This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/20/lord-rennard-lib-dems-saga-attitude-to-women

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Lord Rennard’s return to the Lib Dem fold caps a sorry saga of mistakes Lord Rennard’s return to the Lib Dem fold caps a sorry saga of mistakes
(2 days later)
In choosing a week to bury excruciating news, the Liberal Democrats have excelled at an ugly art. Westminster slumbers in recess, voters are on holiday or reeling from the latesthorrors of Isis – and Nick Clegg tersely announces Lord Rennard has been reinstated as a party member, all disciplinary action miraculously evaporated.In choosing a week to bury excruciating news, the Liberal Democrats have excelled at an ugly art. Westminster slumbers in recess, voters are on holiday or reeling from the latesthorrors of Isis – and Nick Clegg tersely announces Lord Rennard has been reinstated as a party member, all disciplinary action miraculously evaporated.
On the whole, I esteem the Lib Dem leader more highly than many who would visit every coalition failing or fudge on him do. But in the handling of accusations against the party’s former chief executive, he has failed grievously. This week’s pious statement that the party has taken “a hard look in the mirror” particularly grates.On the whole, I esteem the Lib Dem leader more highly than many who would visit every coalition failing or fudge on him do. But in the handling of accusations against the party’s former chief executive, he has failed grievously. This week’s pious statement that the party has taken “a hard look in the mirror” particularly grates.
For what did Clegg see in the glass, but messy, inconclusive dealing with alleged harassment and a (largely male) leadership team which wants to run away from the matter as fast as possible before the next election? Meanwhile, Rennard’s non-apology that he may have “inadvertently” encroached on “personal space” is a premier cru example of lawyerly language dressing up something reprehensible. There are too many congruent stories of troubling conduct to skip out of so nimbly. For what did Clegg see in the glass, but messy, inconclusive dealing with alleged harassment and a (largely male) leadership team which wants to run away from the matter as fast as possible before the next election? Meanwhile, Rennard’s non-apology that he may have “inadvertently” encroached on “personal space” is a premier cru example of lawyerly language dressing up something reprehensible. There are too many congruent stories of troubling conduct to skip out of so nimbly.
Tonally, the statement is the democratic equivalent of the Soviet post-Brezhnevite claim: “Mistakes were made in the 1970s.” In truth, an awful lot of new mistakes were added to the original sin of failing to investigate evidence against a senior figure, who had an unrivalled internal network and controlled the political fortunes of many aspiring women.Tonally, the statement is the democratic equivalent of the Soviet post-Brezhnevite claim: “Mistakes were made in the 1970s.” In truth, an awful lot of new mistakes were added to the original sin of failing to investigate evidence against a senior figure, who had an unrivalled internal network and controlled the political fortunes of many aspiring women.
The biggest blunder was appointing a QC, Alistair Webster, who proved incapable of delivering a clear view and resorted instead to Vicky Pollard “yes-but/no-but” waffle. An internal inquiry concluded that the allegations against Rennard made by several women were “broadly credible” (let us file “broadly” as another weasel word). In Webster’s view, the established facts failed the burden of proof necessary for a criminal conviction, but were generally on the right track – and the man accused should apologise. This is not a conclusion: it is a blurry logistical tangle. The biggest blunder was appointing a QC, Alistair Webster, who proved incapable of delivering a clear view and resorted instead to Vicky Pollard “yes-but/no-but” waffle. An internal inquiry concluded that the allegations against Rennard made by several women were “broadly credible” (let us file “broadly” as another weasel word). In Webster’s view, the established facts failed the standard of proof necessary for a criminal conviction, but were generally on the right track – and the man accused should apologise. This is not a conclusion: it is a blurry logistical tangle.
And it is nonsense. Because Rennard was not facing criminal charges – but allegations of a pattern of conduct that had left women feeling uncomfortable, intimidated and which needed to be addressed. To some extent, women at Westminster learn to navigate awkward moments. Indeed I had a comical one with his lordship not long ago, when I suggested at a party that we might talk in more detail about the Lib Dem outlook in marginal seats, a subject on which he is an undoubted expert. Of course, he replied: but to double the value of the enterprise I should bring along my other half, who edits a newspaper.And it is nonsense. Because Rennard was not facing criminal charges – but allegations of a pattern of conduct that had left women feeling uncomfortable, intimidated and which needed to be addressed. To some extent, women at Westminster learn to navigate awkward moments. Indeed I had a comical one with his lordship not long ago, when I suggested at a party that we might talk in more detail about the Lib Dem outlook in marginal seats, a subject on which he is an undoubted expert. Of course, he replied: but to double the value of the enterprise I should bring along my other half, who edits a newspaper.
My conclusion is that Rennard is just one of those genial coves who do not consider women professionally as they would men. This would also explain why he does not really accept the charge that his behaviour was reprehensible.My conclusion is that Rennard is just one of those genial coves who do not consider women professionally as they would men. This would also explain why he does not really accept the charge that his behaviour was reprehensible.
Those who feel he is the victim here might look at the brutality of his fightback. Rennard has won his reinstatement because he knew precisely which buttons to press with a nervous leadership which fears a wipe-out next May and can ill afford an ongoing row. He and Team Clegg have effectively colluded to get rid of an awkward matter, with no further reproach issued by the leader.Those who feel he is the victim here might look at the brutality of his fightback. Rennard has won his reinstatement because he knew precisely which buttons to press with a nervous leadership which fears a wipe-out next May and can ill afford an ongoing row. He and Team Clegg have effectively colluded to get rid of an awkward matter, with no further reproach issued by the leader.
It is true that Rennard is not, after all, the only senior character at Westminster with a reputation for being over-demonstrative. But the pattern of behaviour here is not trivial. As it stands, it is pretty hard to divine Clegg’s real feelings. When I last interviewed him, he was determined there would be “no place on the campaign team” for the renegade Rennard (given the Lib Dems’ current electoral outlook, that may be a punishment he can live with). It all sounded very tough and disapproving – but it fell, and still falls, far short of a clear repudiation of the former chief executive.It is true that Rennard is not, after all, the only senior character at Westminster with a reputation for being over-demonstrative. But the pattern of behaviour here is not trivial. As it stands, it is pretty hard to divine Clegg’s real feelings. When I last interviewed him, he was determined there would be “no place on the campaign team” for the renegade Rennard (given the Lib Dems’ current electoral outlook, that may be a punishment he can live with). It all sounded very tough and disapproving – but it fell, and still falls, far short of a clear repudiation of the former chief executive.
As for his lordship, he is ebullient as ever and feels vindicated that he can defend “the values that led me to join the Liberal party in my teens”. Whatever they were, they were clearly light on feminism. At the heart of this saga is a lesson in the way authority can be abused and blind eyes turned, while vaunting progressive values. That is the unvarnished truth – and you don’t need a lawyer’s thesaurus to grasp it.As for his lordship, he is ebullient as ever and feels vindicated that he can defend “the values that led me to join the Liberal party in my teens”. Whatever they were, they were clearly light on feminism. At the heart of this saga is a lesson in the way authority can be abused and blind eyes turned, while vaunting progressive values. That is the unvarnished truth – and you don’t need a lawyer’s thesaurus to grasp it.
• This article was amended on 22 August 2014. An earlier version referred to “burden of proof” where “standard of proof” was meant.