Has anyone on here actually met, on a personal basis, either their or any MP? I’ve met a few. Almost without exception, they’re a bit odd and shifty. Don Foster (ex-MP for Bath) had the most insincere smile I’ve seen on anyone and continually looked over my shoulder, even when this was in the middle of the street and there was no one else around. Anyone remember Bungle from Fiverweb? He used to work as one of ‘The Don’s’ members of staff and introduced me. I’ve also met a few in the Commons when there doing some research and they all seemed a bit weird.
I can fully imagine these guys (and women) doing inappropriate things and thinking that it is actually fine. They all seem to touch in an odd way and stand oddly close to people when talking to them.
Unfortunately Soggy they are only talking about putting weak measures in place for future conduct. They don’t want to talk about the past or do anything about the crimes(far too many people involved).
Hopefully one or two high level MPs will force the issue, otherwise it’s another nail in the coffin of democracy. I am looking at Corbyn here. Force the issue and accept it will affect your party as well(it will damage his reputation if he doesn’t).
Pretty sure he’ll address it. The allegations made by Bex Bailey centre on a senior Labour party figure that is not an MP. Consequently, you’re looking at either a peer or a senior member of the administrative function.
Labour’s Lisa Nandy says three years ago she gave May evidence of whips using information about sexual abuse to demand loyalty from MPs. Nandy says on three occasions she asked her to act, and on three occasions May refused.
May says she will look back at the questions that Nandy raised. She says all whips offices in the Commons should make it clear that sex abuse allegations go to the police. Where there are allegations of misconduct, action will be taken, she says. She says she wants people to feel confident that they can bring forward cases, she says. She says she wants a good process in parliament, so people so not need to go through party processes.
Maybot done right up by Lisa Nandy (and her own inaction).
The PM is clearly a fan of the Heath/Fortescue approach.
I watched an epsiode of Star Trek: Next Generation the other day. It had a species that had evolved to be sexless, no gender. Would there still be all this carry on if there were no gender?
And that sadly, is precisely how it is likely to be played. A scoring contest with nowt but own goals scored.
The Tories are having more important players sent off, though. The Conservative party have already made mincemeat of May’s advisors. Damian Green was very much seen as the replacement as May’s confidant. If he goes, who does she really have left batting for her that won’t want her job?
Well if we are going to politically point score, Jezza still has to explain why, despite being warned by his whips, he still promoted someone who was accused of sexual harassment. As you say no one is going to come out of this well.
You should know me well enough by now to know that I’m not partisan to a fault. I suspect the simple truth is that in the Hopkins case, it was one person’s word against another. The party did not entirely acquit him; he was reprimanded.
It’s also worth remembering the context of his promotion. Corbyn had the unenviable task of having to appoint a lot of ministers, quickly, after the mass resignations following the Brexit result.
Finally, it’s probably worth remembering the context of his alleged action, which at worst, is him pushing his crotch into an activist. I don’t condone it at all, but the Labour Party leadership are probably a lot more clued into the proclivities of other politicians in Westminster. They may have looked at Hopkins’ offence and decided that in the grand scheme of things, then, it was something they could manage.
Where there has been more than one person’s word against another, the party has acted. Danczuk lost the whip when he was caught sexting young girls. What has happened is that tolerance for this sort of behaviour has changed. The line on what constitutes sexual assault or abuse of power is finally getting to where it should be, and some politicians on both sides are going to be on the wrong side of that line.
My hope is that they sing like fucking canaries when they’re caught, singing songs about people that have gone much further. Parliament has been facilitating this practice through its whips’ offices for nigh on fifty years. It must end.
How long have we had a Parliament that’s how long it has been going on, The empowered will take advantage of the meek it has been going on for centuries. But only now due to social media is it spread far and wide and the villains are being bought to book.
I’m sure you’re right and that it has been going on far longer, but it’s the Heath period in which the operation of stuff like dirt books and the like were publicly acknowledged as levers of policy, even if only by an unguarded few.
I also think your point about social media and the Internet in the free propagation of thought is bang on. It’s under massive threat. Russia has banned VPNs this week, meaning they’ll get to monitor everything someone says unless that person commits a criminal offence.
Technology is also a double edged sword. We’ve seen “moderate” Presidents like Obama, Dubya (Trump effect, yo) and Clinton preside over the rise of a hugely intrusive NSA, to levels that the Stasi would be proud of. If someone did ever decide to round up all the activists and have them shot, technology would make them piss easy to find.
