Liberal Democrats sexual harassment mess

I heard the interview as well, Movedalot. I thought, he (possibly) made a mild pass, she made it clear she wasn't interested. Er....she said it was the power imbalance that made it so inappropriate and disturbing. Anyone remember Cosmo and Helen Gurley Brown? If I believed in conspiracies, I might think it's all a desperate attempt to get rid of Clegg who wasn't even leader nine years ago.

Always a bit of a *** when the top person is the one that has allegations against them. That is why schools have a separate procedure for allegations against the head and disciplinary issues involving the head. I am very relieved that during my time as chair of governors I was never called upon to use this as it involves the chair of governors making the decision and suspending the head! You do wonder how many times heads don't get suspended because this would require considerable confidence on the part of the chair, who is, after all, an untrained volunteer. (And you can't discuss it with other governors because they might be involved in a hearing or appeal. Local authorities would offer advice though, but do not have the power to suspend)

Jess I only tuned in partly through the interview but heard a woman saying he kept moving to sit by her and invited her to his room. Was there more to it than that? I know that is a pain but it didn't seem like something to make so much fuss about. I think we must all have been in that situation and just dealt with it and not given it another thought. Surely there must be more to it than that?

He was a Party - not government - employee. Masterminded many by-election successes. He retired as Chief Executive in 2009 (owing to ill health) and took his seat in the Lords. The alleged harassment took place while he was still an employee of the Party.

Not sure whether he was an employee or not. But there should still be procedures. He's still denying all.
Hard hitting interview on world at one R4 - woman who was on the receiving end. It will be interesting who, within the party, gets the blame.

Totally agree. Suspension pending investigation. I thought it was standard procedure in all big organisations.

It puzzles me that government/high ranking politcians respond to allegations so clumsiiy, when public sector organisations have clearly laid out policies and procedures for dealing with even the merest whiff of an allegation of gross misconduct. Before I retired I conducted several investigations of alleged sexual harassment. The alleged perpetrators were all suspended immediately, on full pay, and all lost their jobs. The first interview with the complainant always included an explanation that anything constituting an offence could and should be reported to the police.

It is reported that one young woman was told to go to his office, then came runnng out complaining he had 'fondled' her (that should have read 'sexually assaulted her'). At that point, he should have been suspended pending the outcome of an investigation, or do government departments think they don't have to abide by their own disciplinary polices and procedures? Such hypocrisy!

The timing might be coincidental or serendipitous depending on your political and ethical stance. The original Channel 4 interview that triggered all this took place in January before the by-election was in the pipeline.