Ding Ding Ding! Round 5 Salmond and Sturgeon

[Blurberoo]

New thread...

I think that is all of them in today's edition but sometimes things come out online later. Let me know if anyone sees anything else and I will try to share.

"The committee, with which Sturgeon had promised to cooperate fully, was branded “partisan” and biased by her. But it had an SNP convenor, four SNP members and a majority membership supporting independence. If anything, the bias was in her favour."

"On January 19, 2019, she told parliament “it is time to respect the inquiries that opposition members have called for” and that “it strikes me that people cannot call for inquiries and then refuse to respect the work of those inquiries”."

Ha ha ha

"MSPs were told that staff felt shamed because they were expected to tie Salmond’s shoelaces, straighten his tie, apply hand sanitiser to him and comb his hair and remove dandruff. Monday’s session took place in private to protect the identity of the two civil servants who triggered the government’s harassment procedures.

A source close to the committee said one of the women, whose allegations of sexual harassment dated back to 2013, laughed off the suggestion that women could have complained about Salmond’s mercurial behaviour before he stood down in 2014.

The Sunday Times has learnt that MSPs were told on Monday of enormous pressure on ministers, special advisers and civil servants to keep stories about Salmond’s behaviour under wraps because of the referendum."

I'm confused at this point. So, the last week of testimony and they've spoken to the complainants (bit last minute, no) who were btw accompanied by the chief exec of Rape Crisis. We're now being told of openly demeaning behaviour yet somehow Sturgeon was unaware of a poor culture. That seems unlikely to say the least; maybe it's just me but being asked to tie someones laces, comb their hair etc strikes me as the sort of thing that would be round like wildfire.

From what I remember of that time Sturgeon and Salmond were working very closely, travelling around together quite a lot and so on. I don't see how the climate could have been as portrayed and her not know.

It also says that a complainer laughed off the suggestion you could complain about Salmond; but didn't A/F do exactly that, resulting in an apology and an offer to be reassigned? Don't get me wrong I'm not saying it would have been easy but it seems like some real inconsistencies .

Thank you for the Times links.

Maybe because I used to work backstage in theatre, I don’t find those things about being asked to tie shoe laces etc. all that strange! I guess like so many things it depends on context. I feel like I’m losing the compass of what is and isn’t normal!

As an aside, I recently enjoyed watching The Morning Show which I thought was an interesting examination of sexual harassment in the workplace. Lots of examination of issues that have parallels here - who knew what when, what is a toxic “culture” and how can you tell if there is/was one, how do you marry different experiences of the same thing by different people....just lots and lots of nuances.

But yeah totally agree that if problematic things were consistently going on, it’s very hard to believe that Nicola Sturgeon wasn’t aware!

As far as I can tell Sturgeon implies she knew he was a bully 'tough person to work for' but not a sex pest.

Credible? Because bullying so often goes hand in hand with sexual boundary pushing.

But remember the fall back defence - even if she knew, the blame sits with him. You can't expect a poor wee female number 2 in the SNP to take action. Thank goodness Salmond didn't win the 2014 referendum - perhaps its dawning on 2014 yessers/still yes people exactly what they'd have been giving power to.

@StatisticallyChallenged

"On January 19, 2019, she told parliament “it is time to respect the inquiries that opposition members have called for” and that “it strikes me that people cannot call for inquiries and then refuse to respect the work of those inquiries”."

Ha ha ha

Quite!

It is impossible to imagine any other senior Scottish politician surviving a crisis with such a stench of corruption, dishonesty and the subversion of the democratic process at its heart. But Sturgeon is not any other politician.

Thank you for the links cismy (I shortened your name to c*s there for a moment )

It's a bit odd and we don't know in what capacity people were employed or environment these things happened. If you were working in a job preparing someone for a tv appearance, then I would imagine some sort of appearance related things would be expected.

I think it's obviously different if he is telling people to tie his shoes etc rather them just noticing and doing it as it's easier for them to do that while he's maybe getting make up done for a tv appearance or something.

I've worked for over 30 years for a range of different bosses of either sex. None have ben in the public eye, however, if we were heading to a meeting and I noticed their collar was askew or they had dandruff on their shoulders or something, I would naturally just deal with that. And would do for any colleague.

That said, I'd be pretty affronted if any of my bosses asked me to do these things and I felt I couldn't say no. I'd also be aware if other bosses around me were doing so to colleagues.

Agree that bullying and sexual harassment might well come together. In a way I was kind of surprised that none of the accusations in the trial really seemed tied to a wider narrative about abuse of power by Salmond - they appeared to be discrete incidents, they didn’t seem to be linked to other claims about bullying, or career trajectories or anything like that. Which wouldn’t make them any better, of course, but it’s just that I didn’t get the picture of a toxic culture from that side of the story that I was originally expecting - and when I first heard that Salmond was accused, I thought that was the picture - much more Weinsteiny - that would follow.

Agree with your assessment there Wax.

Yes there is a possibility of things being used out of context - at face value asking an office colleague to tie your laces or comb your hair would be weird. I'd certainly notice if one of the bosses was asking folk to tie his laces in normal context.

Preparing for a tv appearance it might be entirely normal for a press officer to comb hair or brush dandruff off.

