UK 21 June 2018 | 3-hour ME debate in Westminster Hall, secured by Carol Monaghan

[chrisb]

This talk of private briefings makes one wonder in what context the term "conduct unbecoming" may have been used. Sharpe clearly feels he was quoted out of context. One can in part see reason for his concern. There seems to be more to this than meets the eye.

EDIT cross posted with the above.

 

[Sasha]

So Michael Sharpe thinks it's 'unbecoming' to misrepresent science. The man with recovery thresholds below trial-entry thresholds.

 

[Adrian]

I've not seen any press coverage of this debate which is a shame. Has anyone else seen any? Were there any press releases?

 

[TiredSam]

Carol Monaghan might be happy to share it although I wonder whether it would be worth it. It probably says nothing new. It might perhaps reveal a little more of their inability to understand basic methodology.

I suspect it would be interesting to see how he describes his critics, which would help show his true colours and undermine his credibility further.

The private - not public - comment was not about representing constituents but about misrepresenting science in parliament.

Oh I get it. In his briefing he said misrepresenting science in parliament is conduct unbecoming of an MP. She said standing up for the most vulnerable in society is not unbecoming. Now he's saying he wasn't talking about how she represents constituents, but how she misrepresents science.

So now he's saying publicly that she misrepresents science and has defamed him. Michael Sharpe is not speaking under parliamentary privilege, so he'd better watch himself. Not everyone he smears is lying in bed unable to do anything about his "he said she said" labelling and name calling habit.

 

[Stewart]

This talk of private briefings makes one wonder in what context the term "conduct unbecoming" may have been used. Sharpe clearly feels he was quoted out of context. One can in part see reason for his concern. There seems to be more to this than meets the eye.

From Sharpe's reply it looks to me as though he's acknowledging that he did use the line "conduct unbecoming of an MP" in his message to Carol Monaghan. Given that she didn't give any context for how the statement was used in his email, I'm struggling to see how he could genuinely believe this amounts to defamation under the protection of parliamentary privilege. I suppose it's possible that he has very poor comprehension of the English language, and he really thinks that Carol Monaghan subsequently suggested that he'd accused her of unbecoming conduct for not representing her constituents properly - but I suspect he's deliberately choosing to misunderstand her comments so he can carry on presenting himself as the maligned party.

I think poor old Sharpe has heard the Science Media Centre's ridiculous claim that Parliamentary scrutiny is a form of harrassment so many times that he's started to believe it. 'You are misrepresenting science in Parliament when you publicly criticise my work' - good to see that he's falling back on the old "All the critics of my work are anti-science zealots" line. He needs a better defence but he doesn't seem capable of constructing one.

 

[chrisb]

I think that CM's tweet may have created an unfortunate impression by juxtaposing the comment about "conduct unbecoming" and her response to it in the debate. The result gave the appearance that MS's comment was part of discussions concerning the representation of constituents.

I am sure this was entirely innocent. There is no need to unfairly malign the man. There is plenty to be used fairly.

 

[Trish]

Saying it is 'conduct unbecoming of an MP' to raise a problem in science is effectively saying it is 'unbecoming' of her to defend her constituents against the application of that bad science. Sharpe is effectively saying her conduct in defending the interests of her constituents is 'unbecoming'. I don't think he can pretend he is being misrepresented.

 

[Joh]

 

[Suffolkres]

Wimp @Esther12 ! It was entirely benign. Only when the minister spoke could one begin to feel a bit annoyed.



I did not really get a sense of deference to institutions. The atmosphere was of genuine scepticism about how the medical establishment were handling things.

I wonder how much the breaking news about Gosport Memorial Hospital( a fitting name) managed to focus minds.....?

 

[TiredSam]

I think that CM's tweet may have created an unfortunate impression by juxtaposing the comment about "conduct unbecoming" and her response to it in the debate. The result gave the appearance that MS's comment was part of discussions concerning the representation of constituents.

I'm not so sure. That's certainly how Sharpe is trying to portray it. She may have just been making the point that to write to her in such terms at all in any context is unacceptable. If his only defence is that he was falsely accusing her misrepresenting science, that's a pretty poor defence. If he thinks he can just throw comments like that around without consequences that's his mistake, and if Carol Monaghan calls him out in Westminster Hall and a chorus of MPs demand his apology he's got no business complaining, she is entitled to respond in any way she chooses using whatever rhetoric she feels like.

