Carshalton and Wallington MP Tom Brake brands Lord Rennard 'disappointing' over failure to apologise

Sutton Guardian: Lord Rennard Lord Rennard

One of Sutton's Liberal Democrat MPs has called controversial peer Lord Chris Rennard's refusal to apologise to women he was accused of harassing "disappointing".

Four female Lib Dems accused Lord Rennard, a prominent peer credited with playing a major part in the rise of the party over the last decade, of sexually harassing them but an independent investigation into the claims concluded the allegations could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Sutton Guardian: Carshalton and Wallington Lib Dem candidate Tom Brake

Carshalton and Wallington MP Tom Brake

But the report, penned by Alistair Webster QC, did describe the women's complaints as "broadly credible" and urged Lord Rennard to apologise to the complainants.

Party leader and deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg backed the calls for Lord Rennard to apologise but he refused and is now believed to be considering legal action after having his party membership suspended.

Carshalton and Wallington MP Tom Brake said he has been asked for his thoughts on the situation by a lot of people so used Facebook to make his feelings known.

He said: "It is disappointing that Chris Rennard failed to [apologise]. As a result the Regional Parties Committee has suspended Chris Rennard's membership whilst they consider whether his actions have brought the Liberal Democrats into disrepute.

"I believe my party should be open to all, without fear of sexual harassment. I am glad to see that Tim Farron (Party President) and Nick Clegg are looking into the processes we have in our party, that failed the women concerned."

Sutton and Cheam MP Paul Burstow was implicated in the scandal. He was the party's Chief Whip when some of the allegations took place in 2007, making him the first port of call for complaints.

Two of the four women to make allegations against Lord Rennard went to Mr Burstow at the time but he failed to take their complaints further.

He has since expressed "deep regret" for his "lapse of judgement" on the matter.


TODAY'S TOP SUTTON STORIES

 

Comments (18)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:52pm Wed 22 Jan 14

Binsanity says...

"Deep regret" "lapse of judgement". This party, as usual, hoped these very serious incidents would be swept under the carpet and in time, forgotten. Welcome to the real world Mr Brake/ Burstow. What happened was wrong at the time and is still wrong. Just shows the Lib-Dems are still in a bygone age without the ability or inclination to catch up. The elections in May will I'm sure reflect this.
"Deep regret" "lapse of judgement". This party, as usual, hoped these very serious incidents would be swept under the carpet and in time, forgotten. Welcome to the real world Mr Brake/ Burstow. What happened was wrong at the time and is still wrong. Just shows the Lib-Dems are still in a bygone age without the ability or inclination to catch up. The elections in May will I'm sure reflect this. Binsanity
  • Score: 3

8:54am Thu 23 Jan 14

Niki R says...

I find Tom Brake's failure to block Clause 118 of the Health & Social Care Act which could put St Helier at risk of closures without consultation disappointing. Sorry, I mean to say disgusting.
I find Tom Brake's failure to block Clause 118 of the Health & Social Care Act which could put St Helier at risk of closures without consultation disappointing. Sorry, I mean to say disgusting. Niki R
  • Score: 2

9:49am Thu 23 Jan 14

Margaret_Hale says...

Now I hear that Lord Rennard is attempting to discredit the women accusers with untrue smears. This man has been behind many electoral successes in recent years, many of them involving smear tactics over their opponents. Dirty in every sense.
I wish to hear much clearer statements from Burstow and Brake, not just "disappointment" but disgust at this man's behaviour over many years. The LibDems treatment of women and the deliberate bullying of women party activists is something that must be confronted, even if it causes the threatened "bloodbath" for the party.
Now I hear that Lord Rennard is attempting to discredit the women accusers with untrue smears. This man has been behind many electoral successes in recent years, many of them involving smear tactics over their opponents. Dirty in every sense. I wish to hear much clearer statements from Burstow and Brake, not just "disappointment" but disgust at this man's behaviour over many years. The LibDems treatment of women and the deliberate bullying of women party activists is something that must be confronted, even if it causes the threatened "bloodbath" for the party. Margaret_Hale
  • Score: 2

9:57am Thu 23 Jan 14

mortster25 says...

