mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 22,458
|
Post by mboy on Feb 26, 2020 22:24:13 GMT
That's a fair point (Andrew P). Though I do wonder what proportion of "pervs" go on to be full abusers. Though I suspect people assume it is most, in reality I suspect it is actually a small portion, and the visibility selection-effect makes it appear much higher.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Feb 26, 2020 22:42:47 GMT
There's an element of that still today. I still can't quite believe we've now got Sir Roger Gale, Sir Mike Penning or Sir David Evenett for instance. To be fair to David Evenett, I think I'm right in saying he was the only Tory MP who lost his seat in the 1997 Blair landslide, kept on fighting it, and won it back at the 2nd attempt in 2005, which shows a fair bit of loyalty to the seat I think you are correct, and I believe Roger Gale was rewarded for being Chairman of the Chairman’s Panel for the longest unbroken period since its formation, so was almost the fourth Deputy Speaker.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Feb 27, 2020 0:10:57 GMT
That's a fair point (Andrew P). Though I do wonder what proportion of "pervs" go on to be full abusers. Though I suspect people assume it is most, in reality I suspect it is actually a small portion, and the visibility selection-effect makes it appear much higher. The difficulty is that we don't know.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Feb 27, 2020 0:17:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Daft H'a'porth A'peth A'pith on Feb 27, 2020 9:09:37 GMT
I wonder how the morals of 2060 will judge 2020.
👽
|
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 22,458
|
Post by mboy on Feb 27, 2020 10:11:32 GMT
I wonder how the morals of 2060 will judge 2020. 👽 Very harshly I expect, because we rarely learn.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,798
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 27, 2020 11:57:24 GMT
All that - even if true, and a lot of it likely is - still didn't mean he had to recommend Smith for a peerage, though..... I have some sympathy with this (assuming you meant knighthood)... Touche, yes I did
|
|
|
Post by tonygreaves on Mar 1, 2020 22:52:22 GMT
David Steel was never at the time aware of any "crimes". By the way the report's stuff about Margaret Thatcher and Norman Tebbit, in relation to Peter Morrison - very much clearer and more problematic - seem to have been ignored by most of the media. And no hue and cry for Tebbit to resign.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2020 23:07:36 GMT
David Steel was never at the time aware of any "crimes". By the way the report's stuff about Margaret Thatcher and Norman Tebbit, in relation to Peter Morrison - very much clearer and more problematic - seem to have been ignored by most of the media. And no hue and cry for Tebbit to resign. Would you like to specify what you mean? I have posted on this subject very recently. There is no actual evidence that Peter Morrison did anything, and the report (contrary to the impression given by the press release announcing it) cannot cite a single specific allegation. There is nothing, nothing at all.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 1, 2020 23:56:00 GMT
David Steel was never at the time aware of any "crimes". By the way the report's stuff about Margaret Thatcher and Norman Tebbit, in relation to Peter Morrison - very much clearer and more problematic - seem to have been ignored by most of the media. And no hue and cry for Tebbit to resign. Would you like to specify what you mean? I have posted on this subject very recently. There is no actual evidence that Peter Morrison did anything, and the report (contrary to the impression given by the press release announcing it) cannot cite a single specific allegation. There is nothing, nothing at all. He certainly had relationships with young men which with the age of consent at 21 would have been illegal. But the having sex with children is not proven
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2020 10:11:14 GMT
Would you like to specify what you mean? I have posted on this subject very recently. There is no actual evidence that Peter Morrison did anything, and the report (contrary to the impression given by the press release announcing it) cannot cite a single specific allegation. There is nothing, nothing at all. He certainly had relationships with young men which with the age of consent at 21 would have been illegal. But the having sex with children is not proven Once again, I am not disputing that Peter Morrison was probably gay - everybody who knew him seemed to believe he was, and he may have confided in some who were similarly inclined. Alternatively, some of the more credible stories about him may have come from acquaintances who moved in the same circles. However, my point is that there is a difference between gossip and evidence, and the fog of rumour surrounding Morrison contains very little specific and disprovable information. Simon Heffer (of all people) claimed that Morrison went cruising in Sussex Gardens. Where did he learn that (one of the Commons bars is my guess)? What has become of Morrison's lifetime tally of young "victims", who have remained completely silent? One man did name him (in a DT report) in relation to Elm Guest House - long ground zero for paedophile conspiracy nuts but now largely disregarded. A newspaper confidently claimed that Morrison had been "cautioned" for cottaging activities involving underage boys. When? By whom? As usual, answer comes there none. Like Lord Greaves, I have read the report - or at least ploughed through the 140+ references to Peter Morrison - but my conclusion was that there is no credible evidence of child abuse against him at all.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 2, 2020 10:16:00 GMT
He certainly had relationships with young men which with the age of consent at 21 would have been illegal. But the having sex with children is not proven Once again, I am not disputing that Peter Morrison was probably gay - everybody who knew him seemed to believe he was, and he may have confided in some who were similarly inclined. Others may have moved in the same circles. However, my point is that there is a difference between gossip and evidence, and the fog of rumour surrounding Morrison contains very little credible and specific information. Simon Heffer (of all people) claimed that Morrison went cruising in Sussex Gardens. Where did he learn that? Where are Morrison's lifetime tally of young "victims"? One man named him in relation to Elm Guest House - long ground zero for paedophile conspiracy nuts but now largely disregarded. A newspaper confidently claimed that Morrison had been "cautioned" for cottaging activities involving underage boys. When? By whom? As usual, answer comes there none. Like Lord Greaves, I have read the report - or at least ploughed through the 140+ references to Peter Morrison - but my conclusion was that there is no credible evidence of child abuse against him at all. I entirely agree. It's important to remember that at the time being openly gay was not something a politician could do. And that with the age of consent being 21 the lines were often blurred. Hardly surprising that rumour and gossip predominated
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2020 16:05:45 GMT
David Steel was never at the time aware of any "crimes". By the way the report's stuff about Margaret Thatcher and Norman Tebbit, in relation to Peter Morrison - very much clearer and more problematic - seem to have been ignored by most of the media. And no hue and cry for Tebbit to resign. Would you like to specify what you mean? I have posted on this subject very recently. There is no actual evidence that Peter Morrison did anything, and the report (contrary to the impression given by the press release announcing it) cannot cite a single specific allegation. There is nothing, nothing at all. Norman Tebbit has commented on this sorry tale in today's DT - Inquiry into child sex abuse
No blame can be attached to Boris Johnson however for the report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse which was published last week and has resulted in the hounding out of the House of Lords of the former Liberal Leader David Steel.
