Westminster sexual abuse scandals

[phillm]

You've posted details and a picture of someone who may the victim of a sex offence. It really needs explaining why this is a problem in 2017?

I took the list to imply that she had had an affair with BJ and was told to sign a NDA to keep his "reputation" intact. I'm not sure any offence has been commited in law as such.

 

[Silas Loom]

to keep his reputation intact

 

[phillm]

edited "reputation".

 

[phillm]

It's fine to try to shame & ridicule this woman because.. ?

because she chose to have an affair with BoJo allegedly ?

 

[killer b]

The only thing you know is there's an NDA - the rest is your torrid imagination.

 

[tim]

Already posted above - without the redactions to spare Kwasi Kwarteng's blushes.

Why was Liz Truss named and Kwasi Kwarteng redacted? And why is two Tory MPs involved in mutual punctuation seen as being on a par with the criminal activities alleged elsewhere?

 

[phillm]

The only thing you know is there's an NDA - the rest is your torrid imagination.

Ok I get it now - I imagined my reasoning above and thought it fair game. Of course there could be an altogether much darker explanation in which case my behaviour was totally inappropriate. Apologies....

 

[SpackleFrog]

Damian Green denying allegations. Again, while inappropriate, not the kind of stuff that will shock people.

Allegations 'completely false' - Green

 

[Wilf]

Damian Green denying allegations. Again, while inappropriate, not the kind of stuff that will shock people.

Allegations 'completely false' - Green

That's true, at least in the sense of it probably not being a shock to people. He was though seeking to trade helping someone's career for sex. And whilst that could apply to either party being of any age, the usual dynamic is in play here: powerful late middle aged bloke and young woman. I suspect this breaches the ministerial code, but don't particularly care. He's a deeply sleazy cunt and should be hounded out of public life. However as this story unfolds, I suspect he'll end up being at the bottom end of offences uncovered.

 

[SpackleFrog]

That's true, at least in the sense of it probably not being a shock to people. He was though seeking to trade helping someone's career for sex. And whilst that could apply to either party being of any age, the usual dynamic is in play here: powerful late middle aged bloke and young woman. I suspect this breaches the ministerial code, but don't particularly care. He's a deeply sleazy cunt and should be hounded out of public life. However as this story unfolds, I suspect he'll end up being at the bottom end of offences uncovered.

Agree, and - sadly - agree

 

[Wilf]

There's a really sad subplot to a lot of these stories, a first meeting where it becomes fairly clear that the politician is 'handsy' or aiming to trade access to a career for sex... and the aspiring activist comes back a second time, with at least a suspicion of what the game is. Something that crops up all over the Weinstein accounts.

I'm not victim blaming in this, it's just genuinely sad. Whilst the optimum outcome might be for the aspiring politico or actor to punch the fucker, go the police, join a campaigning group, we know that is unlikely to happen. People are isolated and don't see a way to beating these powerful people who will normally be able to trash their stories. But the bit I find really distressing is in some cases feeling they have to go back to the same mogul or MP as, still, their only route to a job.

One thing that should come out of this is that MP's researchers, secretaries and the rest should be appointed by Parliament itself, not the MP - with line management up to people in the parliamentary bureaucracy itself. Wouldn't stop all this shit but would at least dilute the idea that the MP's 'staff' are their private property. Of course it won't happen because of the fucking pompous image MPs have as the kind of people that need only self regulation - MPs as outside the normal scrutiny rules.

 

[Teaboy]

There's a really sad subplot to a lot of these stories, a first meeting where it becomes fairly clear that the politician is 'handsy' or aiming to trade access to a career for sex... and the aspiring activist comes back a second time, with at least a suspicion of what the game is. Something that crops up all over the Weinstein accounts.

I'm not victim blaming in this, it's just genuinely sad. Whilst the optimum outcome might be for the aspiring politico or actor to punch the fucker, go the police, join a campaigning group, we know that is unlikely to happen. People are isolated and don't see a way to beating these powerful people who will normally be able to trash their stories. But the bit I find really distressing is in some cases feeling they have to go back to the same mogul or MP as, still, their only route to a job.

One thing that should come out of this is that MP's researchers, secretaries and the rest should be appointed by Parliament itself, not the MP - with line management up to people in the parliamentary bureaucracy itself. Wouldn't stop all this shit but would at least dilute the idea that the MP's 'staff' are their private property. Of course it won't happen because of the fucking pompous image MPs have as the kind of people that need only self regulation - MPs as outside the normal scrutiny rules.

People get hassled at work but they still have to go back in the next day. Its fucked up.

 

[Pickman's model]

One thing that should come out of this is that MP's researchers, secretaries and the rest should be appointed by Parliament itself, not the MP - with line management up to people in the parliamentary bureaucracy itself.

very difficult to see how there could be effective line management if the line manager not working with the member of staff on a regular basis.

 

[agricola]

One thing that should come out of this is that MP's researchers, secretaries and the rest should be appointed by Parliament itself, not the MP - with line management up to people in the parliamentary bureaucracy itself. Wouldn't stop all this shit but would at least dilute the idea that the MP's 'staff' are their private property. Of course it won't happen because of the fucking pompous image MPs have as the kind of people that need only self regulation - MPs as outside the normal scrutiny rules.

If you are talking about a central pool of staff who could then go on to work in an MP's office but who would not be hired/fired by them, then it would have much more of a positive effect than anything else proposed would (though of course it wouldn't cover the Party staff / "activists" and whatnot who are probably most at risk of abuse).