'This party, as usual...' One presumes from that comment that you aren't actually in the Lib Dems and have very little idea what members are actually doing to challenge it. I'm part of a growing group in the party called 'Rock The Boat,' which is designed to challenge sexual harassment in our party and the processes that let the women concerned down. We've been at the heart of the criticism against Rennard throughout all of this, and been there to support the victims. Whatever your feelings about Tom and what the Government's doing, I hardly feel it fair to criticise him for being one of the few MPs willing to speak out.
'This party, as usual...' One presumes from that comment that you aren't actually in the Lib Dems and have very little idea what members are actually doing to challenge it. I'm part of a growing group in the party called 'Rock The Boat,' which is designed to challenge sexual harassment in our party and the processes that let the women concerned down. We've been at the heart of the criticism against Rennard throughout all of this, and been there to support the victims. Whatever your feelings about Tom and what the Government's doing, I hardly feel it fair to criticise him for being one of the few MPs willing to speak out. mortster25
  • Score: -3

10:44am Thu 23 Jan 14

Margaret_Hale says...

It's entirely fair to criticise Tom Brake for "speaking out" as you call it, as he has done so very timidly . Burstow is another case entirely, as he was implicated in not dealing with the complaints in the first instance. Haven't heard much from him lately (except on his constant theme of hospital saviour).
The LibDems have turned a blind eye to sexist behaviour from a bully who conveniently for them, was an expert at dirty election tactics. LibDems play dirty in every way!
It's entirely fair to criticise Tom Brake for "speaking out" as you call it, as he has done so very timidly . Burstow is another case entirely, as he was implicated in not dealing with the complaints in the first instance. Haven't heard much from him lately (except on his constant theme of hospital saviour). The LibDems have turned a blind eye to sexist behaviour from a bully who conveniently for them, was an expert at dirty election tactics. LibDems play dirty in every way! Margaret_Hale
  • Score: 0

12:50pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Michael Pantlin says...

Niki R wrote:
I find Tom Brake's failure to block Clause 118 of the Health & Social Care Act which could put St Helier at risk of closures without consultation disappointing. Sorry, I mean to say disgusting.
I feel the same Niki R.
[quote][p][bold]Niki R[/bold] wrote: I find Tom Brake's failure to block Clause 118 of the Health & Social Care Act which could put St Helier at risk of closures without consultation disappointing. Sorry, I mean to say disgusting.[/p][/quote]I feel the same Niki R. Michael Pantlin
  • Score: 0

2:45pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Binsanity says...

mortster25 wrote:
'This party, as usual...' One presumes from that comment that you aren't actually in the Lib Dems and have very little idea what members are actually doing to challenge it. I'm part of a growing group in the party called 'Rock The Boat,' which is designed to challenge sexual harassment in our party and the processes that let the women concerned down. We've been at the heart of the criticism against Rennard throughout all of this, and been there to support the victims. Whatever your feelings about Tom and what the Government's doing, I hardly feel it fair to criticise him for being one of the few MPs willing to speak out.
Lets get this right. He is only very belatedly speaking out (if thats what you call his whimper) because he fears a backlash on the run up to the forthcoming elections, fact. I would be interested to know how long "rock the boat" have been a disfunctional "growing group" or are you a pathetic recent damage limation response to the very real anger quite rightly directed at Rennard and the Lib-Dem disinterest/lack of backbone.
[quote][p][bold]mortster25[/bold] wrote: 'This party, as usual...' One presumes from that comment that you aren't actually in the Lib Dems and have very little idea what members are actually doing to challenge it. I'm part of a growing group in the party called 'Rock The Boat,' which is designed to challenge sexual harassment in our party and the processes that let the women concerned down. We've been at the heart of the criticism against Rennard throughout all of this, and been there to support the victims. Whatever your feelings about Tom and what the Government's doing, I hardly feel it fair to criticise him for being one of the few MPs willing to speak out.[/p][/quote]Lets get this right. He is only very belatedly speaking out (if thats what you call his whimper) because he fears a backlash on the run up to the forthcoming elections, fact. I would be interested to know how long "rock the boat" have been a disfunctional "growing group" or are you a pathetic recent damage limation response to the very real anger quite rightly directed at Rennard and the Lib-Dem disinterest/lack of backbone. Binsanity
  • Score: 1

2:51pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Neil78 says...

Why is there so much focus on whether Rennard apologises? It's appalling to think that, if the allegations are true, all he needs to do it say sorry and everyone can carry on.

Some of what he's accused of basically amounts to indecent assault, which carries a 10 year prison sentence. If he has been indecently assaulting women he cannot just say sorry then forget it, and it's shameful that Tom Brake, Nick Clegg and the rest of the Lib Dems seems to think that.

