I like Jess Phillip's a lot but

But vote with the opposition to elect a chairperson and you are out.
The decent thing for the man concerned would be to stand down until the case is settled, although that would identify him so perhaps that is not a good idea either.

Innocent until proved guilty anyone?
This was a relationship so I have heard, and will be a ‘he said/did’ against a ‘she said/did’ sort of case.He was an MP and she worked with him.It will be investigated.

I think, had he been charged then he should be suspended but not as he hasn't!

I think JP is all about JP. Anything to promote the brand.

the arrested man cannot be named for legal reasons; that means it would be against the law to name him.
that is not always the case, so i think we will not know the name until the matter is concluded.
this is one of those cases, i presume, where to name the accused would identify the complainant, which is strictly forbidden.
so he cannot be suspended, because that in turn would identify him and the complainant.

More like it cause 'political instability' than 'affect the complainant'
Unless the man accused has only ever met or known one woman in his entire sexually active life...

The man has not been charged, to name him could cost him his career, mud stitcks , no smoke without etc

Until he is found guilty he is innocent, so there is no reason for the whip to be withdrawn.

He has been arrested, charged and bailed.
Yet to be named but by retaining the whip he can continue to help 'get brexit done'.
So all's well in toryland?

He hasn’t been found guilty mcem ...but I see you have been judge and jury all by yourself and condemned him out of hand, probably for simply being a Tory MP ?

Whereas Alex Salmond of course, was a shining example of manhood.

I agree with suspects not being named until charged ( except in exceptional circumstances). However that is a different issue from his being suspended by his party. A teacher, social worker or doctor in this situation would be suspended whilst the investigations were carried out (as would many other employees) It’s a safeguarding issue. Anyway, anyone who wants to know can just ask Twitter. I was a bit surprised to put it mildly.

Are people actually making political points about an alleged rape.

He hasn’t been charged mcem

It’s a political point * Galaxy* about the Tories playing fast and loose with withdrawing the whip or not with men accused of sexual crimes.

Sexual assault conviction
Party suspension
In November 2017, Elphicke was suspended from the Conservative Party after "serious allegations" made against him were referred to the police. Elphicke stated: "I am not aware of what the alleged claims are and deny any wrongdoing."

In March 2018, Elphicke was told that he was accused of sex offences against two members of his staff. He said in response: "I am completely confident I will be able to prove my innocence". In April 2018, The Sunday Times reported that a rape allegation had been made against Elphicke in November 2017, at the height of the Westminster sex scandals, but that the police had not informed him of it for about five months.

Reinstatement of party membership
On 12 December 2018, Elphicke had the Conservative whip reinstated prior to a confidence vote in Theresa May.

That's not what's mostly being discussed here though. It seems to be your party has worse men than my party.

I think it is right that he has not been named and, were he to be suspended, that would immediately point the finger at him. He is innocent until proved guilty and many men have been falsely accused but still have the stigma hanging over them even when their innocence is proved.

Other cases spring to mind where people have been named such as Carl Sargeant who committed suicide and another politician whom we know who was suspended from the Tory Party without any proof of wrong doing. It took him some time to clear his name but there was still finger pointing going on.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11, states: "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which the defendant has had all the guarantees necessary for their defence."

But because the accused is an MP does that mean that article 11 can be ridden roughshod over? And does it also mean that if anyone, in any walk of life, is accused of rape, they must then be suspended from work until the accusation is dealt with, one way or another, at a public trial in a court of law?

Good point Spangler.
?

Yes Spangle it is right that someone accused of rape is suspended from the workplace whilst the police decide whether to charge them or not. Just think about it for one minute - a doctor accused of raping a patient, a nursery worker accused of raping a child, a teacher accused of raping a pupil. The workplace says well, innocent until proved guilty so carry on regardless. As I said upthread- it’s a safeguarding issue - ie the employers responsibility to protect others until the situation is clear.

The principle in law here is that someone shouldn’t be named until charged but safeguarding in the workplace is a different issue

I thought that there was more than one accusation?

Well that just makes it worse but I believe it’s one complainant and 4 situations one of which was rape. All allegations of course