“Tory councillor expelled after rape remarks” – but why involve the standards committee?

The Press Association reports:

A city councillor has been expelled from the Conservative Party after making offensive remarks about rape at a meeting.

Eddie Wake, 56, a Tory councillor at Sunderland City Council, is alleged to have made the remarks at a meeting of the authority and left one woman in tears.

Conservative party chiefs said comments by Washington South member Mr Wake, at the end of a meeting with police about a rape prevention campaign, were “totally unacceptable”…

Group leader Lee Martin told the BBC: “When I ask anyone to go out and vote for a Conservative candidate, I’ve got a minimum expectation, should that person be elected, of how they conduct themselves.

“Eddie Wake has come in well below that standard and as a result is no longer a Conservative councillor.”

The council’s standards committee is investigating Cllr Wake’s remark.

The Conservative Party looks to have responded sensibly and promptly. Whilst there’s no suggestion that the remarks should be illegal, it’s right for parties to hold their candidates to a higher standard than simply “it’s legal”.

But when you’ve got the party’s with their own standards, the public’s ability to judge those standards and their enforcement through the ballot box and the law to deal with extreme cases, does it really need a standards committee looking at the matter too?

A body to look at and enforce breaches of rules such as the declaration of donations and the claiming of expenses is certainly required. A body judging personal behaviour beyond what the law, the parties and the electorate can do anyway? I’m not so sure.

Read more by or more about , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

8 Comments

  • We need some sort of system that allows voters to judge the performance of parties in recent years, and punish or reward those with unwise or wise councillors. Perhaps we could call it “an election”.

  • Andrew Suffield 14th Jan '10 - 8:42am

    It would be nice if elections had a long enough memory to judge performance in recent years, but we know they really don’t. A few months is about all you can hope for.

  • Are you suggesting that Councils should not have Standards Committees? Are you saying that councillors should be untouchable whatever they do or say, as long as they don’t actually break the law, or belong to a political party that happens to decide to take action against them?

    Elections may provide an element of sanction – Eventually! But when a councillor’s remarks can bring a Council into disrepute, the Council surely needs a Standards Committee which has the opportunity to provide timely redress.

  • tonygreaves 14th Jan '10 - 1:41pm

    I am suggesting that Standards Committees and the Standards Board for England should all be abolished. The system is ridiculous and pays very little attention to principles of natural justice and due process.

    They are not needed, do far more harm than good, and ought to go.

    Tony Greaves

  • tonygreaves 14th Jan '10 - 1:51pm
  • I actually agreed with Tony Greaves about abolishing the Standards Board until I read the article he linked to. While the Standards Board is increasingly being used by councillors to nobble their political opponents, and by council officers as a defence against their incompetence (or for political reasons), nonetheless situations can arise where an individual can cause havoc on the best run council by making unsubstantiated claims, bullying officers and fellow councillors, and generally wasting so much time that the council’s administrative apparatus becomes inoperable. To suggest that the electorate should have the last say on individuals like this is not necessarily realistic because they may be able to present themselves as being champions of the public good, fighters against corruption, and so on (we all know that the electorate is predisposed to believe that all councils are corrupt). This is, of course, more likely to happen on small councils such as town or parish councils, where it is often difficult to find enough candidates to fill vacancies at the best of times. I’m not sure what the answer is – but there is a dilemma.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • David Evans
    Max, there are so many cases of economy with the actualité in your article it is difficult to know where to begin. So let's start with "Ed Davey’s inter...
  • William Francis
    Somehow pro-EU stances are not credited for the party's successes in the local and EU elections of 2019. Yet they are at the same time to blame for Tim Farro...
  • Marco
    “Ed Davey’s interview on Marr may not have fully captured the nuance of our position“ What is the point of nuance at this time The raison d’etre f...
  • Christopher Curtis
    The saddest thing is that putting political expediency ahead of principle (and party policy) is showing not the slightest sign of working. The party is pretty m...
  • John King
    John Probert: It's undeniably a pretty flag and has proliferated everywhere amid the new nationalism. However if Scotland departed, followed by Northern Irelan...