Ignore the smears: I was never a close friend of Peter Mandelson. And I fully understand the lessons we must learn | Wes Streeting

"Politics has a problem with sexism and misogyny. We need to be clear what it is and why. With every scandal there is a call to clean up the system, to reform vetting procedures and the laws governing the release of sensitive information. Those are serious issues, but we will not fix the problem by starting there because the problem is not procedural. It is about culture and behaviour. In the scandal of Peter Mandelson's appointment to be the British ambassador to the United States,"

"of course we need to establish the timeline of who said what, to whom and when. Gordon Brown is right to insist on a more rigorous process and a renewed commitment to the redistribution of power. But if we focus solely on what happened we will miss the important question of why it happened. This is more than a story about the flaws of individuals and the flaws of a system."

"This is about culture and moral character. About how, for too long, proximity to power insulated powerful, wealthy and well-connected men from the consequences of their appalling behaviour towards women and girls. The really worrying aspect is not what took place in secret. It is what happened in plain sight. A candidate's known association with a convicted sexual predator did not weigh heavily enough on decision-makers. And we need to think too about the silence of those who stood by,"

Politics suffers from entrenched sexism and misogyny rooted in culture and behaviour rather than solely in procedures. Scandals generate demands for stricter vetting and information laws, but procedural fixes alone will not solve the problem. Proximity to power has long insulated wealthy, well-connected men from consequences for appalling behaviour toward women and girls. Known associations with convicted sexual predators have been insufficiently weighed by decision-makers. Widespread silence and failure to speak up have enabled problematic appointments. Publishing private messages can reveal complicity and create difficult choices for colleagues, particularly where sensitive political comments intersect with personal associations.

Read at www.theguardian.com