Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
It is of course a very awkward position to be put in, but I don't see what they can reasonably do. I'm open to suggestions.
SWP expulsions and squabbles
- Thread starter Nigel Irritable
- Start date
It is of course a very awkward position to be put in, but I don't see what they can reasonably do. I'm open to suggestions.
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
Given socialist groups have expelled people in the past without waiting or wanting a legal decision would you think that, ie expulsion, a suitable response?
Have you asked internally what is being 'done' or what is being discussed in relation to this issue? Have you asked, as a member of the same international as the SP what is being done or looked at?
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
No idea.
I note that you haven't made any suggestions as to what you think the SP should be doing.
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
Have you?
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
Are you saying that the SP should expel someone without investigation, after two more competent authorities have already investigated? That would probably be the most convenient thing for the SP to do, mind you.
Fedayn said:
I asked informally at the time, and was told that their view was that given the nature of the allegation and given that complaints had been made to the police and the union that those bodies were the ones best placed to deal with it. I thought that was the correct stance.
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
Socialist groups have done it in the past, are you saying you have to wait for legal niceties? Are you saying that because no investigation is to take place it's all over and done with and there's nothing to see hear? Simple question, do you think Steve Hedley is acceptable as a member of the SP, yes or no?
So, now you know that contrary to Mr Hedley's claims he was exonerated but that no investigation is to take place what do you intend to ask?
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
The problem is that the union is no more competent than the SWP to deal with these issues internally. I gather that there are existing claims of bullying out against him, and at least one other woman in the union has claimed he was abusive (though not physically violent) towards her.
So in terms of what the SP could have done, I'd suggest the very least was suspended his membership whilst proceedings against him are concluded.
So in terms of what the SP could have done, I'd suggest the very least was suspended his membership whilst proceedings against him are concluded.
bolshiebhoy
socialism leinster drink
How to deal with someone against whom there are accusations but nothing has been proved. Not always as easy as one thinks is it.
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
Who says it is?
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
As I understand it, there still has been no formal complaint to the SP, nor a request that they investigate.
Leaving that aside, most people here would expect them to have immediately followed the decision of the Courts and the RMT had the person complained of been found to have done something wrong. I know I'd have expected them to do so. Is the suggestion being made that new investigations should be launched by ever less competent bodies with ever less to do with the complaint until such a finding is made?
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
Yes, they have. And when they do throw people out arbitrarily most of us here give out about it.
Fedayn said:
I think it's a good idea to let appropriate bodies deal with serious allegations.
Fedayn said:
I'm saying that (a) the SP has been put in a very awkward position, that (b) I don't really see what they can do about it and that (c) there haven't been many useful suggestions coming from anyone else here. But I'm willing to listen.
As for the person complained of, I've never met him and have no reasonable basis for forming an opinion of him.
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
Did anyone suggest it was easy?
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
In reality what you're saying here is that you think it's finished, nothing to see and carry on as before, whether you like it or not. Why don't you make some suggestions? Why don't you ask what your organisation is doing, or if they intend to do anything?.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
but it is no longer a third hand complaint. a direct accusation from the victim has been publically made. that does change the picture.
The SP isnt a trainspotters society, its an organisation with a principled position on violence against women. SH is a well known SP member, therefore it does impact upon the organisation. If they have any reason to believe the other investigations were in any way inadequate, or halted on purely technical reasons, then they have a responsibility, I would have thought, to take some action, if only to ensure the SP isnt brought into disrepute.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
would it not be on the conscience of the person to not speak rather than on the union to deny someone who has not actually been found guilty?
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
What makes you think that they would be in a position to set up a more "adequate" investigation than the police or the union? I'm not personally all that confident in their ability to do so, even assuming the best of intentions.
Nonetheless, I suspect that they'll decide on a course of action soon.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Thats the wrong question. It isnt whether you can carry out a procedure which would, by the power of the dialiectic, reveal all, it's whether you can do something. If you dont have confidence in the other procedures, you can't simply accept their decisions. If you do think (one of) their investigations was adequate, fine stand by that. But if not....
What could you do? Nothoing more than expel him, of course. Which would be inadequate. But a punishment being inadequate is hardly a reason not to do anything.
leyton96
NGO's selling privilege checking solutions
The Socialist Party is not the SWP. Members can not be arbitrarily expelled. If a process of expulsion is begun that means the SP has to launch an investigation. Are you saying the SP should launch an investigation?
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
I don't think that any of us are currently in a position to make a judgment on that. And I very much doubt if anyone in the SP in London is either. Having made the (correct) decision to leave the issue to the appropriate authorities in the first place, I suspect that they will be somewhat taken aback at the contents of that blog post and will have to make some difficult decisions in the near future.
Beyond that, and in the absence of more information, I don't really have much to say at this point, beyond noting that the allegations are horrifying.
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
Yes, that is what he's saying. He's pretty clear about it too.
imposs1904
Thread Killa'
BBC report on the current problems within the SWP:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21706292
It's woeful.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21706292
It's woeful.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
If the party thinks the other investigations were inadequate, then yes, exactly as you say.
Nigel Irritable
Five, Ten, Fifteen Years
The first issue is what the RMT has to say about the blog's claims.
leyton96
NGO's selling privilege checking solutions
How does the Party determine that? Does it investigate the investigation of the police and the RMT? Ask the CPS and RMT officialdom to give evidence? Why would a Socialist Party investigation be more adequate than a police investigation or an RMT investigation?
Bear in mind the RMT has also been accused here. Shouldn't the SP give the RMT the space to put their side of the story before rushing to pass judgement?
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Your defensive attitude is a tad worrying. And you ask the same wrong question I answered before,
I have made no mention of 'rushing to judgement', far from it. It is up to the SP how to decide on disciplining SP members, and what processes you choose to use. But you are capable of making judgements. If it is true the prosecution only failed because of time limits, that is inadequate, no? If the RMT decision was based simply on the case having been dropped by the CPS, then that also becomes inadequate, no?
Sure, the RMT's response must be heard before making any definite move. But it isn't really good enough to simply rely upon their response.
october_lost
It's not hip any more...
Caroline L is known to quite a few posters on here, so this is, I am sure, quite close to home for some people.
I think what stands out about this and what I pull out from the SWPs case is the bravery the women have in coming forward. Thats despite being knocked back through various procedural biases.
It's up to all and sundry to not really allow, what is a basic call for justice, to not go unheeded.
I think what stands out about this and what I pull out from the SWPs case is the bravery the women have in coming forward. Thats despite being knocked back through various procedural biases.
It's up to all and sundry to not really allow, what is a basic call for justice, to not go unheeded.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
the InternationalSocialism blog shown oh so clearly too. In their IB article CM & RH could at least point to how the bourgeois media hadn't bothered doing research, and they couldn't blame the platform for any leaks, but now...
Similar threads
