Culture news and discussion on TalkFuse.
Panel rules out further inquiry into sexual harassment claims against Lib Dem peer Chris Rennard
An independent panel has ruled that the Liberal Democrats cannot reopen sexual harassment allegations against peer Chris Rennard without new evidence. Party leader Ed Davey said he was “disappointed and upset”, while Rennard argued that the decision showed the renewed investigation should not have taken place.
The party asked three independent adjudicators to reassess the case after receiving advice that a 2013 inquiry had been flawed in several respects. The original complaints were made by four women; a review by Alistair Webster KC found broadly credible evidence of behaviour that violated their personal space, but judged there was less than a 50% chance of proving the case beyond reasonable doubt. Police and other inquiries did not prove the allegations, which Rennard has denied, while Davey says he lacks the power to remove him from the party or the House of Lords.
In short
- Panel says the case cannot be reopened without new evidence.
- Davey expressed disappointment at the decision.
- Four women made complaints against Rennard.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The party’s decision to seek an independent reassessment can be defended as a response to concerns that the 2013 inquiry was flawed and to the seriousness of complaints by four women. Supporters of further scrutiny may argue that credible evidence of behaviour violating personal space warranted a fair process capable of addressing the complaints, even though earlier inquiries did not establish the allegations.
The case against
Rennard’s position can be defended on the grounds that serious allegations require a fair process and should not be reopened without new evidence, particularly after police and other inquiries did not prove them. The panel’s ruling supports the view that continuing to revisit the case risks treating unresolved allegations as established and undermining procedural fairness.
Explained simply
Chris Rennard is a Liberal Democrat peer, meaning he is a member of the House of Lords. In 2013, four women made complaints about his behaviour, which he has denied. The party investigated the complaints, but the case did not lead to a finding that proved the allegations.
The Liberal Democrats later sought a fresh assessment after receiving advice that the original inquiry had shortcomings. A review found evidence it considered credible that Rennard had invaded the women’s personal space, but said the case was unlikely to meet the criminal standard of proof. The latest panel’s decision matters because it sets the conditions for whether the party can examine the allegations again.