He's too used to throwing his weight around against the defenceless, no reason why MPs should put up with such behaviour. And if he wants to double down by publicly claiming she's misrepresenting science and defaming him, let's see how far he gets with that too. It's a bit of a side-show, but why not? He can show his true colours and destroy what little remains of his credibility all he wants as far as I'm concerned. People might not understand the details of PACE, but they can recognise a bully when they see one, and for those who can't grasp the details of PACE so need to use the heuristic of "who seems most reasonable, who do I like most?", Sharpe presenting his most odious side can only be to our advantage.

 

[Stewart]

I think that CM's tweet may have created an unfortunate impression by juxtaposing the comment about "conduct unbecoming" and her response to it in the debate. The result gave the appearance that MS's comment was part of discussions concerning the representation of constituents.

That wasn't how it came across to me. I took it as CM saying "This man has accused me of conduct unbecoming an MP, which is an utterly ridiculous claim given that I am representing and expressing the concerns of my constituents, which is of course what they elected me to do."

 

[Joh]

Debate now also on Youtube:

 

[Suffolkres]

John Muir (@johnamuir) Tweeted:
@profmsharpe @JonesyJ49 @tottyscone_one @Saturnation8 @davidtuller1 Read the transcript - defamation? Have to be a little more specific, who defamed you, and what did they say that would be legally actionable outside parliamentary privilege?

I wonder if @JonesyJ49 is friend or foe?......... is it the very same who was caught defaming Dr Sarah Myhill for Queen's Essex? She did mange to turn the tables on him and refer him to GMC and Fitness to Practice .... need to check this out.....

 

[chrisb]

That wasn't how it came across to me. I took it as CM saying "This man has accused me of conduct unbecoming an MP, which is an utterly ridiculous claim given that I am representing and expressing the concerns of my constituents, which is of course what they elected me to do."

Yes , that is all absolutely fine. My point was about the later tweet from which a different impression might have been gained.

 

[Sasha]

Two important actions in the #MEAction report:

Thank the MPs who attended

We need your help to keep the momentum going. Now more than ever, it’s crucial we have the capacity to sustain and grow the impact of this work. Donate today to our crowdfunding campaign and help us hire our first, on the ground UK coordinator.​

 

[adambeyoncelowe]

I've not seen any press coverage of this debate which is a shame. Has anyone else seen any? Were there any press releases?

I know that the BBC contacted some patients who attended the debate for comment. Whether that results in an article or not depends on a number of factors, including editorial bias/whim.

#MEAction UK and Scotland have also sent out press releases, images and quotes from the debate. I suspect the MEA has too, given that it now has a PR person too.

Let's cross our fingers!

 

[Adrian]

I know that the BBC contacted some patients who attended the debate for comment. Whether that results in an article or not depends on a number of factors, including editorial bias/whim.

#MEAction UK and Scotland have also sent out press releases, images and quotes from the debate. I suspect the MEA has too, given that it now has a PR person too.

Let's cross our fingers!

That sounds good. If there is publicity around it then that provides added momentum. Could we do something with local press for those MPs who took part. Just sending a press release to local papers?

 

[adambeyoncelowe]

That sounds good. If there is publicity around it then that provides added momentum. Could we do something with local press for those MPs who took part. Just sending a press release to local papers?

I think it's a good idea. A few Scottish publications ran articles in the run-up. The more organisations providing press releases, the more likely something is to stick. Also, as with the Parliamentary briefings, it at least means journalists can see a variety of views. That way they'd be less likely to just parrot the SMC view.

 

[AR68]

I've not seen any press coverage of this debate which is a shame. Has anyone else seen any? Were there any press releases?

I wouldn't expect any. Needs to be in the Commons - although I suspect that will eventually come. There'd be a small amount of coverage then.

 

[Sly Saint]

Something else struck me yesterday when they were discussing stigma and started relating it to the Mental Health stigma issue;
the irony is those who are considered 'champions' in the 'fight to remove the stigma of mental health'
are, by and large, the same people largely responsible for the stigma attached to ME.