Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Westminster sexual abuse scandals

Anyone else find this really bizrre?

Apparently Kelvin Hopkins has released his formal statement to the Skawkbox website.

Excl: Kelvin Hopkins formal statement

Now I'm not going to say that Hopkins is definitely guilty of what he is accused of, how could I possibly know? What I am going to say though, is that if these conspiracy-theory clickbait pro-Corbyn websites like Skawkbox and The Canary are going to be used, and use, stories like this in order to paint sexual harassment allegations against Labour MPs as part of the overall anti-Corbyn media effort then that is quite a worrying development.

Now I've read his statement I think he's definitely a wrong 'Un.

" On 16 February 2015 I did send a text message to Ava which included the reported words saying Ava was “charming and sweet natured” and that “a nice young man would be lucky to have you as a girlfriend and lover…Were I to be young…but I am not…”. She in fact replied to my text on the same day:"
 
Corbyn 'warned over harassment claim MP'

edited to add - the video is still top of the sidebar on the politics section, and when you go to the page with the video it has links to related stories which include the one I just linked to.

The only thing that gives me pause there is that nowhere does it say that Corbyn knew about the complaint before he appointed Hopkins; indeed most of the actual criticism - the lack of action taken, the advice given to the complainant that nothing could be done with anonymity, and conceivably the non-recording of it actually rests with Rosie Winterton.
 
The only thing that gives me pause there is that nowhere does it say that Corbyn knew about the complaint before he appointed Hopkins; indeed most of the actual criticism - the lack of action taken, the advice given to the complainant that nothing could be done with anonymity, and conceivably the non-recording of it actually rests with Rosie Winterton.
Yeh but Corbyn ruined Christmas, there is nothing he can't be blamed for
 
The most recent version of the story has Winterton warning Corbyn when he was appointing him though...

The behaviour was reported to Winterton in 2014 and by all accounts she issued a verbal reprimand after advising the victim that without waiving anonymity nothing could be done, despite her being Chief Whip at the time and in a position to investigate and take action.

I just think its a bit mad that two years later its Corbyn's fault for appointing Hopkins to a post, when nothing was done to begin with.
 
I mean, I reckon issuing a warning and then tipping off the leader that he's probably a creep is about as much as you could really do with an anonymous report of an harassy text. There certainly wasn't enough there to withdraw the whip.
 
What could she have done?

Could have asked him to resign or threaten leaking it to be fair.

I mean, I reckon issuing a warning and then tipping off the leader that he's probably a creep is about as much as you could really do with an anonymous report of an harassy text. There certainly wasn't enough there to withdraw the whip.

If it''s not "enough" to withdraw the whip are we saying he's too much of a wrong Un for government but not too much of a wrong Un for the backbenches?
 
I just think its a bit mad that two years later its Corbyn's fault for appointing Hopkins to a post, when nothing was done to begin with.

Do you apply the same standard in cases such as Thatcher considering whether to give a knighthood to someone with a dodgy reputation?
 
What could she have done?

Have an in-depth chat with the victim, speak to other people who work / worked closely with Hopkins - basically work out whether anyone else was at risk or if there is a pattern of behaviour and support the victim if an investigation was required and anonymity had to be waived. If what she found was serious enough then she could have withdrawn the whip, even started looking at whether he should have been the Labour candidate in the 2015 election for his constituency (which is after all what Corbyn did with Danczuk for 2017). She could have done lots of things and was in a position to do them. Was the warning even on Hopkin's record?
 
Do you apply the same standard in cases such as Thatcher considering whether to give a knighthood to someone with a dodgy reputation?

TBH the clearest Thatcher parallel here would be if John Nott had got rid of most of the Navy and then criticized the Government for not having a Navy to respond to the Falklands conflict.
 
Have an in-depth chat with the victim, speak to other people who work / worked closely with Hopkins - basically work out whether anyone else was at risk or if there is a pattern of behaviour and support the victim if an investigation was required and anonymity had to be waived. If what she found was serious enough then she could have withdrawn the whip, even started looking at whether he should have been the Labour candidate in the 2015 election for his constituency (which is after all what Corbyn did with Danczuk for 2017). She could have done lots of things and was in a position to do them. Was the warning even on Hopkin's record?
I guess that's about right, although we've no way of knowing whether all of this wasn't done. She did warn Corbyn though, which is what he's getting flak for.
 
TBH the clearest Thatcher parallel here would be if John Nott had got rid of most of the Navy and then criticized the Government for not having a Navy to respond to the Falklands conflict.

I'll take your avoidance of the question as a failure to rise above the business of politics, how predictable.
 
I guess that's about right, although we've no way of knowing whether all of this wasn't done. She did warn Corbyn though, which is what he's getting flak for.

I know, I just find it odd that in a scandal that is about victims at Westminster reporting harassment and nothing being done about it, that someone to whom harassment was reported to in person, by the victim, and who appears to have done nothing about it (edit) beyond giving a verbal reprimand (at least until the accused got offered a job two years later) appears to have escaped all criticism.
 
I'll take your avoidance of the question as a failure to rise above the business of politics, how predictable.

Alright then - if there is an incident with Thatcher whereby someone whose actual job it was to deal with malpractice, who was made aware of malpractice by a person and did nothing / very little about it, and who then went on to try and block a knighthood awarded to that person because of the malpractice they were told about then yes, that is a suitable parallel to this.
 
Petronella Wyatt on the Today programme doing the 'women gave up their right to moan about such things when they wanted to be treated like men, it's a bit of fun, nothing wrong with it as long as everyone has good manners, why are women making a fuss over nothing' bollocks and, of course, women being offended by men holding doors open for them (which I have to say I've never, ever encountered in real life). What an appalling woman.

She also kept talking over the woman giving the other (reasonable) point of view then complained she wasn't getting a chance to talk. Absolutely dreadful.
well, she had an affair with Johnson and had a child with him, so I really doubt both her tastes and judgement
 
Have an in-depth chat with the victim, speak to other people who work / worked closely with Hopkins - basically work out whether anyone else was at risk or if there is a pattern of behaviour and support the victim if an investigation was required and anonymity had to be waived. If what she found was serious enough then she could have withdrawn the whip, even started looking at whether he should have been the Labour candidate in the 2015 election for his constituency (which is after all what Corbyn did with Danczuk for 2017). She could have done lots of things and was in a position to do them. Was the warning even on Hopkin's record?
I agree with this. chief whip is responsible for conduct and discipline of PLP. She could have done so much more - it's a bit rich, her parking all the blame on Corbyn now
 
Less MPs so lower probability I suppose


Any journalist willing to shine a light in the DUP's darkest corners would be richly rewarded for their endeavoors by the rich vein of their dodgy behaviour to number of MPs ratio
 
Back
Top Bottom