On the other hand, if he's been falsely accused (which is what Rennard is saying) then asking him to apologise is effectively asking him to admit to a serious criminal offence and risk prison. Why? Just to make the problem go away so the Lib Dems can pretend it never happened. Even more shameful.

What we need, before anything else, is a proper investigation to find out what actually happened. What is the truth? So far there has been no investigation, just a series of attempts by the Lib Dems to pretend that they knew nothing about it, and when facts shattered that claim, they now claim that nothing can really be done, except to stand around wringing hands and asking him to say sorry. Even though it's not actually been established whether he did some, all or none of what he's accused of.

And these people claim they're competent to run the country?
Why is there so much focus on whether Rennard apologises? It's appalling to think that, if the allegations are true, all he needs to do it say sorry and everyone can carry on. Some of what he's accused of basically amounts to indecent assault, which carries a 10 year prison sentence. If he has been indecently assaulting women he cannot just say sorry then forget it, and it's shameful that Tom Brake, Nick Clegg and the rest of the Lib Dems seems to think that. On the other hand, if he's been falsely accused (which is what Rennard is saying) then asking him to apologise is effectively asking him to admit to a serious criminal offence and risk prison. Why? Just to make the problem go away so the Lib Dems can pretend it never happened. Even more shameful. What we need, before anything else, is a proper investigation to find out what actually happened. What is the truth? So far there has been no investigation, just a series of attempts by the Lib Dems to pretend that they knew nothing about it, and when facts shattered that claim, they now claim that nothing can really be done, except to stand around wringing hands and asking him to say sorry. Even though it's not actually been established whether he did some, all or none of what he's accused of. And these people claim they're competent to run the country? Neil78
  • Score: 3

6:57pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Binsanity says...

Neil78 wrote:
Why is there so much focus on whether Rennard apologises? It's appalling to think that, if the allegations are true, all he needs to do it say sorry and everyone can carry on.

Some of what he's accused of basically amounts to indecent assault, which carries a 10 year prison sentence. If he has been indecently assaulting women he cannot just say sorry then forget it, and it's shameful that Tom Brake, Nick Clegg and the rest of the Lib Dems seems to think that.

On the other hand, if he's been falsely accused (which is what Rennard is saying) then asking him to apologise is effectively asking him to admit to a serious criminal offence and risk prison. Why? Just to make the problem go away so the Lib Dems can pretend it never happened. Even more shameful.

What we need, before anything else, is a proper investigation to find out what actually happened. What is the truth? So far there has been no investigation, just a series of attempts by the Lib Dems to pretend that they knew nothing about it, and when facts shattered that claim, they now claim that nothing can really be done, except to stand around wringing hands and asking him to say sorry. Even though it's not actually been established whether he did some, all or none of what he's accused of.

And these people claim they're competent to run the country?
What a comment. Exactly how my comment should have sounded but without the waffling. You should comment more often then we could all shut up. Cheers.
[quote][p][bold]Neil78[/bold] wrote: Why is there so much focus on whether Rennard apologises? It's appalling to think that, if the allegations are true, all he needs to do it say sorry and everyone can carry on. Some of what he's accused of basically amounts to indecent assault, which carries a 10 year prison sentence. If he has been indecently assaulting women he cannot just say sorry then forget it, and it's shameful that Tom Brake, Nick Clegg and the rest of the Lib Dems seems to think that. On the other hand, if he's been falsely accused (which is what Rennard is saying) then asking him to apologise is effectively asking him to admit to a serious criminal offence and risk prison. Why? Just to make the problem go away so the Lib Dems can pretend it never happened. Even more shameful. What we need, before anything else, is a proper investigation to find out what actually happened. What is the truth? So far there has been no investigation, just a series of attempts by the Lib Dems to pretend that they knew nothing about it, and when facts shattered that claim, they now claim that nothing can really be done, except to stand around wringing hands and asking him to say sorry. Even though it's not actually been established whether he did some, all or none of what he's accused of. And these people claim they're competent to run the country?[/p][/quote]What a comment. Exactly how my comment should have sounded but without the waffling. You should comment more often then we could all shut up. Cheers. Binsanity
  • Score: -1

11:22am Fri 24 Jan 14

mortster25 says...

To be fair to Rock The Boat it's been campaigning for over a year now and has almost 500 members in its group on facebook, with many posts going up on a daily basis, emails, letters to national newspapers, etc. Rock The Boat has always said that apologising is just the start.

