Throughout the Corbyn years (and probably before that) there was no consensus on how the disciplinary process should work in the cases of MPs. And despite there being a new LOTO and GenSec it doesn’t seem that these issues have been resolved 1/

Corbyn was said to have had at least a role in the suspension of Shah in 2016, but it was GLU and Formby who finally suspended Williamson. Other times MPs were not suspended pending investigation 2/

In the case of Williamson- complaints bounced back and forth between the Whips and GLU/GSO with both sides claiming that it was the others job. That’s not the main reason action wasn’t taken against him, but it didn’t help 3/

There is also a question over the standards that MPs are held to. There needs to be a formalisation of the behaviour expected from them, and if they are held to the same or higher standards than the lay membership 4/

One of the reasons given that Williamson didn’t not receive disciplinary action was that he hadn’t actually broken the rules around antisemitism (Yeah, right). But surely he had brought the party into disrepute by the amount of negative press his actions generated? 5/

And at the moment the system (or lack there of it) favours MPs who the leader likes. It is not objective by any stretch of the imagination, and rule breeches by MPs will never be dealt with consistently or seriously 6/

There’s never going to be a disciplinary process for MPs that is not in some way political. But it can be a hell of a lot better than it is now.
I really hope the EHRC has some recommendations on the issue /7

I wrote this in response to certain MPs’ actions yesterday and it’s not intended to be a defence of Starmer’s inaction (or Corbyn’s). But it’s important to remember how systems in the party contribute as much to the toxic environment as individuals/END