International Trade Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan confessed to a harrowing personal experience of abuse in Westminster during her morning media round, when questioned about the ongoing spate of sex and behaviour scandals coming out of Parliament. Trevelyan claims to have been “at the sharp end” of misogyny from MPs multiple times:
“AMT: I have witnessed and been at the sharp end of misogyny from some colleagues many times over…
NF: Might I ask how that misogyny presented itself?
AMT: Well we might describe it as ‘wandering hands’, if you like, we might describe it as, you know, a number of years ago being pinned up against a wall by a male MP who is now no longer in the House I’m pleased to say, declaring that I ‘must want him because he’s a powerful man’.”
Just looking back over the last week, we’ve had Angie’s legs, the porn MP, a shadow cabinet member accused of sexist comments, Trans Tory MP Jamie Wallis charged over a car crash and Liam Byrne suspended for bullying. We’ve almost got enough for a complete re-write of ‘We Didn’t Start The Fire’…
The parliamentary authorities are today introducing the latest flimsy attempt to deal with bad behaviour by estate passholders, with a new “it’s not OK” card aimed at giving a warning to those contravening the behaviour code. According to details seen by Guido, the “‘it’s not OK’ cards are part of a trial to help our colleagues when they are facing difficult scenarios at work”, with the aims of:
- Giving the passholder “a moment to reflect on their behaviour”
- De-escalate the situation
- Remind the passholder of the House of Commons values, House of Lords values and the Behaviour Code
The cards are being introduced on a trial for the next few months. Rob Roberts jokes in the new intake Whatsapp group, “Who’s going to be the first to get a “naughty card”?”. Who indeed…
UPDATE: Less than 12 hours later, Guido understands the scheme has now been suspended pending further review…
Relative drama from the Commons last night as MPs voted to reject a government proposal that would have seen MPs debate serious behaviour breaches on the floor of the house.
The core proposals will see a panel of independent experts consider complaints against MPs, before issuing their recommendations; less serious sanctions would be imposed directly by the panel, however more serious punishments – such as expulsion or suspension – would have to be approved by a vote in the Commons. Finally ending the historic process of MPs adjudicating on their own behaviour…
Jacob Rees-Mogg had tacked on an extra proposal, allowing MPs to debate the most serious cases before a vote. Mogg’s proposals were rejected by 243 to 238.
Parliamentary staffers had spent the day heavily lobbying their bosses to oppose Rees-Mogg’s proposal, over fears that despite the limited rules of any debate – including a ban on naming the alleged victims and discussion of specific details of the case – MPs would, in the words of Meg Hillier MP, use the debate as a “bully pulpit”, using “gossip” and “innuendo” to get around the rules. Fury turned to jubilation among staffers and after the defeat there was “sheer joy” in their Whatsapp groups…
The vote in favour of Chris Bryant’s wrecking amendment cannot technically be chalked down as a Government defeat, nevertheless, the Tory whips tried their hardest to persuade MPs into the voting lobbies with them to support Rees-Mogg’s motion, including a dig-in-the-ribs email setting out how the Chief and Deputy Chief Whip were intending to vote. 45 Tory MPs ended up backing Bryant’s amendment, including Theresa May and serving Minister Penny Mordaunt.
Following his defeat, Rees-Mogg responded via an article in The House Magazine, conceding:
“If this means more complainants will feel confident in the system, then so much the better. Of greatest importance is the fact that the independent panel has been established.”
Magnanimous as ever, Jacob…
In Case You Missed It: Parliament Begins Formal Investigation into Rob Roberts*
*Rob voted against Chris Bryant’s amendment…