There HAS been an independent investigation, the report for which said itself that the evidence from the women concerned was 'broadly credibly' (not my words) and that Rennard should apologise.

There is also a separate investigation that Rock The Boat has been heavily involved in, regarding the processes the party has in terms of reporting sexual harassment, punishment for perpetrators etc. For example, there are different rules in the party with regards to allegations if you are an employee and a member. So when Rennard left as chief exec he was no longer an employee of the party and had to go through the procedure for members, with different rules. Rock The Boat is campaigning to change this and more besides, using democratic conferences. I don't see democratic conferences in the parties who are criticising lib dem members campaigning to change things. Don't think for one second that this kind of behaviour only happens in the Lib Dems.

So in summary, there has been not just one investigation but two. There is also another being conducted to judge whether Rennard has brought the party into disrepute. I wonder who rang up LD HQ complaining that Rennard had done this? Oh yeah, Rock The Boat members.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good Lib Dem rant hey?
To be fair to Rock The Boat it's been campaigning for over a year now and has almost 500 members in its group on facebook, with many posts going up on a daily basis, emails, letters to national newspapers, etc. Rock The Boat has always said that apologising is just the start. There HAS been an independent investigation, the report for which said itself that the evidence from the women concerned was 'broadly credibly' (not my words) and that Rennard should apologise. There is also a separate investigation that Rock The Boat has been heavily involved in, regarding the processes the party has in terms of reporting sexual harassment, punishment for perpetrators etc. For example, there are different rules in the party with regards to allegations if you are an employee and a member. So when Rennard left as chief exec he was no longer an employee of the party and had to go through the procedure for members, with different rules. Rock The Boat is campaigning to change this and more besides, using democratic conferences. I don't see democratic conferences in the parties who are criticising lib dem members campaigning to change things. Don't think for one second that this kind of behaviour only happens in the Lib Dems. So in summary, there has been not just one investigation but two. There is also another being conducted to judge whether Rennard has brought the party into disrepute. I wonder who rang up LD HQ complaining that Rennard had done this? Oh yeah, Rock The Boat members. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good Lib Dem rant hey? mortster25
  • Score: 3

11:47am Fri 24 Jan 14

Niki R says...

Will Rock The Boat be speaking out on the three year old allegations against Mike Hancock MP and asking why Nick Clegg ignored the complainant when she wrote to him in 2011? Or will they be told to shush by the likes of Burstow, who has serious questions to answer over Rennard?
Will Rock The Boat be speaking out on the three year old allegations against Mike Hancock MP and asking why Nick Clegg ignored the complainant when she wrote to him in 2011? Or will they be told to shush by the likes of Burstow, who has serious questions to answer over Rennard? Niki R
  • Score: 0

12:31pm Fri 24 Jan 14

mortster25 says...

I know there's conversations in the facebook group and amongst the steering committee right now about a stance. Many of them are utterly disgusted.
I know there's conversations in the facebook group and amongst the steering committee right now about a stance. Many of them are utterly disgusted. mortster25
  • Score: 0

1:49pm Fri 24 Jan 14

Neil78 says...

mortster25 wrote:
To be fair to Rock The Boat it's been campaigning for over a year now and has almost 500 members in its group on facebook, with many posts going up on a daily basis, emails, letters to national newspapers, etc. Rock The Boat has always said that apologising is just the start.

There HAS been an independent investigation, the report for which said itself that the evidence from the women concerned was 'broadly credibly' (not my words) and that Rennard should apologise.

There is also a separate investigation that Rock The Boat has been heavily involved in, regarding the processes the party has in terms of reporting sexual harassment, punishment for perpetrators etc. For example, there are different rules in the party with regards to allegations if you are an employee and a member. So when Rennard left as chief exec he was no longer an employee of the party and had to go through the procedure for members, with different rules. Rock The Boat is campaigning to change this and more besides, using democratic conferences. I don't see democratic conferences in the parties who are criticising lib dem members campaigning to change things. Don't think for one second that this kind of behaviour only happens in the Lib Dems.

So in summary, there has been not just one investigation but two. There is also another being conducted to judge whether Rennard has brought the party into disrepute. I wonder who rang up LD HQ complaining that Rennard had done this? Oh yeah, Rock The Boat members.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good Lib Dem rant hey?
There has not been a report nor an investigation into Rennard. Andrew Neil got to the bottom of that on Daily Politics last week - the so-called report was really just a legal opinion as to whether it was worth running an investigation. The conclusion was that it wasn't, so they haven't.

