Liberal Democrats sexual harassment mess

I didn't hear the interview, but in SW's autobiography she praised Lord Rennard's organisational and campaigning skills.
That's obviously more important to her and the other grandees than women being treated with dignity and respect.
Given the LibDems' results in last week's elections, you can perhaps see why they might think that, even if you don't agree with them!

Yes I heard that too. It would appear that as far as the grandees of the libdems are concerned Rennard knows where the bodies are buried Or at any rate, he's done them all lots of favours.

I heard Shirley Williams ( who I have always admired in the past) standing up for Lord Rennard on Radio 4 this morning. She said the sexual harassment had been blown out of all proportion.

Well obviously he left her well alone, but what of the other 4 women he harassed, of which 3 of them do not want his return to the Lib Dems.

Lord Rennard made some kind of a weak apology, but it's only, I believe, that he wants to come back into the fold.

I was very disappointed with her reaction and pleased I am not a Lib Dem.

Ana.

Correct.

A good time to try and bury bad news, wait for something bigger to come along to hopefully take the media's eye off the ball.

Someone's obviously leaned on him hard - there was no way he was even admitting he had anything to apologise for a while ago...

The Lib Dems certainly are in mess aren't they.

Lord Rennard, Lord Oakeshott, Vince Cable, possible 'Cash for Honours', party in -fighting, anhialation in the EU and local council votes. Will Nick Clegg cut the ties and join the EU gravy train, as expected.

I think the timing of Lord Rennard's apologies is what's commonly called 'Kitchen Sink Politics". Chuck everything into the mix now and get it all over and done with, hopefully!

They are meant to be pillars of Society. Therefore they should be gentlemen and resign. I was amazed to hear Lord someone or other and David Steele talking in Lord Rennards defence. While there are men like that what hope is there?

Yes the apology does not seem to have worked as far as the wronged parties are concerned does it. Mealy mouthed and insincere apologies rarely work.

The 'apology' with so many get out clauses issued by a solicitor makes me feel that these powerful men still just don't get it. Unwanted, inappropriate behaviour will never stop unless women brave enough to come forward & receive the usual vilification do so. There is usually another reason behind the timing of such statements - these are skillful political people.

Former Liberal leader Lord Steel said he thought Lord Rennard had brought "closure" to a "very unfortunate episode" with his apology.

Alistair Webster, the QC appointed by the party to examine the evidence in the disciplinary case being considered against Lord (Chris) Rennard stated in his review (available online):

I reject that view. It seemed to me that it was eminently reasonable to explain that, in my view, there was credible evidence that events had occurred which had caused distress. To have done otherwise would have been unfair to some of the complainants and would have deprived my conclusions of context.

The statements made that there were only four statements from the complainants, set against the many others is a gross oversimplification. Other independent statements were highly relevant in my conclusion as to the likelihood of establishing that events had occurred which caused distress.

To apologise over a mistake made, is one thing - to apologise because you keep making the same mistake is another.

Oh, I knew, even as I typed, that would be a reply.

Sexual harrassment is bad. But the matter has been dealt with. They should shut up and get on with their jobs now.

Ok, so sexual abuse/sexual harassment aren't important when governing a country. It must be true, because that was the decision taken in relation to CS 30 years ago - no change there then

And he (Rennard) should get back into the fold. Not that he ever left. The women have had their apology and they should drop their campaign now. In other words, they should be sensible, and focus on the important things in governing a country.

What a mess the Libdems are in, and at a time when we particularly need our politicians to be focussed on politics rather than infighting. The Rennard case alongside the continued drip of information about the extent of Cyril Smith's abuse of boys suggest attitudes to sexual harassment/abuse remain problematic within this party.

Rennard, after 3 months or so of contemplation, has "apologised" for "invading personal space".
Obviously wants to get back into the fold. Boring being suspended when there is the possibility that Clegg might be toppled. Rennard used to being in the thick of it "king making" .

It seems to me that there are parallels between the case of Cardinal O'Brian and Lord Rennard. Both were in positions of power and their victims were afraid of the consequences if they spoke out at the time. In the past women who worked for male bosses sometimes found themselves in similar positions but were afraid to speak out for fear of getting poor references or not being believed.

Well in many workplaces people are strongly advised to avoid such relationships - if not downright forbidden. A boss inviting a junior out on a date would be a disciplinary matter because it immediately compromises both of them.
But really - even without guidance, any man with half a brain should have twigged that it may be OK to make a pass at a colleague while on a conference, But NOT if you are their boss or their bosses boss, or you are any powerful position over them. This is not the time or the place for sexual opportunism (ie seeing of you can cop on) bc.
Terrible problems arise when a boss starts a relationship with someone in his team. At best other people are going to be envious (will she get promotion?) and wonder what is being said about them outside work (she's a spy). Trust disintegrates.
I have seen it happen and it usually upsets a whole lot of people. I once worked in a team where this occurred (boss was married and they were supposedly keeping it a secret) The whole team, about 10 of us, all left over a period of about a year to go to different roles because they atmosphere became so toxic.
(i know it could happen with female bosses, but that is pretty rare because not many women go around trying it on to see if they can get their end away with junior staff)

Unwelcome advances are approaches that aren't acceptable to the person approached. If they are welcome they may lead to a relationship. There are many relationships which start between people of unequal status. How do they start if an approach from a person of higher status is by definition unacceptable?

Not getting you lilygran of course there are relationships of unequal status. And some of them start in the workplace.
But what has that got to do with "unwelcome advances"?

It isn't just one woman who has complained. The alleged incidents may not be serious enough to involve the police and I have to say I am slightly surprised that they have already become involved. That doesn't mean that sexual harassment should go unchallenged within the workplace/government/school or Liberal party.

Leaving aside this particular case, I think there is every reason to make a "fuss" if someone is found to have abused his (or her) senior position by making suggestive remarks or sexual advances to a less senior person. It's true that one person may feel able to deal with this sort of harassment but others, who are not so confident and assertive, may feel badly intimidated and may also feel that their position within an organisation is at risk.

She seemed a little vague during the interview about whether he was making advances. He moved to sit nearer to her, he waited for her and walked her to her room. He invited her to his room for a drink. She said no. She went into her room, he went to his. JessM how do any relationships between two people of unequal status ever develop? Because if you look around, you'll see lots of relationships in which one partner (often the male in the case of heterosexual couples but not always) is richer, higher status, more powerful, older than the other. Is it not a question of how welcome the advance is?

Or she might just have another agenda? It just didn't seem worth all the fuss to me. I've had bosses who have made a pass at me but I didn't ever think my job depended upon it. Maybe I was being naive? People away from home get up to stuff, you join in - or not. I'm just not sure it is all as it is made to appear.

The counterweight to "you come to bed with me and I will see you right for a safe seat" is, of course, "if you don't come to bed with me …" – in other words, an implied threat which is equally an abuse of power.

That's right lilygran if it is a colleague of equal (or less) power there is no problem declining an unwanted "pass" or telling someone to push off if they are trying to grope you. if it is someone who has a lot of power it is inexcusable. In this case could easily be seen as - you come to bed with me and I will see you right for a safe seat - you don't and you never will. So a form of corruption as well inasmuch as might be using power to get what he wants and distort what is meant to be a transparent process.