Expediency trumps justice when it comes to our MPs

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/16/expediency-trumps-justice-when-it-comes-to-our-mps

Version 0 of 2.

Labour MP Jess Phillips spoke up in parliament about the Conservative MPs Charlie Elphicke and Andrew Griffiths being allowed to participate in the recent confidence vote on Theresa May.

Griffiths, MP for Burton, resigned from his ministerial post after it was revealed that he’d sent thousands of sexually explicit text messages to two constituents, one of which, read aloud by Phillips, asked if a woman could “take a beating”. Nice.

Elphicke, MP for Dover and Deal, was accused of serious sex offences (which he denies, with charges yet to be brought against him).

Both had their whip removed but then reinstated in time for the vote, leading to Phillips asking: “What matters more – political power or protecting victims of sexual abuse?” Well done to Phillips for speaking up, but why should she have to? And why was the whip restored rather quietly to the two? There are complications (Griffiths says that he has suffered mental health issues since he was abused as a child). However, this does seem to place sexual misconduct on a much lower footing than, say, the MPs’ expenses scandal of 2009. The revulsion caused by the expenses revelation was understandable, but inappropriate sexual behaviour is just as serious, if not more so. At least, it should be.

The message seems to be that money matters (a lot), sexual impropriety not quite so much. It’s almost as though we’re supposed to buy into this idea of male MPs – men in power – as just naughty boys, who have had their ticking off (possibly by some saucy matron figure) and there’s no need to take it any further and ruin a chap’s career. Absolute rot. If such characters are to be reinstated, then at least respect the public enough to explain why and don’t try to slip it through quietly.