As for "Don't think this only happens in the Lib Dems" - considering how few MPs you have compared with Labour or Tories, you do seem to have far more than your fair share. And in particular, you seem unusually keep to hush things up while excusing appalling behaviour from your people.

Just look at the *YEARS* you've spent telling everyone that there's nothing going on with Mike Hancock, move along everyone, nothing to see here. Then finally the report was leaked and the evidence became so overwhelming that looking away was no longer credible, so then you claimed that this was the first you knew and obviously now that you're aware you'll get straight on it. But ITV News has published a letter from 2012 which states that a Liberal Democrat committee looked into the clams against Hancock back in 2012 and found nothing needed to be done, and that this would be an end to the matter.

What makes it worse is the pious "Oh, we're so much fairer and more honest than those horrible other two parties" which we must constantly endure from the Lib Dems, on any topic you care to name. But as soon as you're in government and subject to the same scrutiny that Labour and the Conservatives normally experience, we discover that you're certainly no better and if anything seem worse.
[quote][p][bold]mortster25[/bold] wrote: To be fair to Rock The Boat it's been campaigning for over a year now and has almost 500 members in its group on facebook, with many posts going up on a daily basis, emails, letters to national newspapers, etc. Rock The Boat has always said that apologising is just the start. There HAS been an independent investigation, the report for which said itself that the evidence from the women concerned was 'broadly credibly' (not my words) and that Rennard should apologise. There is also a separate investigation that Rock The Boat has been heavily involved in, regarding the processes the party has in terms of reporting sexual harassment, punishment for perpetrators etc. For example, there are different rules in the party with regards to allegations if you are an employee and a member. So when Rennard left as chief exec he was no longer an employee of the party and had to go through the procedure for members, with different rules. Rock The Boat is campaigning to change this and more besides, using democratic conferences. I don't see democratic conferences in the parties who are criticising lib dem members campaigning to change things. Don't think for one second that this kind of behaviour only happens in the Lib Dems. So in summary, there has been not just one investigation but two. There is also another being conducted to judge whether Rennard has brought the party into disrepute. I wonder who rang up LD HQ complaining that Rennard had done this? Oh yeah, Rock The Boat members. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good Lib Dem rant hey?[/p][/quote]There has not been a report nor an investigation into Rennard. Andrew Neil got to the bottom of that on Daily Politics last week - the so-called report was really just a legal opinion as to whether it was worth running an investigation. The conclusion was that it wasn't, so they haven't. As for "Don't think this only happens in the Lib Dems" - considering how few MPs you have compared with Labour or Tories, you do seem to have far more than your fair share. And in particular, you seem unusually keep to hush things up while excusing appalling behaviour from your people. Just look at the *YEARS* you've spent telling everyone that there's nothing going on with Mike Hancock, move along everyone, nothing to see here. Then finally the report was leaked and the evidence became so overwhelming that looking away was no longer credible, so then you claimed that this was the first you knew and obviously now that you're aware you'll get straight on it. But ITV News has published a letter from 2012 which states that a Liberal Democrat committee looked into the clams against Hancock back in 2012 and found nothing needed to be done, and that this would be an end to the matter. What makes it worse is the pious "Oh, we're so much fairer and more honest than those horrible other two parties" which we must constantly endure from the Lib Dems, on any topic you care to name. But as soon as you're in government and subject to the same scrutiny that Labour and the Conservatives normally experience, we discover that you're certainly no better and if anything seem worse. Neil78
  • Score: -2

2:13pm Fri 24 Jan 14

mortster25 says...

Here you are, just in case you want to dismiss the fact that an investigation did happen again. There was also a criminal investigation too, by the way.

http://www.libdemvoi
ce.org/internal-inve
stigation-into-alleg
ations-against-lord-
rennard-37847.html

Not everything the media says is accurate, you know.
Here you are, just in case you want to dismiss the fact that an investigation did happen again. There was also a criminal investigation too, by the way. http://www.libdemvoi ce.org/internal-inve stigation-into-alleg ations-against-lord- rennard-37847.html Not everything the media says is accurate, you know. mortster25
  • Score: 4

2:26pm Fri 24 Jan 14

Neil78 says...

mortster25 wrote:
Here you are, just in case you want to dismiss the fact that an investigation did happen again. There was also a criminal investigation too, by the way.

http://www.libdemvoi

ce.org/internal-inve

stigation-into-alleg

ations-against-lord-

rennard-37847.html

Not everything the media says is accurate, you know.
This is the classic ruse of claiming to have an "investigation" while defining the terms of the investigation so narrowly that you don't really uncover what went on.

