- Rape allegation against Tory MP, ex Minister Archived Message
Posted by Mary
on August 9, 2020, 8:45 am
|
Tory MP’s rape accuser: I’ve had no help A young parliamentary staffer who says she was attacked by a former minister was left ‘devastated’ by Westminster’s inaction https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-mps-rape-accuser-ive-had-no-help-fmlh09k05 Wednesday, April 1, was a difficult day at No 10. Britain had been in lockdown for just over a week and the prime minister was isolated in his flat upstairs getting steadily weaker from the coronavirus. At about 9am the Downing Street switchboard called a young woman to connect her to the Conservative chief whip, Mark Spencer. The conversation that followed has raised questions about the Tory party’s duty of care to parliamentary staffers and the general welfare of junior employees in the Palace of Westminster. The woman, a former parliamentary staffer in her twenties, was deeply apprehensive about talking to Spencer, the burly Nottinghamshire farmer who is Boris Johnson’s enforcer on the Tory back benches. She had never spoken to him before but she was determined to report disturbing claims of sexual assault and rape by a Conservative MP. According to confidential sources, she hoped the MP might be suspended by the party. Spencer appeared well intentioned but clearly was unprepared for a conversation of such sensitivity, the sources said. The Sherwood MP is alleged to have asked how he could help and to have told her: “People who make threats rarely act upon them.” He then advised her that he was “reluctant” to suspend the MP over the allegations, according to the sources, but that she should go to the “relevant authorities”. Spencer allegedly promised to investigate the MP informally by speaking to witnesses familiar with his suspected behaviour, before getting back to her in “a week or so”. We understand that he has not contacted her since. The chief whip’s office said last week that Spencer “takes all allegations of harassment and abuse extremely seriously”, but sources close to the woman say she was disappointed. She said he was “just trying to pacify me” and she felt she did not have the opportunity to detail her allegations in full. Last weekend the MP was arrested on suspicion of rape and remains under investigation for sexual offences allegedly committed between last summer and January. The Conservative Party has refused to suspend him, saying that it would be premature to do so before the police conclude their investigation. That decision has prompted a serious row, with some senior MPs insisting that the whip should be taken away. It asks questions not only of the party, but also of parliament itself. When a young woman complains to whips that she has been attacked by a powerful MP, what should they do? How are parties meant to balance the privacy and reputation of MPs accused of wrongdoing with the safeguarding of staff? Despite the changes in attitude prompted by the #MeToo scandal, these questions still do not invite simple answers. Nor has the reality of working in parliament changed for most young people: MPs continue to act as their effective employers, responsible not only for their work but also for their wellbeing and career development. The cramped office suites, corridors and bars of parliament are an ideal arena for the potential abuse of power. According to the latest figures, the parliamentary bullying and harassment hotline received 704 calls in 2018-19. Chief whip Mark Spencer is Boris Johnson’s enforcer on the Tory back benches (Photo) Dave Penman, general secretary of the FDA, the civil servants’ and public service union, said: “Whatever the ingredients — power and alcohol — there is no other workplace like it where so many have complained about inappropriate behaviour.” Parliament’s systems for handling complaints appear to be as arcane as the procedures of the House of Commons. In this case, the young woman’s search for help started on March 12 when she went to the Members’ and Peers’ Staff Association, which acts as an informal union and staff social club. It advised her to use parliament’s anonymous hotline and informally acted as a go-between, seeking access for her to the chief whip. There is no document or rulebook governing when the whips should suspend an MP, but when sexual assault allegations first emerged in 2017 against Charlie Elphicke, who at the time was the Tory MP for Dover and Deal, the then chief whip, Julian Smith, suspended him and ensured that members of his team accompanied the alleged victims to Scotland Yard. According to a person familiar with the decision to suspend Elphicke, who last month was convicted of three charges of sexual assault, the rationale was threefold: encouraging other women to come forward, safeguarding young staff and demonstrating that the party took such claims seriously. That principle appears to have been forgotten. Today’s approach may have been best summarised by Michael Fabricant, the Tory backbencher, who last week tweeted: “In THIS country, you are innocent until proven guilty.” Tories also argue that if they suspended the MP accused of rape, they would identify him, risking legal consequences and a backlash if he was later exonerated. We have learnt that the young woman’s next step, shortly before she spoke to the chief whip, was to contact parliament’s independent complaints and grievance scheme (ICGS), which was set up two years ago under the premiership of Theresa May as a bullying and harassment helpline. It assigned her an “advocate” from a women’s charity to help her navigate the process. Two options were available: she could submit a complaint against the MP, triggering a parliamentary investigation, or she could go to the police. According to a parliamentary source, contacting the ICGS is the “right thing to do”, although complainants must be willing to go