she was pulled off her feet by an Alsatian is suing her friend for £115,000 in damages.
Kay Benstead, 60, broke her arm and hip when she was pulled backwards by the dog, Lily, during a walk through Trent Park in Enfield.
She has now taken Lily’s owner, Anne Finnie, to court, claiming she never agreed to take control of the large dog’s lead but “had no choice about it”.
At Central London county court Mrs Benstead argued that Mrs Finnie, 76, thrust the lead into her hand without consent. Mrs Benstead said she would never have agreed to take charge of Lily on her own.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/woman-hurt-by-friend-s-alsatian-sues-for-115000-a3673296.html
As an aside, I'm watching the latest LindyBeige video, and at 21 minutes in there's an interesting observation on Soviet show trials, the implication being many went meekly to their unfair fate because they thought Communism was so great it was worth taking a hit for the cause.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLtfJ0ekqVE
The 2010 enhanced Dave and the Tory party, as they made the transition from opposition to Government.
If you're incompetent, you're having to live with the consequences of your mistakes, which leads to you comprising your morals to get you out of the hole you find yourself in.
Unpaid jobs are also tough on people who do not have family resources to help them survive.
Mind you, they have been around in some form for a while. I had to do a year’s pupillage without being paid. I financed myself through teaching and a scholarship from my Inn.
Theresa May lost seats. In an election she didn't need to call and did so principally to capitalise on what at the time was a commanding lead in the polls.
My reason for suggesting payment was perhaps inadequate before was that perhaps some who would rise above this and take politics on to a more worthy plane are being put off by the relatively modest pay, leaving room for some who are less worthy.
It has often been said pay peanuts you get monkeys. I have never ascribed to that view as my experience in local goverment is if you pay handsomely all you get are greedy monkeys.
It seems that under the present system we are in deed getting monkeys, the little ones who bare their backsides to the great hilarity of nine year old kids.
David Herdson's post at 10.04 might give you some help.
https://twitter.com/martinkettle/status/925644351748886528
I can see how ZHC could allow for the same, but in a more abusive way. Power is relative, and even an office manager has status.
Fleas have smaller fleas, on their backs, to bite 'em,
They, in turn, have smaller fleas, and so on, ad finitum.
And referring back to the discussion the other day, Koestler was not a particularly nice human being. Treated his wife appallingly and Michael Foot’s wife claimed that he raped her.
As it is, aggrieved parties with anything short of a criminal complaint have little recourse except the press - which is no good for MPs, either.