The Waugh Zone Wednesday November 1, 2017<\/b>
\nAt PMQs today, Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn will no doubt unite to condemn the terror attack in New York. But will they unite on any meaningful, practical way forward on the issue of sexual harassment and assault in politics? After the latest revelations, all the parties need to come together to agree on a complaints framework inside and outside Westminster and it will need real leadership from both the PM and Corbyn.<\/p>\n
Damian Green is the latest Tory MP to be accused of inappropriate conduct. Bright Blue think tanker and writer Kate Maltby uses a column in the Times to accuse the minister of touching her knee and making it \u201cclear he was sexually interested\u201d in her, adding his own wife was \u201cvery understanding\u201d. Green denies any sexual advance and says the allegations are \u201cuntrue [and] deeply hurtful\u201d. The PM has asked the Cabinet Secretary to \u201cestablish the facts and report back as soon as possible\u201d.<\/p>\n
Damian Green\u2019s importance to Theresa May cannot be overstated. A friend since they were both at Oxford University, he carries the title of First Secretary of State and is de facto deputy PM (imagine if he had to fill in for her at PMQs today). As May\u2019s cross-Whitehall \u2018enforcer\u2019, he chairs no fewer than nine Cabinet sub-committees on everything from Brexit prep (see below) to immigration, social reform and housing. And the latest allegations have the added problem that the Cabinet Secretary is not actually an \u2018independent\u2019 investigator, given he works with Green almost daily on a range of issues. Will Sue Gray, the Cabinet Office\u2019s director general of \u2018Propriety and Ethics\u2019 be drafted in? Tory MP Anna Soubry this morning suggested Green should step aside during the investigation.<\/p>\n
The facts of the Green\/Maltby case are disputed, but the issue of young women<\/a> feeling powerless when confronted by the conduct of more senior men<\/a> is precisely at the heart of the cases dismissed by some as at the so-called \u2018lower end\u2019 of the harassment scale. Don\u2019t forget that Commons Leader Andrea Leadsom on Monday set the bar \u201csignificantly\u201d lower than criminal conduct, stating that anyone \u2018made to feel uncomfortable\u2019 by the conduct of others should have their concerns treated seriously. She added that staff could lose their jobs, MPs lose the whip and ministers sacked. One-off incidents may be described as \u2018harmless\u2019 flirtation, but regular patterns of behaviour cannot be shrugged off so lightly. If an MP is accused once, they can possibly avoid consequences. But if they\u2019re accused several times and by several people, then Leadsom\u2019s lower bar of proof (and I suspect backed by the PM herself) will surely kick in.<\/p>\n The appalling case of Bex Bailey, the Labour activist who on\u00a0Radio 4 yesterday\u00a0bravely revealed her own rape at the hands of a party figure (and the advice by a party official to keep quiet) underlines just how serious this all is. Labour has called in an independent legal figure to investigate and a police case is not out of the question.\u00a0 Bailey\u2019s bigger point was to call<\/a> for an independent mechanism for all party staff to get help and justice. When she was on the party\u2019s ruling NEC (from 2013 to 2016), she pushed hard for changes to Labour\u2019s own procedures for dealing with sexual harassment and bullying. Ed Miliband tweeted his shock last night, but could he and the NEC have done more to overhaul the structures? As MP Stella Creasy\u00a0told us last night: \u201cYou should not be getting a careers advice session if you come forward to report a sexual assault.\u201d<\/p>\n Another Parliamentary staffer has told ITV News (and the Guardian) of how an MP pinned her to a bed while on a foreign trip last year. She complained to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, the police (who said it was outside their jurisdiction as the incident was abroad), the Commons authorities and party officials – and none took any action. \u00a0Her claims, and those of Bailey, are a long way from the consensual affairs\/peccadillos of some of the Tory MPs on the \u2018pest spreadsheet\u2019 circulating Westminster (and the web). Several of those named are threatening to sue, stating some of the claims are plain wrong. One of them told me one allegation was \u201c100% untrue\u201d. For Theresa May the list is not the issue. The issue is just what practical steps she will now take to deal with current \u2013 and future – complaints. All those victims who have suffered in silence (and there are plenty) until now will be watching and waiting for real action and reassurance.<\/p>\n The PM\u2019s reliance on Damian Green was underscored yesterday when No.10 told us he was chairing a brand new Cabinet sub-committee on EU Exit and Trade, with a focus on \u201cDomestic Preparedness, Legislation, and Devolution\u201d. The PM herself will chair a reshaped sub-committee on \u201cstrategy and negotiations\u201d, but Green\u2019s new body looks like it is designed specifically to cope with a possible \u2018no deal\u2019 outcome.<\/p>\n And it was on a \u2018no deal\u2019 Brexit, and other options, that yesterday\u2019s Cabinet meeting focused as David Davis led his colleagues through the 300 programmes being worked on. In an unusually detailed read-out, the PM\u2019s spokesman told us Davis revealed 3,000 new Governments posts had been created to handle Brexit so far, including 300 extra lawyers.