 

[MrSki]

 

[Wilf]

If you are talking about a central pool of staff who could then go on to work in an MP's office but who would not be hired/fired by them, then it would have much more of a positive effect than anything else proposed would (though of course it wouldn't cover the Party staff / "activists" and whatnot who are probably most at risk of abuse).

Yep, exactly that. It cropped up around the expenses scandal, the notion that it might stop them employing their partners and kids, but would be highly relevant here. I don't think it will happen for one moment. It's not just that some MPs want to exploit their staff in ways from collecting their dry cleaning right through to sexually assaulting them, it's their inflated vision of themselves as special cases.

 

[Pickman's model]

Yep, exactly that. It cropped up around the expenses scandal, the notion that it might stop them employing their partners and kids, but would be highly relevant here. I don't think it will happen for one moment. It's not just that some MPs want to exploit their staff in ways from collecting their dry cleaning right through to sexually assaulting them, it's their inflated vision of themselves as special cases.

what would be better might be if research was taken out of the hands of individual mps and put into a bolstered house of commons library staff.

i am reminded that a woman i used to know met the former ruc mp, who - apparently on the grounds of her looks - suggested she might like to work for him.

 

[Wilf]

very difficult to see how there could be effective line management if the line manager not working with the member of staff on a regular basis.

Aye, I didn't put that very well. Suppose I meant a combination of what Agricola said, along with regular meetings , reporting and career development stuff going through more senior civil servants. Sticking plasters really, things that don't fully undermine the power relationship,, but do disrupt it.

 

[agricola]

Yep, exactly that. It cropped up around the expenses scandal, the notion that it might stop them employing their partners and kids, but would be highly relevant here. I don't think it will happen for one moment. It's not just that some MPs want to exploit their staff in ways from collecting their dry cleaning right through to sexually assaulting them, it's their inflated vision of themselves as special cases.

Sad then that Bercow specifically ruled it out yesterday, under the pretense that MP's must employ their own staff (though of course we pay the wages of the staff, dismissal costs etc).

 

[Pickman's model]

.

 

[Wilf]

Sad then that Bercow specifically ruled it out yesterday, under the pretense that MP's must employ their own staff (though of course we pay the wages of the staff, dismissal costs etc).

... through to the point of 'office winding up costs' when they lose their seat (on top of several other pots of money they receive).

 

[agricola]

what would be better might be if research was taken out of the hands of individual mps and put into a bolstered house of commons library staff.

i am reminded that a woman i used to know met the former ruc mp, who - apparently on the grounds of her looks - suggested she might like to work for him.

Perhaps, but the problem there would be it would be very difficult to keep it out of the hands of individual MPs. It would probably result in parties doing the research away from Parliament, which might conceivably put more people at risk.

 

[Wilf]

Perhaps, but the problem there would be it would be very difficult to keep it out of the hands of individual MPs. It would probably result in parties doing the research away from Parliament, which might conceivably put more people at risk.

On that last point: as someone who is not exactly a fan of the parliamentary system, it seems odd having to say this. But responses to the MP's expenses scandal had an underlying (nominal) logic of 'how can we stop MPs stealing money from the public purse'. May et al are now faced with having to create a system of regulation that stops MPs sexually assaulting staff, but still tap dances round their idiotic sense of entitlement. Astonishing situation. 'Would you mind not groping your staff, please Sir?'

 

[Pickman's model]

Perhaps, but the problem there would be it would be very difficult to keep it out of the hands of individual MPs. It would probably result in parties doing the research away from Parliament, which might conceivably put more people at risk.

maybe they should be allowed to employ their families on the basis that they are perhaps less likely to sexually assault them or send them out for sex toys.

 

[butchersapron]

what would be better might be if research was taken out of the hands of individual mps and put into a bolstered house of commons library staff.

i am reminded that a woman i used to know met the former ruc mp, who - apparently on the grounds of her looks - suggested she might like to work for him.

When GG was a labour MP he shared an office with Mildred Gordon and he tried to get her to agree to a bed being moved in.

 

[agricola]

On that last point: as someone who is not exactly a fan of the parliamentary system, it seems odd having to say this. But responses to the MP's expenses scandal had an underlying (nominal) logic of 'how can we stop MPs stealing money from the public purse'. May et al are now faced with having to create a system of regulation that stops MPs sexually assaulting staff, but still tap dances round their idiotic sense of entitlement. Astonishing situation. 'Would you mind not groping your staff, please Sir?'

Indeed, but my point was that the problem is not just one of MPs and their office staff at Westminster; if anything the situation there is better than with regards to activists / casual staff away from the Commons who are probably more at risk of abuse and exploitation (as the Elliott Johnson thing proved) given that they have no protection whatsoever.

 

[killer b]

A Lib Dem activist posted a good thread on twitter this morning on that topic - worth a read.

 

[Pickman's model]

the mail has its finger on the pulse

 

[Teaboy]

the mail has its finger on the pulse

View attachment 119319

I know who she is and what's shes about and her agenda but it is still disheartening to see the exact same attitude that allowed Saville to flourish being so loudly and proudly displayed. I had hoped that after what we've seen in the last few years and what we've learned there might just be a slight more decency, but no.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Why was Liz Truss named and Kwasi Kwarteng redacted? And why is two Tory MPs involved in mutual punctuation seen as being on a par with the criminal activities alleged elsewhere?

I assume the list was kept for the purposes of keeping people in line, not for actually doing anything about any of the stuff mentioned. So cheating, harassment and abuse are all there because they can all be used as leverage, not because they're ethical equivalents.