Ah councillors, bless ’em:
- Labour Councillor Suspended From Party For ‘Shirt Lifting Gender Bender’ Attack – Mike Harrison, Thanet, who has been suspended from a month (which, assuming he’s then let back into the Labour group, is rather different from being suspended from the party permanently).
- Thanet Tory councillor suspended for Aids answerphone message – Ken Gregory, also Thanet. Must be something in the water there. His suspension is pending further investigation.
- Tory councillor faces calls to quit over ‘n***** in woodpile’ comment – Gerry Forsbrey, Spelthorne.
- Conservative councillor derides NHS as “Marxist” – John Butcher, Surrrey, with a nasty twist in wanting people living healthy lives to end up in their own communities, separate from those living less healthy ones.
* Mark Pack is Party President and is the editor of Liberal Democrat Newswire.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Joy of Six 1297
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Brexit putting England and Wales tap water safety at risk
Regional Candidates Committee - let the verwaltung* commence (but not until the New Year)
Should Labour move to the right on immigration? The Week in Polls
4th Dec
Nonconformistradical
David Garlick
Simon R
Mick Taylor
Diana Simpson
8 Comments
‘Suspension’ is, by its very nature, temporary. If the situation acquires permanence, that would be ‘expulsion’.
There is also this rather strange tale
http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/news/national-news/former-nazi-wins-a-labour-council-seat
Hywel: Strange certainly, though the reports I’ve read about it suggest genuine repentance and regret for her past.
No, three councillors deserve to be voted out.
The first three are rightly to be criticised for their offensiveness.
The fourth is expressing a legitimate (wrong, and eccentric, but legitimate) policy idea.
Voting people out because they have wrong and eccentric ideas seems like a pretty fair result for democracy though 🙂
Hywel: Quite 🙂
The interesting thing about these three stories is the fact that the first two were considered criminal offences.
The first “gender bender” comment was apparently reported to the police – presumably under the ridiculous Section 5 of the Public Order Act, which includes insulting language and does not require any intention (to cause distress or alarm). It is fair enough for political parties to discipline people for this behaviour but it should NOT be a police matter. Also the future as a councillor belongs with the electorate not with an unelected Standards Board, as was the case until recently. Depressingly the Coalition has failed to repeal section 5 despite it being in our manifesto and was supported (half-heartedly) by the Tories in opposition. I should know as I started the campaign to repeal section 5.
The second one involves the Malicious Communication Act – again it can be subject to party disciplinary proceedings but should not be a matter for the police. Worse things are said on twitter and there is no right not to be offended unless it becomes a pattern constituting harassment (i.e. repeated). LDs have called for review of the MCA in a recent conference motion. I predict we’ll soon have the MCA equivalent of the twitter joke trial.
The third case is rather sad. “Nigger in the woodpile” is certainly offensive but is an expression that was in common use a few decades ago, including by people (inc. kids) who never knew what it was referring to. I suspect the councillor said it unthinkingly and stupidly but speech offences (in criminal law and in disciplinary matters) need to include a mens rea, an intentionality element, otherwise it is unfair on the ignorant or the older or the absent-minded who may have no racist beliefs at all. By analogy, people with Tourette’s (where swearing btw is a rare symptom) are not prosecuted, rightly as they have no intentionality.
Free speech (i.e. not having a “chill” on free expression) requires that we cut a little slack to those who are not intending to cause distress or alarm (cases 1 and 3) and should keep the criminal law out of mere abuse between two adults (case 2). Political correctness is better described as institutionalised politeness and is a good thing as long as it never comes with criminal sanction.
Wrt case four, we must have culture which encourages not deters Tories from expressing their true feelings on the NHS!
Excellent post, Evan.
@Evan Harris :
Wrt case four, we must have culture which encourages not deters Tories from expressing their true feelings on the NHS!”
….and THEN we get them voted out! 🙂 Incidentally, I have just found a local Tory leaflet from 2009 where the Tory candidate for Southport derides Labour’s policy of making people lose the ability to pass on their homes to their children in order to pay for care. Any chance of the the Tories seriously changing this now they’re in government?