Head Of B C C Suspended Over Brexit Views

[ChillDoubt]

Apparently, the head of the British Chamber of Commerce believes we're better off out of the EU and has been gagged. Why would that be then?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35732291

[sunny-dave]

Because his organisation has a policy of not campaigning for EITHER side - it has decided to be entirely neutral.

He broke that policy - he got suspended ... why is that hard to understand?

[Togo]

Because it is not party line central. If he had favoured in, he would have been lauded.

[sunny-dave]

Böllocks - he would have been suspended just the same - read the article properly.

[sunny-dave]

[ and just to be clear - I am (marginally) in favour of Brexit - but this ridiculous paranoia really isn't helping the Brexit cause , it just puts people off ]

[sunny-dave]

He is a public figure - he can only have a "personal view" if he keeps it entirely to himself - he didn't - so it then becomes a "public view".

His job description bans that and so he is suspended. All very simple.

[sunny-dave]

Yes I can - as can many sensible people.

As I keep saying, the paranoia of some Brexit supporters is not helping their cause - which is a shame.

[sunny-dave]

I used to be a (terribly minor) public figure in my local NHS - and I had views which, on some occasions, differed from those agreed by my organisation.

But there is such a thing as Corporate Responsibility - so I campaigned inside the organisation (behind closed doors) and kept my gob shut elsewhere - even in 'private' meetings - which is what this bloke should have done.

As you say - we differ in our interpretation of this event.

[ChillDoubt]

As I keep saying, the paranoia of some Brexit supporters is not helping their cause - which is a shame.
--------------------
What paranoia is that then? I've heard a lot of scaremongering by those who want to stay in, leaps into the dark etc (and other EU heads who are themselves fearful of a Brexit) but no obvious signs by those in favour of it.
Doesn't Cameron have a personal view that we should stay in? And as far as I can tell he's a VERY public figure!

[Gromit]

Because the BCC policy is to be neutral. Not support one side or the other. And he came out in support of Brexit. He broke his own organisations rule on impartiality. Many BCC member will not support his views, so he has made his own role untenible.

[Gromit]

In a speech at the BCC he said the UK faced a brighter future outside of the EU. Whilst that is hardly an earth shattering view, he used a BCC platform to campaign for a Brexit. It moved from a personal opinion to a public endorsement of one side, breaking the organisations neutrality stance.
If he had talked to delegates informally afters, that would be acceptable as his own personal view. To broadcast them from a BCC platform though, is not acceptable, so he had to go.

[ChillDoubt]

BCC members will be surveyed so their views could inform the debate ahead of the vote in June, Mr Longworth added.
------------------------------
Ah right, so they're allowed to give their opinion, but his must be stiled? Clear as mud then.......

[Gromit]

Chill,

The paragraph before reads
// The BCC has said it was not aligned to either camp in the debate because its membership was split on the issue. //

The organisation is supposed to represent its membership. The membership is not pro brexit ((some of them are), so the head of the organisation should not abuse his posotion and he should not misrepresent the members.

[Gromit]

And from the Guardian

// But with a recent survey showing that two thirds of the BCC’s members reject Brexit, Longworth came under pressure after his remarks. //

[ChillDoubt]

From elsewhere:

But Sky News understands the BCC's president, Nora Senior, instigated the suspension and members have now been told that Mr Longworth has been temporarily suspended for breaching the group's official position of neutrality........


........In his speech to the London conference, Mr Longworth said that the UK could create a "brighter economic future for itself" outside the EU.

The long-term risks of staying in the EU were "likely to be as daunting as the short-term risks of leaving", he added.

Afterwards his spokesman said: "The BCC's director-general has been very clear where his remarks reflect his personal assessment, rather than the position of the BCC."
----------------------
Sounds like someone within in the BCC is getting twitchy and displaying the very paranoia SD was decrying! He made it clear they're his own personal views, the members of the BCC will be allowed to air their own shortly.

[Old_Geezer]

Folk not allowed to voice personal opinion then. Suspension seems harsh given that the BBC itself has stayed neutral on the subject.

[Togo]

The BCC were crowing earlier in the week that the quango was 60/30 in favour of remaining. Why haven't they suspended themselves for showing bias towards the pro EUSSR camp followers. It is a further demonstration that we are not just dealing with 'project fear', the establishment is prepared to bully and intimidate people to try and silence them. Perhaps the BCC cannot come up with a sound counter argument.

[Gromit]

What an idiot.
He is in charge of the shebang so must know that he is supposed to be neutral.
Then gets up in front of delegates at the annual conference, again knowing that two thirds have an oppsing view, and breaks the neutrality stance.
Then he wonders why he has been suspended.

// The BCC were crowing earlier in the week that the quango was 60/30 in favour of remaining. //

Were they? I have checked that and I can find no reports to support that. And it isn't a quango, it is a membership organisation with elected officials and its job is primarily to lobby in support of business.