through a potentially years-long investigation into their former employers. The source said: “Parliament is not a place for quick fixes.” The process of drafting a complaint to the ICGS and finding a counsellor and medical professionals, who can diagnose any health problems such as post-traumatic stress disorder, takes weeks. For the young woman, this became all the more complicated earlier in summer when the ICGS was taken over by a new contractor. This meant that her advocate could no longer work for her and all the data had to be transferred to a new charity. Her allegations had to be retold all over again. One source revealed that the woman said: “It’s quite distressing as I had a close and genuine understanding relationship with my advocate and now I’ll have to go through that all again with someone new.” Last Saturday an unmarked vehicle pulled up outside the MP’s home and officers took him to an east London police station. Scotland Yard said he had been arrested “on suspicion of rape”. He was later released on bail. For decades the Speaker was required to name and notify the House of Commons in the event that an MP was arrested. But in 2016 the rule was removed after it was decided that it violated the right to privacy enshrined in human rights laws. Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the current Speaker, was formally told of the MP’s arrest last Saturday night by the clerk of the House, but he was unable to act. This meant that the chief whip could not rely on parliamentary authorities to act or create a situation in which he was forced to suspend an MP. Now Spencer must act alone to decide the MP’s fate while being seen to safeguard other young staffers who may come into contact with him when parliament returns from its summer recess next month. Johnson has asked the chief whip to provide a full explanation of his handling of the alleged victim, who has told confidantes that she is “devastated” by his apparent inaction. Spencer insists that he has a full note of the conversation with the alleged victim, showing that he had acted properly. He is understood to insist that the woman had not made allegations of serious sexual assault or sexual abuse when she spoke to him in April. Police officers are due to speak to the MP again on August 25. The investigation remains at an early stage but, while detectives look into the claims, the ICGS is unable to proceed with its own inquiry. Between the parliamentary authorities and the Conservative Party there is no known safeguarding plan in place for other aides. As a result, the FDA union wants to have urgent meetings with the House authorities to improvise an emergency plan. “They want [the accused MP] to be banned from the parliamentary estate,” said a person familiar with the discussions. Last night friends of the victim said that she feels abandoned by the party. The chief whip might not be required to make contact but, as a former parliamentary aide, she is “shocked” that nobody from the Conservative Party has approached her, they said. The chief whip’s office said: “The chief whip takes all allegations of harassment and abuse extremely seriously and has strongly encouraged anybody who has approached him to contact the appropriate authorities, including parliament’s independent complaints and grievance scheme, which can formally carry out independent and confidential investigations. “The matter is now in the hands of the police and any action taken will be decided once the investigation has been concluded.” Confusion reigns for Westminster ‘victims’ When the #MeToo scandal hit Westminster in 2017, the leaders of all the main parties agreed a new system was needed for MPs’ and peers’ staff to report bullying and sexual harassment allegations, writes Gabriel Pogrund. As the parliamentary authorities have since acknowledged, the Palace of Wesminster had operated as a workplace in “more or less the same way for over 700 years”. The top priority post-”Pestminster” was to prevent people from having to report bad behaviour to their line managers — often the MPs accused of misconduct. It also sought to remove power from politicians in deciding on the outcome of complaints. Two-and-a-half years on, women’s groups and trade unions deliver a mixed verdict on whether the reforms have gone far enough, or been implemented with sufficient speed. The centrepiece of the new regime is an independent complaints and grievance scheme (ICGS). As part of the service, victims can anonymously contact a helpline via telephone or email and make a complaint about any MP, MP’s staff or member of House of Commons staff. Since last October, allegations can be “non-recent” as well, meaning that the ICGS can trigger investigations into historic abuse. The parliamentary commissioner for standards, an official approved by MPs, will then conduct a confidential probe. It was only in June that MPs went further and voted to create an independent panel to decide on sanctions for those found to have bullied or harassed staff. The panel of eight experts, none of whom are MPs, will have the power to suspend or exclude MPs in serious cases. So far, not one has suffered such a punishment. But Amy Leversidge, assistant general secretary of the senior civil servants’ FDA union, said at the time it was an “amazing result”. In June, MPs also decided by a slender margin of five votes to ditch plans to have debates on certain panel decisions. That such plans were even considered was then described as “re-traumatising” and a “slap in the face” for victims. According to the latest figures, the ICGS had received 201 calls and emails in the first quarter of this year alone. The resulting complaints prompted 26 investigations. Last year, 806 calls and emails were received, leading to about 100 investigations. Related articles Whips knew of concerns about rape suspect Tory MP ‘for years’ |
| Message Thread:
|