WE should never lose our capacity for shock when we learn that yet another MP has been accused of sexual misconduct. The regularity with which we hear these stories should compound our horror, not lessen it.
In the last year alone, a series of Conservative MPs have been at the centre of such allegations. Neil Parish resigned his seat after it emerged he had watched pornography in the House of Commons in full view of colleagues.
Rob Roberts was suspended from Parliament for six weeks after a panel found he had made “repeated and unwanted advances” towards an employee. David Warburton had the whip removed after allegations of cocaine use and two sexual harassment complaints from women.
In May, Imran Ahmad Khan was sentenced to 18 months in prison for sexually assaulting a 15-year-old boy.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson 'unaware' of groping claim before appointing MP as chief whip
There is also an unnamed Tory MP – who still has the party whip – who was arrested and bailed on suspicion of sexual assault, indecent assault, rape, and misconduct in public office.
This isn’t even an exhaustive list: yet the party continues to take a “wait-and-see” approach when new allegations emerge.
On Thursday, Chris Pincher released a statement resigning from his position as deputy chief whip, saying that he had “embarrassed himself while drunk”. Allegations soon emerged that the MP had “groped” two men at the Carlton Club the night before.
In 2017, Pincher also quit the whip’s office and referred himself to the Conservative Party’s own complaints procedure after a former Olympic rower, Alex Story, went public with allegations about an unwanted sexual advance. An investigating panel determined that Pincher had not breached the code of conduct.
The fact he managed to rise back up the ranks within the party and become a powerful figure, while Alex Story was ostracised and forced out of politics, sums up just how badly political parties let down alleged victims of sexual misconduct.
A lot has been made of Westminster’s drinking culture and the fact that, unlike most normal workplaces, MPs have a variety of late-night bars serving subsidised drinks to choose from on the parliamentary estate.
While it’s true that these practices are more suited to a gentleman’s club than a democratic institution, we shouldn’t blame booze for MPs who take the decision to behave inappropriately towards their colleagues or staff.
Think of how many times you’ve been drunk in your life. Now think of all the times you have sexually assaulted somebody. Alcohol doesn’t make good people do bad things.
In recent years, the independent complaints and grievance procedure in Parliament has been updated. And not a moment too soon.
But no matter how robust a complaints procedure is, it counts for nothing for as long as political parties continue to close ranks to protect their own. Boris Johnson showed reckless disregard for the safety of his colleagues by appointing Pincher deputy chief whip.
This is a trusted position which involves regular contact with vulnerable MPs. Up until a few days ago, an MP with concerns about inappropriate conduct would have been dealing directly with Pincher, a man who is known to be “handsy” and “Pincher by name, Pincher by nature” according to the Prime Minister himself.
Forget the nonsense from allies of Johnson who have tried to pretend that he wasn’t aware of any “specific” allegations against Pincher before giving him the job.
He knew. It was an open secret. A few months ago, I wrote in these pages about how an unnamed minister was assigned a “minder” during boozy events, because he had a reputation for groping. It has since emerged that the minister that claim referred to was in fact Pincher.
Despite this, the party initially resisted taking any action against him when he resigned on Thursday night. An anonymous source even went so far as to say that he should keep the Tory whip because he had “done the right thing” by resigning.
In the Sunday papers, six new claims stretching back over a decade where made against the MP.
At what point does a duty of care – both to colleagues and the wider public – trump partisan loyalties?
READ MORE: Neil Parish complains of ‘double standards’ in Pincher controversy
It’s no great surprise that Johnson didn’t consider the welfare of others when he promoted (in rower Alex Story’s words) “a pound-shop Harvey Weinstein” to government, but it does reveal a lot about his character.
Unless and until political parties have a real zero-tolerance approach to sexual misconduct, we’ll keep reading stories like these. Culture comes from the top and it is the job of leaders to set the standard. That goes for all political parties and none have a blemish-free record when it comes to this issue.
In the days ahead, Johnson will be asked to explain what he knew and when. He will probably lie in response to those questions but enough of his colleagues know the truth to ensure those lies don’t stick.
Despite the obvious risks, he ignored concerns about Pincher’s conduct and appointed him to a position of trust. Even by Boris Johnson’s shoddy standards, that is a new low.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here