It is highly when allegations of sexual misconduct are made about anybody then they should be taken seriously and in the workplace then depending on the nature, they should be dealt from within, though this should never exclude the police being involved and criminal charges made, by a prosecution.
To be clear, Alex Salmond has every right to assert his innocence and he must be presumed innocent unless proven otherwise. It is easy to understand why he might feel aggrieved that the complaints are being investigated in the full glare of publicity, with his name being dragged through the mud in the meantime. But this story potentially matters.
For this particular incident has echoes of the politics of a former age, also involving a nationalist movement. In the 1880s, Westminster politics were overshadowed by another nationalist figure: Charles Stewart Parnell. He was instrumental in pushing the cause of Irish Home Rule to the centre of British politics. As a result of his efforts, the Irish Parliamentary Party were kingmakers.The Liberal party split as a consequence and Parnell worked closely with Gladstone to construct a form of Home Rule that could command broad support in Ireland and was acceptable to the rest of the country. The outlines of a potentially lasting settlement were visible.This came crashing down when he was cited as co-respondent in a divorce case. The ensuing scandal made him unacceptable both to the Catholic church that formed a central support of Irish nationalism and the non-conformists who comprised much of the Liberal party.The Irish Parliamentary Party split, with supporters and opponents of Parnell feuding. With the loss of his talents, the cause of Irish nationalism was set back a generation. By the time it re-emerged, attitudes on all sides had hardened.Ireland lives with the consequences of that to this day.As even Nicola Sturgeon would probably accept, Alex Salmond is still by some way the most prominent nationalist politician of the age. The Parnell precedent shows the potential impact on the cause of a long-running squalid sideshow.We have already seen Alex Salmond launch a crowdfunding campaign for his legal fees to demonstrate that he has popular support, and the risk of factions forming looks substantial. So the stakes are potentially high.
Indeed the UK Media have seemed to dicided that, the actual accusations whether true or not are irrelevant because , what is important is that it can damage the SNP.
When William Hearst Artist Frederic Remington, cabled from Cuba in 1897 that “there will be no war,” William Randolph Hearst cabled back: “You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war
It seems this is a case of History repeating itself the extent in making a ludicrous claim that that the SNP have split into a what amounts to a civil war
“SNP faces split over Salmond Sex Claims” thundered the Scottish edition of The Times of London, with its tabloid sibling The Scottish Sun splashing with the headline “SNP ministers told â€¦ Stay Away from Eck”.The Daily Telegraph, meanwhile, proclaimed “Split in SNP as MPs back Salmondâ€™s legal fund”.
The i â€“ sister paper of The Scotsman â€“ claimed there was a “Backlash as Salmond raises Â£85,000 for legal fight”.
The Scottish Daily Mail’s coverage described a “bitter civil war” which the paper said was threatening to “split the party in two”.
And the Scottish Daily Express, following suit, ran the headline “SNP DESCENDS INTO CIVIL WAR” on its front page. Just in case it wasn’t clear, the sub-deck added: “Sturgeon hits back over Salmondâ€™s cash appeal