Vocal Voices

I do not like Keith Vaz, he is a nasty piece of work. If he was not an MP his past actions could / would have landed him in jail, but never mind.

The latest accusation(s) are that he bullied commons' clerks, or at least one clerk.

In an interview on Newsnight Jenny McCullough claimed he entered into a tirade against her in an hotel lobby and in front of other staff and guests, claiming that she we not fit to be on a committee because she was not a mother. Nasty stuff, but...

Why has it taken over six years for this to come out, and why did she not challenge him at the time? She was in a public place with plenty of witnesses, she could have destroyed him there and then.

Ah but, there was a career to think about....

Workingman wrote:Ah but, there was a career to think about....

And because of that people like Vaz get away with what they did.

Whilst I do agree that people need to stand up for themselves, I also understand that there are pressures which mean they may not. At the time.

This kind of behaviour needs to stop and if it means that someone has to get their career and their support network before calling it out, I think I might be willing to let the time gap lapse.

I have, quite literally, been in the situation where I've been advised to drop my complaint as it was not a "winning proposition" but might actually be the opposite. For no other reason than I was low man on the totem pole.

My main opposition to this kind of thing is "where does it stop?".

Which leads me to your position WM.

If I trusted that making this precedent to stop people like Vaz would not be abused, I would be all for it. Sadly I believe it would be abused and not used responsibly.

That makes me very sad. Because I want to stand behind this as a good thing but I also don't want to because of all the people who will jump on it and use it to make political statements.

Talk about conflicted!

Suff wrote:Whilst I do agree that people need to stand up for themselves, I also understand that there are pressures which mean they may not.

Absolutely. I have been there too Suff.

I have worked for three public sector organisations and two of them were rife with bullying, mostly from the management. Not all of them but enough.

And these are the organisations which talk the loudest about their "policies" to prevent bullying, sexism and racism whilst bullying and sexism is commonplace. You have only to look at the regular scandals in Parliament to know what hypocrites they are.

Gents, I do understand what you are saying, but if the woman's claim is genuine she should have challenged him there and then. She was in a public place with plenty of witnesses. All she had to do was very politely tell him to stop or she would make an official complaint.

I do not like this idea of saving things up for years and years before going public - it is cowardly and opportunistic.

Workingman wrote:I do not like this idea of saving things up for years and years before going public - it is cowardly and opportunistic.

Neither do I. But until the person making the complaint is automatically locked into the job until the complaint is completed (with automatic dismissal if the complaint is found to be false), then this is going to happen again and again.

I know that even the automatic dismissal clause has serious issues where witnesses were not available, but something has to be there to stop the reverse happening; where sheer spite is used to destroy a career without consequences.