As Webster says in that article, he was asked to given an opinion as to whether the allegations could be proven beyond any reasonable doubt. This was not a "let's find out what really went on and make sure it's dealt with" investigation.

Note that Webster does not actually say what he thinks probably went on, his report is totally inconclusive: on the one hand he finds the women credible and discounts Rennard's defence that this was a smear, on the other hand there isn't enough evidence to prosecute.

That's absolutely classic Lib Demmery, isn't it? "On the one hand this, on the other hand that, so let's do nothing."
[quote][p][bold]mortster25[/bold] wrote: Here you are, just in case you want to dismiss the fact that an investigation did happen again. There was also a criminal investigation too, by the way. http://www.libdemvoi ce.org/internal-inve stigation-into-alleg ations-against-lord- rennard-37847.html Not everything the media says is accurate, you know.[/p][/quote]This is the classic ruse of claiming to have an "investigation" while defining the terms of the investigation so narrowly that you don't really uncover what went on. As Webster says in that article, he was asked to given an opinion as to whether the allegations could be proven beyond any reasonable doubt. This was not a "let's find out what really went on and make sure it's dealt with" investigation. Note that Webster does not actually say what he thinks probably went on, his report is totally inconclusive: on the one hand he finds the women credible and discounts Rennard's defence that this was a smear, on the other hand there isn't enough evidence to prosecute. That's absolutely classic Lib Demmery, isn't it? "On the one hand this, on the other hand that, so let's do nothing." Neil78
  • Score: 0

3:24pm Fri 24 Jan 14

mortster25 says...

As I've said before, there's another investigation taking place into party processes. In other words, doing something about the way the party let the women concerned down. Would you rather the QC came out with all the personal details of the women involved, and the things that Rennard is alleged to have done?

The QC took evidence from the women and from Rennard and made a statement on the balance of probabilities. I don't really know how that isn't investigation the matter.

The member rules state that for Rennard to be kicked out of the party his actions have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. This is why the party couldn't suspend Rennard. They only did suspend him when Rock The Boat members rang up LD HQ and complained that he had brought the party into disrepute. This, under the member rules, is grounds for kicking him out of the party.

Again, I don't know why you're claiming there hasn't been an investigation despite several taking place. Or why you're generalising all Lib Dems when Rock The Boat, of which I'm a member, pushed for him to be suspended and another investigation started.
As I've said before, there's another investigation taking place into party processes. In other words, doing something about the way the party let the women concerned down. Would you rather the QC came out with all the personal details of the women involved, and the things that Rennard is alleged to have done? The QC took evidence from the women and from Rennard and made a statement on the balance of probabilities. I don't really know how that isn't investigation the matter. The member rules state that for Rennard to be kicked out of the party his actions have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. This is why the party couldn't suspend Rennard. They only did suspend him when Rock The Boat members rang up LD HQ and complained that he had brought the party into disrepute. This, under the member rules, is grounds for kicking him out of the party. Again, I don't know why you're claiming there hasn't been an investigation despite several taking place. Or why you're generalising all Lib Dems when Rock The Boat, of which I'm a member, pushed for him to be suspended and another investigation started. mortster25
  • Score: 4

11:39pm Fri 24 Jan 14

Neil78 says...

mortster25 wrote:
As I've said before, there's another investigation taking place into party processes. In other words, doing something about the way the party let the women concerned down. Would you rather the QC came out with all the personal details of the women involved, and the things that Rennard is alleged to have done?

The QC took evidence from the women and from Rennard and made a statement on the balance of probabilities. I don't really know how that isn't investigation the matter.

The member rules state that for Rennard to be kicked out of the party his actions have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. This is why the party couldn't suspend Rennard. They only did suspend him when Rock The Boat members rang up LD HQ and complained that he had brought the party into disrepute. This, under the member rules, is grounds for kicking him out of the party.

Again, I don't know why you're claiming there hasn't been an investigation despite several taking place. Or why you're generalising all Lib Dems when Rock The Boat, of which I'm a member, pushed for him to be suspended and another investigation started.
Here's the problem - at first the Lib Dem line was that no one knew anything. Then we learn that loads of people knew, so the denials look dishonest. The Spectator timeline states that back in 2008, 6 years ago, Clegg was aware of allegations against Rennard and Danny Alexander warned Rennard about his behaviour. ie: very senior people in the party knew.