<\/p>\n The cost of those lawyers alone may be substantial, but we were then also told HM Customs and Revenue has \u2018confirmed\u2019 it will hire between 3,000 and 5,000 new staff too to deal with trade issues. There was surprisingly little clarity on just how much those new posts would be cost or be funded. And I\u2019m told some senior HMRC staff were stunned when told No.10 had briefed the staff figures. Dave Penman, general secretary of the First Division Association of senior civil servants, told me the new posts were welcome \u201cbut we have no answer yet as to whether this will be fully funded\u201d. I understand some of the new HMRC posts will be \u2018backfilled\u2019 by existing staff when their current roles end. After years of staff cuts, the new expansion suggests rhetoric about austerity is upended when Brexit is concerned.<\/p>\n No10 did come up with a figure that \u00a3250m extra would be spent in 2017\/18 on Brexit prep, on top of \u00a3412m for one-off costs in coming years. That\u2019s already a cool three quarters of a billion in new spending for Brexit (they didn\u2019t put that on Boris\u2019s Vote Leave bus), and the new HMRC staff could add a further \u00a3200m (though it seems 5,000 staff is the maximum, worst case \u2018no deal\u2019 scenario). The Times has a figure that nearly \u00a31m a day will be spent next year on Brexit prep.<\/p>\n It\u2019s certainly another big day for Brexit transparency today, with Brexiteers Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Liam Fox (and trade negotiator Crawford Falconer) all due to give evidence to various committees. Yet it is a lack of transparency that is the focus for Labour\u2019s latest Parliamentary guerilla tactics.<\/p>\n Keir Starmer has an Opposition Day motion that Labour says will force a binding vote to require Ministers to hand over the 58 secret studies that have been carried out about the economic impact of Brexit to a Parliamentary select committee. Labour\u2019s motion will use an ancient, but still effective, Parliamentary procedure that gives the Commons the power to require Ministers to release Government papers to Parliament. And in a strange coincidence, the Government itself is using such a procedure (a \u2018Humble Address to Her Majesty\u2019) to give an update on the Hillsborough tragedy.<\/p>\n Tory rebels such as Dominic Grieve and Ken Clarke are on record supporting the publication of the secret studies. With the DUP\u2019s backing, the Government could squeak a victory but it may be tight if more Tory rebels line up. Will ministers dare to repeat recent tactics of simply not opposing such Opposition motions? If they ignore any vote, a big constitutional row will erupt again. The Brexit Department slipped out news of its 58 secret studies on Monday night, but they are in the limelight now. The TUC is accusing ministers of trying to \u2018bury bad news\u2019, and many suspect the impact assessments spell out some scary consequences of Brexit. We have an update later on the increasingly odd ways in which DExEU is refusing Freedom of Information requests about details of our exit.<\/p>\n Controversy over Universal Credit continues to rumble on and today we have\u00a0an exclusive on the problems it causes for the self-employed. \u2018Sole traders\u2019 have been told by Department for Work and Pensions advisers that they would be better off jobless. Given that the Government\u2019s main claim about UC is it helps get people off the dole into work, the new revelations ought to worry many ministers.<\/p>\n Thousands of people who work for themselves are on working tax credits but are being migrated onto UC. Some of them have been told they may as well shut down their business and sign on, while others say strict rules have left them reliant on food banks and charity handouts. One claimant was told by an official they \u201cwould not have a sanction applied\u201d if he chose to end his trade and became unemployed.<\/p>\n A \u201chidden\u201d clause restricting in-work benefits has begun to affect some of the 800,000 people who run their own business, many of whom are naturally reluctant to claim benefit in the first place but do so out of necessity. The Federation of Small Businesses tells us: \u201cAs it stands, Universal Credit poses a real threat to entrepreneurship in the UK.\u201d After the national outrage over \u2018White Van Man\u2019 national insurance rises forced Hammond to U-turn on his first Budget, ministers are under real pressure to act on this one.<\/p>\n It remains to be seen just how much help the Chancellor gives to housing in his Budget. But given recent reports that he wants a \u2018cost-free radicalism\u2019 (such as changing some Green Belt designations), maybe he should back calls<\/a> to tighten the law on affordable housing.<\/p>\n A\u00a0new Shelter study\u00a0has revealed that thousands of such homes are not being built each year because developers use a legal loophole to wriggle out of targets in order to maximise profits. So-called \u2018viability assessments\u2019 used by builders have cost 2,500 fewer homes to be built, Freedom of Information request show. One council told HuffPost UK it feels it has no choice but to accept the cuts or risk no new low-cost homes at all. The Home Builders Federation defends the assessments, which are part of DCLG advice. Over to you, Sajid Javid? The Waugh Zone Wednesday November 1, 2017 At PMQs today, Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn will no doubt unite to condemn the terror attack in New York. But will they unite on any meaningful, practical way forward on the issue of sexual harassment and assault in politics? After the latest revelations, all the parties need … Continue reading The Waugh Zone Wednesday November 1, 2017<\/span>
\n
\nwww.huffingtonpost.co.uk\/entry\/the-waugh-zone-wednesday-november-1-2017_uk_59f98dabe4b046017fafca9d<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"