There is a huge need for coproduction and user-led research in a number of areas (eg healthcare, experience of having been a looked-after child, or being someone living with an intellectual/cognitive disability.) However, it's increasingly concerning that there is a strong push to have everything centring people with "lived experience" with almost no due diligence involved as to the suitability of people wrt the vulnerable demographics involved.
Westminster Committee on Standards in Public Life
Research and analysis
'Intimidation in Public Life: Evidence from the Green Party'
TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING WITH AIMEE CHALLENOR, GREEN PARTY CANDIDATE
FOR COVENTRY SOUTH IN 2017 GENERAL ELECTION
21 September 2017, London
Committee members present: Lord Bew (Chair), Sheila Drew Smith OBE, Dr Jane Martin CBE, Jane Ramsey, Monisha Shah, Rt Hon Lord Stunell OBE
(extract)
Lord Bew: We are very grateful to you for coming along today. This is not a new issue, some say it is the behaviour of politicians that bring this upon themselves. Most say that something happened to a new level in the last election. We would like to hear your experience.
Aimee Challenor: Good morning, my name is Aimee Challenor. I stood in Coventry South for the Green Party in the last General Election, I’m 19 and I’m openly transgender.
It is my opinion that our society as a whole is becoming more divided, with an increasing amount of hate being reported each year. Not just in the past election. This applies to those in the public life just as much as anyone else, and in today’s social media era, it is relentless.
In the election campaign, I was targeted because I was an openly transgender person in politics, I received tweets or direct messages calling me a “delusional child abusing freak” . I had people telling me to kill myself, comments saying “zero debate needed, just point and
laugh hysterically. This needs bullying”. It is quite clear from the most recent general election in the UK, as well as conduct during other recent elections around the world, that politics is becoming more toxic. Intimidation from activists, members, and indeed other
candidates is growing. More can, and should, be done by all parties to tackle this behaviour and offer support to candidates.
These actions should include implementation and proper enforcement of Codes of Conduct, as well as the introduction of a ‘Candidate Welfare Officer’ or similar, so that Candidates
may have a point-of-contact. It is also my belief that action needs to be improved beyond political parties, social media websites need to improve at removing abusive content: too often I see “We reviewed your report carefully and found that there was no violation of our
Rules regarding abusive behaviour” - this has happened with some of the comments I read out to you earlier. Division in society is fuelled by social media; people feel they have an anonymous face. And it is fuelled by others behaving in a hateful way, it encourages others.
Politics is also to blame. The Referendum campaign was very divisive, and hateful to particular groups of people. This legitimised the abusive behaviour that candidates have had to face this year.
More needs to be done by the Police, when I myself have reported abusive content to the appropriate authorities, it’s been brushed aside and eventually not even forwarded on to the Crown Prosecution Service.
Therefore I’d like to suggest that the Committee should hear from social networks themselves, it would be sad if if you only look at what political parties should do to help candidates, which is definitely part of the solution, but political parties are going to need the help of those who can take enforcement action.
Why is it so important we get this right? Because Parliament is meant to be representative of society, but with the threat of intimidation and abuse becoming ever larger, diverse candidates are questioning whether or not to stand. In the 2017 General Election, there were
only 9 openly transgender candidates across all parties across the United Kingdom, To summarise; 1. There is a growing division in this country, and more needs to be done to address it. 2. The Committee should hear from social media companies 3. Parties can and should do more, I’d like to see a Candidate Welfare Officer in each Party 4. Intimidation and abuse of candidates needs to be taken more seriously by those who can take action" (continues)
Aimee Challenor: We have particular groups e.g. Greens of colour, women, LGBTIQA+ and others. These groups specialise in supporting these people - has led to better relations with the Party. At election time they form a key part of supporting those groups of people.
Generally, it’s support with emails, social media, and peer support. We did some press handling too for a transgender candidate where the local media wanted to write pieces referring to the candidate’s gender identity in a sensationalist way and the candidate was very uncomfortable with their use of language. We worked with the paper and also reported to Trans Media Watch, which did help. After we spoke to the newspaper, they did write a piece using more appropriate language." (continues)
"With respect to the Green Party, there is an executive, and a regional committee. We can recall leadership if they are bringing the Party into disrepute. There have been no difficulties with Caroline Lucas or our other Spokespeople." (continues)
www.gov.uk/government/publications/intimidation-of-parliamentary-candidates-evidence-from-the-green-party