I have to rely on press accounts of the report since although I gave evidence to the Inquiry and read in the media that I have been subject to some criticism, I have not yet received a copy.
Lord Steel is criticised for not taking action against the former Liberal Member for Rotherham [actually Rochdale], Cyril Smith. Smith was widely believed to have been a child abuser, but was never prosecuted. Lord Steel was at that time Leader of the Liberal Party, but since the police and prosecuting authorities never brought charges. On what grounds does the Independent Inquiry hold that David Steel should have acted?
In rather the same way it seems that I, in my role as Chairman of The Conservative Party, am criticised for not taking action against my Deputy, Peter Morrison, over allegations that he had an unhealthy interest in sixth form schoolboys or young men whilst the age of consent at that time was twenty five [in fact, of course, 21]
I had been visited by a police officer from Mr Morrison's constituency who asked me to warn Mr Morrison about his conduct.
That I did, but Mr. Morrison assured me that there was no truth in the allegations.
Since the police never charged him, and I had received no evidence of misconduct, what more could I have done?
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 2, 2020 16:08:49 GMT
Would you like to specify what you mean? I have posted on this subject very recently. There is no actual evidence that Peter Morrison did anything, and the report (contrary to the impression given by the press release announcing it) cannot cite a single specific allegation. There is nothing, nothing at all. Norman Tebbit has commented on this sorry tale in today's DT - Inquiry into child sex abuse
No blame can be attached to Boris Johnson however for the report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse which was published last week and has resulted in the hounding out of the House of Lords of the former Liberal Leader David Steel.
I have to rely on press accounts of the report since although I gave evidence to the Inquiry and read in the media that I have been subject to some criticism, I have not yet received a copy.
Lord Steel is criticised for not taking action against the former Liberal Member for Rotherham, Cyril Smith. Smith was widely believed to have been a child abuser, but was never prosecuted. Lord Steel was at that time Leader of the Liberal Party, but since the police and prosecuting authorities never brought charges. On what grounds does the Independent Inquiry hold that David Steel should have acted?
In rather the same way it seems that I, in my role as Chairman of The Conservative Party, am criticised for not taking action against my Deputy, Peter Morrison, over allegations that he had an unhealthy interest in sixth form schoolboys or young men whilst the age of consent at that time was twenty five [in fact, of course, 21]
I had been visited by a police officer from Mr Morrison's constituency who asked me to warn Mr Morrison about his conduct.
That I did, but Mr. Morrison assured me that there was no truth in the allegations.
Since the police never charged him, and I had received no evidence of misconduct, what more could I have done? I suppose we just have to be grateful that Cyril Smith never was MP for Rotherham (see fourth line).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2020 16:10:52 GMT
Norman Tebbit has commented on this sorry tale in today's DT - Inquiry into child sex abuse
No blame can be attached to Boris Johnson however for the report of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse which was published last week and has resulted in the hounding out of the House of Lords of the former Liberal Leader David Steel.
I have to rely on press accounts of the report since although I gave evidence to the Inquiry and read in the media that I have been subject to some criticism, I have not yet received a copy.
Lord Steel is criticised for not taking action against the former Liberal Member for Rotherham, Cyril Smith. Smith was widely believed to have been a child abuser, but was never prosecuted. Lord Steel was at that time Leader of the Liberal Party, but since the police and prosecuting authorities never brought charges. On what grounds does the Independent Inquiry hold that David Steel should have acted?
In rather the same way it seems that I, in my role as Chairman of The Conservative Party, am criticised for not taking action against my Deputy, Peter Morrison, over allegations that he had an unhealthy interest in sixth form schoolboys or young men whilst the age of consent at that time was twenty five [in fact, of course, 21]
I had been visited by a police officer from Mr Morrison's constituency who asked me to warn Mr Morrison about his conduct.
That I did, but Mr. Morrison assured me that there was no truth in the allegations.
Since the police never charged him, and I had received no evidence of misconduct, what more could I have done? I suppose we just have to be grateful that Cyril Smith never was MP for Rotherham (see fourth line). I get the impression this was dictated over the phone in some haste. The lack of proof-reading and fact-checking is all too typical of today's DT, alas.
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,322
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Mar 5, 2020 22:42:54 GMT
No reference made to long-term Alliance Party stalwart and Stormont MLATrevor Lunn's quitting on 2nd March to sit as an Independent.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 6, 2020 10:19:04 GMT
No reference made to long-term Alliance Party stalwart and Stormont MLATrevor Lunn's quitting on 2nd March to sit as an Independent. any reason given or known?
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 6, 2020 10:31:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Mar 7, 2020 10:32:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Mar 7, 2020 17:39:37 GMT
At first glance I thought those were Labour banners they were holding up.
|
|