Brendan Cox has resigned

Wow that bbc video is just fantastic - just wow

He's being remarkably obstinate in the face of the evidence against him and the criticisms, and the charity appears remarkably reluctant to sack him. Manveen Rana's PM makes reference to very own article about handling crises and how he is now doing the exact opposite.

His arrogance is palpable - just watch him next to Alexia Pepper de Caries in the video linked on the BBC article.

Thanks for linking that new BBC story maladroit - I'd not see it.

It looks like the real story is coming out now - lots of details of what happened to the women - much minimisation from the men...

Surely Sir Alan will have to resign - such a cavalier attitude to HR processes etc?

Glad to see this still rumbling on. I had got the feeling the bosses were keeping their heads down and hoping it would all blow over.

More charities are coming forward to admit their workers abroad abused children and vunerable people.
www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/mar/05/child-sex-abuse-claims-cases-newly-reported-charity-watchdog-penny-mordaunt

I am now listening to this:
PM programme

They report that as part of the investigation of the first complaint, the Chairman was supposed to send a formal warning letter to Justin Forsyth, but Forsyth claims he doesn't recall seeing one. I reckon this will all unravel when the men start throwing each other under a bus, but that will only be once they have run out of women to silence, patronise, gaslight and denigrate.

This story rumbles on and gets worse:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43287838

The attitudes are disgraceful. And they are letting the Chairman who failed to act properly before to be part of their very thorough "root and branch review"?

Save The Children are aggressively threatening legal action to journalists trying to report on this (excellent use of funds). I would not be surprised if more depressing detail comes out.

That is a good article nauticant. Good article but depressing.

KateAdie - I agree with everything you've written.

I do feel sorry for Short. She was an impressive int dev secretary and she will be viewing this as a complete disaster for the sector. Where she is wrong is in conflating this reckoning with a disaster for int aid.

It doesn't have to be.

Save the Children and Oxfam failed their female staff and the people they were supposed to help in Haiti, Chad, etc but it doesn't mean the entire sector is rotten and it doesn't mean international aid has failed.

Rather than trying to minimise she should be standing alongside the female staff and calling out the predators. It's this messy fudging of the issue that is going to damn the sector.

There are lots of good people who work in int dev. If only MPs were standing up for them rather than the lecherous bullies they're currently trying to defend.

There's a good article about this in today's Times*. It describes an utterly horrible culture in Save the Children with Cox as a prolific and calculatedly predatory abuser. Despite still being very scared, women are starting to speak about what went on.

Meanwhile, the Labour Party are in the business of diverting attention. This morning there was Clare Short saying that the issue is the negative media coverage about charities. According to Short, it's "hysterical". Then a couple of hours later Jenny Chapman MP was saying it was all about failures by the Charity Commission and the Department for International Development. The common approach is to move the focus away from the managers who enabled the culture and also from the people who committed the abuse.

The reason for this is clear. It's because of the close links between these abusers and the Labour Party. These close links with political power have been highly effective in creating toxic cultures.

• behind a paywall with no share token unfortunately www.thetimes.co.uk/article/charity-scandal-tantrums-and-2am-texts-of-thick-of-it-charity-chiefs-at-save-the-children-uk-brendan-cox-justin-forsyth-g90287h79

Imagine receiving texts about what you were wearing and how it made him feel from your boss - and then if you did not respond to be told he needed a "quick word" with you. How stressful is that when he had the power over your whole ongoing career in the sector. It put the young women in a really invidious position. It was coercive and bullying, trying to get the women to somehow collude in his harassment - utterly vile. The behaviour of a decent man? - looking at you Adam Boulton. The behaviour of a dirty old man.

JF's supporters minimising his behaviour a few flirty texts are not right. Let's hope they take note.

This is from the BBC site:

An investigation by BBC Radio 4's PM programme, found the complaints related to women receiving inappropriate texts, and comments on how they looked, what they were wearing and how he felt about them.

If they did not respond, Mr Forsyth would follow up his messages with an email, asking if they had seen the text, and then asking for a "quick word", the BBC investigation found.
A woman who complained at the time said it did not seem the complaints were being treated with the "appropriate degree of seriousness".

Link:www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-43166585

The impunity is amazing isn't it? The formal warning story was covered on the news earlier and twitter was full of people saying "but warnings, formal or otherwise, aren't notified by current employers to prospective employers". I'd bet good money he didn't leave Save the Children with a minimal reference simply stating his job and starting date.

Incompetence, that should say.

So the defence from both Justin Forsyth and Save the Children for not coming clean were that the complaints were informal and dealt with informally.

Except they weren't.

Why are they persisting in telling lies and half truths? Too used to impunity I suppose. The lack of transparency is astounding. The fact that getting away with it is as easy as resigning with a glowing reference is astounding. The arrogance and continued minimisation is astounding. The complete PR incomplete flabbergasts me!

Kikashi, I think you are absolutely right.

From his statement:

"In the aftermath of Jo's murder, I promised that I would dedicate my life to two things, firstly loving and protecting our children and secondly fighting the hatred that killed Jo.

In the last few days allegations from several years ago have resurfaced that makes concentrating on both of those tasks much more difficult.

For that reason, while away over half-term, I decided to step down from my current public roles for the time being."

Shows his mindset. He'll take a bit of time for reflection and then be back.

Thanks nauticant. Bet JF is leaving with a very nice remuneration package and will slip into lots of consultancy and non exec director /board member roles.

I'm sure the plan is to present BC as rehabilitated in a year or so. He'll probably set up a foundation to "educate" other men on how to reflect on their behaviour. Back in the inner circle as a celebrated man who saw the error of his ways he'll be appointed to a taskforce or advisory role and will no doubt be a "consultant" to the Cox foundation or back in the driving seat. Spreading his message of love, not hate.

I'm another lefty in despair - the left establishment really does think women are simply disposable commodities, doesn't it?

So many people still hire based on connections and therefore don't do their due diligence.

Yep. And the corporate charity sector intersects very closely with liberal media and liberal politics.

It is really a very small social network we are talking about here.

Even now his arrogance is astounding. I'm as lefty, tree-huggy lentil-weavy as they come and strongly believe in aid. Using the misdemeanours of some despicable people in the aid sector as a stick to beat the whole sector with isn't great, but if you weren't despicable in the first place there would be no stick. And it's also a bit rich to moan about people using something for shady aims when he himself has used something (his power and influence) for even shadier aims (harassing women). Or are women just collateral damage, sacrificial lambs for the greater good? Just put up and shut up so Justin and Brendan can get on with saving the world's needy children while you do some photocopying?

I just think being a sexual harasser is so divorced from the values of charity and aid that saying sorry and pointing to all of your saintly actions as mitigation is simply not enough.

drinkcoffee that is so interesting (and heartening) to know there is one charity prepared to do the decent thing.

I mean, it's not rocket science. It should go without saying that harrassment is wrong (though it appears that Brendan and Justin - and their apologists - did not get that particular memo). But even sex the person making the first move thinks is consensual is actually potentially exploitative as soon as there's a power imbalance.

So the first question anyone in a position of authority should ask themselves when thinking of pursuing a sexual relationship is: Do I have power over this person?
Power to hire/fire?
Power to write their annual report and set their salary?
Power to set marks/determine their academic grades?
Power over their reputation (e.g. as a journalist)?
Power over their health/ well being (e.g. as a HCP)?
Power to give/withhold food and other necessities for their very existence?

If the answer to any of these is "yes", do not pursue a sexual relationship with them. Even if you think it's consensual, there's a very high chance it won't be because of the power imbalance.

Justin Forsyth has just resigned from Unicef. Apparently "it has nothing to do with Save the Children".

Remind me again of how allegations of sexual harrassment ruin men's lives? Man how I'd love my life to be ruined with a glowing reference for one of the most prestigious, powerful and well paid jobs in my sector and a bonus which is probably equivalent to the take home salary of the women I sexually harassed.

The Telegraph reporting that Save The Children supported Justin Forsyth in getting a top job at Unicef.

Also mentions that Save the Children paid him a £20K bonus after it had uncovered evidence of his inappropriate behaviour towards female members of staff in 2012.

I haven't had time to read through this thread.

In case it's not been said:
On Adam Boulton, his wife was a very close colleague of Tony Blair PM. Justin of StC was an adviser to Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.
Before buddying up again at Save the Children Brendan Cox and Justin worked together as advisers to Gordon Brown when he was PM.

They're covering their own backs as well as BC and why it works - also why people's behaviour doesn't make sense as only know bit of story presented.

It will be majorly protecting own arse first and reason for support.

Really don't believe that the 'friends' angle is as we'd understand it - it's trading power, influence, secrets etc and flushing you down the toilet if you become a liability - that's the reality of 'friends' in high places.

If contagion by association becomes too strong - then throw to the lions, but keep close until then as the favour may be required to be returned.

Mariella known to be very, very good friends with the Browns, Brendan worked closely with Gordon etc

BC very well connected and knows which skeletons to jangle amongst his small world of influential people - rest of the world is irrelevant as they don't control the narratives, could be changing though?