As an aside, I recently enjoyed watching The Morning Show which I thought was an interesting examination of sexual harassment in the workplace. Lots of examination of issues that have parallels here - who knew what when, what is a toxic “culture” and how can you tell if there is/was one, how do you marry different experiences of the same thing by different people....just lots and lots of nuances.

That's a good comparison. Not 100% analogous but definitely something that unravelled all the layers in a very interesting way. Going off on this tangent, Martin Short's character was just brilliantly creepy.

I think the comments about feeling 'shamed' for attending to someone in the capacity of effectively a maid suggests a very odd working culture. Not unusual for people working with people in the spotlight & I'm not sure if civil servants contracts would extend to include such duties. But it's not that much of a stretch to see why effectively a groomer would be required. I don't know, if your job is high level & you're roped into this I can see they'd believe it was beneath them. But I'm not getting the 'shamed' part here. I'm sure sturgeon has & uses staff to preen her appearance for the public & her 'makeover' when she got close to leadership was quite stark. I still look at her & see how uncomfortable she looks with the image she's been given to 'present' as.

Maybe I'm being unfair but I don't quite get the 'shamed' bit here. I'd be pissed off if I was high ranking & professional I suppose. And I've no doubt Salmond's arrogance & expectation would grate. But I can't really see that as being 'shamed' or shameful unless they suspected he got a thrill from it.

I think those of us who are older have probably done things at work that would be a bit odd or shady nowadays. I once sewed the arse rip in a young male colleagues trousers while he hid in a cupboard in the office in his underpants for example. I was older (mid twenties) and more senior to him but would I let a young lad (about 17) go around with his pants on show when I could spent a few minutes sorting them for him?

I'm not a particularly touchy feely person, but I'd automatically tuck in a label if one was showing on the back of a neck of a colleague or boss and they would do the same for me. Maybe I'm a sex pest?

@WaxOnFeckOff

Hello all, here for the confusion and intrigue!

Why do we thing Tories going with the VONC? I can't see her resigning and I can't see her losing the VONC and to be honest, at this point I'd rather see her limping along for the election.

Her winning the VONC (assuming she does) will just rally the troops a bit no?

I agree (sadly)

I do think a major problem here is that there's no obvious successor. IMO the SNP seem to have two issues there - no big name replacement potential and the party themselves seems to lack any real way of pushing her.

I think most people could name several possible replacements for BoJo shouldn't any if his murky scandals gain traction. I don't think it's easy to do the same for Sturgeon.

He isn’t Weinstein - all sounds a bit wish washy to me . Especially the one that said she was at a dinner and clearly wasn’t . Then there was one who said he touched her hair in a lift just after another colleague had touched her hair . Bit handsy when full of drink but these women’s revelations were not rock the boat stuff . Not that I’m excusing that sort of behaviour but I can see how it didn’t stand up in court . As for the brushing off of dandruff then I suspect that would be before a public appearance . I can see this happening as AS about to face the cameras - looking at his notes while someone tidies him up . I’m not a fan of his but fairs fair .

I do think a major problem here is that there's no obvious successor.

Cherry is a natural successor. But not if you ask sturgeon herself.

The whole 'not a team player' BS that gets peddled always amuses me. She's not a team player because she's a natural leader. She doesn't wait around for instructions, she works on her own initiative & political instincts. And even if that was suspected of going 'off message' as seems to be the case, I think it just highlights the lack of ability & political nouse in her lesser 'gifted' colleagues. She continues to comment & lead on justice when it's no longer her role, and they've no one who could challenge her. It's a farcical situation mainly brought about because sturgeon recognises the quality Cherry has & feels threatened by it.

Expending so much energy on discrediting a gifted & able politician when you've no one else who could match her is just such bizarre behaviour. But certainly the norm in the SNP.

Yep Cherry is the obvious one but she has been so thoroughly smeared by the Sturgeon/Smyth faction that it may take a while to recover in the eyes of the public.

Do you think any of the smears have stuck in the “real world”? I’ve seen a few people having a go because she has stood by Salmond but that’s all really.

@StatisticallyChallenged

Yes there is a possibility of things being used out of context - at face value asking an office colleague to tie your laces or comb your hair would be weird. I'd certainly notice if one of the bosses was asking folk to tie his laces in normal context.

Preparing for a tv appearance it might be entirely normal for a press officer to comb hair or brush dandruff off.

I’ve worked as a press officer and can confirm that yes, it’s normal to do a hair, dandruff and tie check before being anywhere near a camera.

I had to rub suncream on my then boss’s bald head once too. It’s part of the job.

Never tied shoelaces though.

PS Thanks for the links!

Never tied shoelaces though.

For someone of Alec's "build", tying shoelaces might be awkward and risk mussing up other things such as his jacket and tie and hair. If you've already just sorted that, then it would be easier to have someone tie his shoe laces than him doing them.

That kind of it isn't it - what's out of order for one role is totally fine in another.

If that kind of thing was being asked of a press officer it's probably nothing to write home about and mentioning it without context is intented to smear. If it was being asked of lots of people who worked in entirely different roles them it sounds weird and noteworthy, but also gossip inspiring.

Just a thought; that article has a decent amount of info about that private evidence session. Who talked to the press, or has a summary been released that I've not seen