2008 is also when an email was sent to all women Lib Dems stating that there had been a "long-standing problem with a number of women where the abuse of Chris ’s position was clearly inappropriate.". Shortly afterwards Rennard left his job due to "ill health".

So the claim that no one knew anything fell apart in the glare of the facts, though there's been no apology or explanation as to why you all went around pretending to know nothing.

Now we have a new explanation - you would love to do something, but are prevented by your own rulebook which blocks any action. Presumably this rulebook was written by God on tablets of stone, so it's impossible for you to ever change it.

Again, this all came to a head 5 or 6 years ago the first time around, so if someone had bothered to look into it properly at the time, wouldn't they have realised that your rules and procedures were inadequate then done something about it? I get that you can't change your rules in a fortnight, but it's been years and YEARS and **YEARS**. There has been plenty of time, if you'd shown any interest in getting to the bottom of it.

And I assume you've seen this evening's news, that despite Mike Hancock being suspended from the party for his appalling behaviour, your colleagues in Portsmouth have decided that he can retain his council cabinet job and pay, because he's the best man for the job! Is that also because of faulty procedures? Or because Lib Dems just don't take this stuff seriously?
[quote][p][bold]mortster25[/bold] wrote: As I've said before, there's another investigation taking place into party processes. In other words, doing something about the way the party let the women concerned down. Would you rather the QC came out with all the personal details of the women involved, and the things that Rennard is alleged to have done? The QC took evidence from the women and from Rennard and made a statement on the balance of probabilities. I don't really know how that isn't investigation the matter. The member rules state that for Rennard to be kicked out of the party his actions have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. This is why the party couldn't suspend Rennard. They only did suspend him when Rock The Boat members rang up LD HQ and complained that he had brought the party into disrepute. This, under the member rules, is grounds for kicking him out of the party. Again, I don't know why you're claiming there hasn't been an investigation despite several taking place. Or why you're generalising all Lib Dems when Rock The Boat, of which I'm a member, pushed for him to be suspended and another investigation started.[/p][/quote]Here's the problem - at first the Lib Dem line was that no one knew anything. Then we learn that loads of people knew, so the denials look dishonest. The Spectator timeline states that back in 2008, 6 years ago, Clegg was aware of allegations against Rennard and Danny Alexander warned Rennard about his behaviour. ie: very senior people in the party knew. 2008 is also when an email was sent to all women Lib Dems stating that there had been a "long-standing problem with a number of women where the abuse of Chris [Lord Rennard]’s position was clearly inappropriate.". Shortly afterwards Rennard left his job due to "ill health". So the claim that no one knew anything fell apart in the glare of the facts, though there's been no apology or explanation as to why you all went around pretending to know nothing. Now we have a new explanation - you would love to do something, but are prevented by your own rulebook which blocks any action. Presumably this rulebook was written by God on tablets of stone, so it's impossible for you to ever change it. Again, this all came to a head 5 or 6 years ago the first time around, so if someone had bothered to look into it properly at the time, wouldn't they have realised that your rules and procedures were inadequate then done something about it? I get that you can't change your rules in a fortnight, but it's been years and YEARS and **YEARS**. There has been plenty of time, if you'd shown any interest in getting to the bottom of it. And I assume you've seen this evening's news, that despite Mike Hancock being suspended from the party for his appalling behaviour, your colleagues in Portsmouth have decided that he can retain his council cabinet job and pay, because he's the best man for the job! Is that also because of faulty procedures? Or because Lib Dems just don't take this stuff seriously? Neil78
  • Score: 0

9:07am Sat 25 Jan 14

Giles C says...

The Lib Dems in their heartlands like Portsmouth or Sutton are so cocky and sure that they can keep perpetuating this con trick with the public that they don't care about the outside world.
We know at elections they Hoover up huge numbers of postal votes so you have to ask how many of these votes are harvested legally...I can't see how they get in otherwise..
The Lib Dems in their heartlands like Portsmouth or Sutton are so cocky and sure that they can keep perpetuating this con trick with the public that they don't care about the outside world. We know at elections they Hoover up huge numbers of postal votes so you have to ask how many of these votes are harvested legally...I can't see how they get in otherwise.. Giles C
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree