This page provides a collection of messages of support from Labour Party members across the region. Some of these people have known me for 20-30 years, come for a lot less. But all know me well enough to know there is no foundation to the allegations.
Support has been received from the following members and organisations
Chris Williamson MP
Chris is a very longstanding member the Labour Party and MP for Derby North. He was Shadow Minister for Communities and Local Government for three years between October 2010 and October 2013.
The treatment to which Peter Gates has been subjected is reprehensible. He is a dedicated Labour activist and one of the hardest working members of the party I have come across. When I first met him just over 3 years ago I was struck by his energy and enthusiasm to involve more people in our party. He was regularly arranging street stalls and other campaign sessions as well as workshops to enable new and longer standing members to discuss policy issues and ideas. He was also active in bringing people together to consider the implications of the EU referendum. I was therefore absolutely astonished when Peter was eventually expelled. The disciplinary process was positively Kafkaesque for well over a year because Peter had being given no information about why he had been suspended. Having reviewed the written testimony against him, it is clear that it does not stand up to scrutiny and yet a good man’s reputation has been traduced by this absurd decision to expel him. In my opinion not only should Peter Gates be reinstated, but he should also be given a fulsome apology for the truly appalling way in which he has been treated.
Cheryl is the Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Rushcliffe, and is a long-standing Party member and Trades Unionist. She is a member of UNITE
I know Peter Gates both personally and through my work within the Labour Party. I have always found Peter to be a person of enormous integrity and to be totally trustworthy. Peter has always conducted himself in a very calm, courteous and considered manner and is very much a team player with the interests of the Party and our Movement always at the heart of any work he has undertaken. I am proud to call Peter my friend and Comrade.
John has been a Hucknall District and Nottinghamshire Country Councillor for Hucknall South (1995-1997, and 2013-2017) and a Labour Party member for over 20 years. He is also an ardent Burnley supporter!
Peter Gates is one of the most committed, passionate and dedicated supporters of a socialist Labour Party – a man whose energy, enthusiasm and hard work has been focused on ensuring Labour success at all levels of representative government for many years. The Labour Party is a better place, a better organisation and a better defender of those most in need of a Labour Government with members like Peter within it. For the Party to dismiss the activism of comrades such as Peter is a grievous loss; for the Party to dismiss the activism of comrades such as Peter in a manner displayed by the Party itself, is a scandal. I am happy to support any, and all, attempts for Peter Gates to be reinstated as a member of the Labour Party at the earliest possible moment.
Keir is currently Chair of Rushcliffe CLP. He has been a member of the Labour Party 10 years and a Councillor for Cotgrave for 3 years He has also been a member of Rushcliffe Executive Committee for 9 years holding various positions including, for the last year and a half, CLP Chair.
I have known Peter Gates for over 4 years, and in this time I have been fortunate to call him a colleague, a comrade and more importantly, a friend.
Peter is one of the most dedicated and professional members of the Labour Party I have met. You could not find a more dedicated member. He would turn up rain or shine to leaflet, canvass or participate on street stalls. He would be there to advise on current issues and give a level-headed response to the matter at hand. He was, and still is, a confidante whose advice I take seriously. What makes Peter truly remarkable is that he carried on doing this during a time when he was subjected to a lengthy and unjust suspension that was completely at odds, not only with natural justice, but the basic principles we as a party fight for when it comes to how employees are treated by their employers.
* Would we allow workers to face 2 years of suspension without knowing exactly what they are accused of?
* Would we allow workers to be subjected to 2 years of suspension with no review to ensure that the suspension was lawful and proportionate?
* Would we allow our workers to face a hearing where they cannot bring all of their witnesses forward and allow them to present their best case?
Of course we would not, so why is it that the party’s process allows this?
I saw first-hand how Peter’s hearing was dealt with, and I have never seen anything like it. The panel chair cherry-picked points and when I answered his question to his dissatisfaction (due to my evidence supporting Peter’s case), he tried to stop me from continuing with my answer, shouting over me so aggressively that the hearing had to be adjourned to allow the chair to calm down. I can safely say that I have never experienced anything like this in my life, and this is me speaking as a former police officer with 11 years’ experience, a local councillor who often deals with nasty Tories and as a CLP chair.
The party needs to take a hard look at this case and ask itself how did they let this happen
Andreas is the Political Education Officer of Broxtowe CLP. He is also Vice President UCU Nottingham University and a well-known activist in Nottingham. He is central to the Fair Pay campaign.
Over the years, I have co-operated on a number of occasions with Peter on campaigns related to the local University and College Union association at Nottingham University. I have always experienced Peter as a friendly, competent, cooperative and fully trustworthy colleague and am shocked by his treatment from within our Labour Party.
Ged is Political Education Officer for West Bridgford Branch. Hew was a CLP delegate to Labour Party Conference in September 2017.
Considering what Peter has endured over the last couple of years, it would be understandable if he were to simply walk away. However, it is testament to his integrity, passion and desire to redress injustice that he battles on. Bureaucratic manoeuvres will never defeat principled socialists like Peter. I remain in solidarity with you Peter.
Umaar is Branch Secretary of West Bridgford Branch Labour Party. He has been a Young Labour Representative on the East Midlands Regional Board, a BAME Officer and Youth Officer in his Rushcliffe Constituency. He was one of the 10 members who were suspended by the Est Midland Region in March 2016 for attending a meeting as an observer.
Peter is generous, affable and gregarious – far from being the thuggish bully that his detractors have used to paint him as. What happened to Peter was unjust,. unethical and unbefitting of a democratic socialist party; it shames us all. It is right that we continue to show our solidarity with him and fight for his reinstatement.
David is treasurer of West Bridgford Branch LP. He is a retired consultant oncologist, and was elected as delegate to Labour Party Conference in September 2108.
It’s difficult to know where to start to express the outrage I feel over the treatment Peter Gates has received at the hands of his, and my, deeply-loved Party. I (like Peter) am a lifelong supporter of the Labour Party, although I had resigned my membership on the day that a Labour government sent British troops to Iraq. I applied to re-join in 2015 after the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader. It was then that I first met Peter, who had recently been elected Secretary of my local West Bridgford Branch. Shortly afterwards, I was horrified to hear that his membership had been suspended. Peter has described the history of events surrounding this in detail, so I shall not recapitulate all of it, but there is an important point that I should like to make to back up what Peter says. This relates to his appearance before the NCC.
The allegations against Peter were essentially of a sort for which truly objective evidence can never be produced: “bullying”, and so on are very subjective matters. In judging whether such things had taken place then, the NCC Panel necessarily had to weigh up the expressed opinions of their witnesses. Their witnesses clearly fell into two camps, those who supported Peter and those who had made the original allegations against him. In weighing the two sides against each other, objective criteria are hard to define, but not altogether impossibly so, and I suggest that there ARE certain objective facts relating to people’s behaviour as Party members that should carry considerable weight, especially as this concerns an internal Party matter. Those that spoke in Peter’s defence were all widely respected and active members of the West Bridgford Branch, in fact one is the current, elected Chair. On the other hand, there are serious questions about the credibility of two, if not three, of the witnesses that spoke against him. This is about their credibility as Labour Party members.
Firstly, one of the witnesses had previously been elected as “Co-Chair” of the West Bridgford Branch, in early 2017, but after “Co-Chairing” one meeting has never seen at a Branch meeting since, and no explanation has been given to the members. This is NOT acceptable behaviour within the Party. The person concerned did, by a selection process I am unfamiliar with, later stand (unsuccessfully) for election as a District Councillor in an area outside West Bridgford, and became involved in an unpleasant dispute with officers of the local Branch. Later, this same person, applied to become Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Rushcliffe, but gained almost no local support.
Secondly, another of the witnesses was elected as Delegate to the National Conference in 2017 – but without notice failed to attend, and has never been seen at a local meeting since; later we learnt that the person concerned had moved to another part of the country – but no excuse was ever presented for failure to attend Conference.
A third one of the witnesses is the partner of the second. This witness, although holder of a minor position within the Branch, also “disappeared without trace” at the same time.
In summary, the irresponsible behaviour shown in Party matters by at least two of the witnesses against Peter are good grounds for treating their credibility as far lower than that of all the witnesses (all impeccable) in Peter’s favour. All things considered, I can see no way in which the evidence presented against Peter could justly result in a finding of guilt and will therefore support him in challenging the outcome of the Hearing.”
Marc is the current Chair of West Bridgford Labour Party and Treasurer of Rushcliffe CLP.
I am the current ‘chair’ of West Bridgford Branch Labour Party and I’ve worked with a range of people, starting off down the pit as a miner at 16, now a senior IT manager at Loughborough University. Firstly I would like to say that I have found Peter Gates very easy to get along with, and that the accusations against him were as laughable as the Labour Party having an ‘antisemitism’ problem. The ‘charges’ should have been dismissed forthwith, containing what appeared to me unfounded assertions. Instead he was made to wait more than two years for a hearing that was quite shocking, because in my opinion two of the panel had already decided on the verdict before they got there. They literally had no interest other than seeing the charges upheld against Peter.
I have always found Peter has brought constructive energy with him in all the contacts I’ve had and the Party was fortunate to have had him as a member. I can’t tell you what a loss he has been to our party. Furthermore, I have at no time heard from any other person any accusations of inappropriate behaviours from Peter. He has always been measured and courteous in his approach in my experience.
Peter Gates has been accused of somehow being capable of what seem quite extraordinary feats of manipulation and control. At the time of writing I am nearly 60, and whilst many years ago I might have at times been inexperienced enough to have been fooled for a period of time, the idea that I and a number of other people have been ‘collected’ and then ‘manipulated’ by is, frankly, laughable – and more than a little insulting.
Finally, disgraceful submissions by two people in particular also construed Peter a Machiavellian character, themselves cast in the role of ‘victims’, with claims of intimidation and bullying. In my view, and now that I understand the source and the deceits and lying from those involved, the truth was entirely the opposite. The lies and machinations actually came from those making the accusations. Personally, I hope the accusers, all of them, have time dwell and reflect on the consequences of their actions and behaviours. Shame on them.
To re-state, Peter has, in my experience, and at all times conducted himself in an adult, responsible and respectful manner, and he has always sought constructive and open solutions through dialogue.
Mia is the joint Secretary of Rushcliffe CLP and was West Bridgford Newsletter Editor.
Before I get into the particulars of Peter’s case, there is no doubt in my mind that the charges are false and unproven. I am quick to call out inappropriate behaviour. I am not some misguided, easily-led type. I work with sex offenders in prison, expert at manipulating, conditioning and using persuasive behaviours and communications, along with misogynistic views of women. It is possible to manage such behaviours and attitudes for a short time, but they will always out after time. After nearly 3 years working alongside Peter for Labour across the constituency, I have witnessed very positive and supportive behaviour on a regular and repeated basis, both towards myself and to others, and never seen the behaviours described in the charges. To see Peter’s character destroyed on these grounds is beyond injustice.
Process and proportionate response. The meeting on 7th March, which I attended as an observer (and for which I was myself subsequently suspended for 17 weeks), was never advertised as an Executive Committee meeting. Furthermore, a conciliatory or meditation meeting would never occur in the presence of the entire membership of an Executive Committee, and with one complainant taking minutes. This meeting was badly handled for its stated purpose, rather than carefully planned; it was neither fair nor just. The witness statements support this, even if only taking the executive members’ views into account. Liz Plant said in a branch meeting that suspensions after this meeting was a disproportionate heavy-handed response. Peter spent over two years in suspension, with Peter continuing to be active and positive about and for the party, and a third time lucky approach taken to cancelled hearings!
Presumption of guilt. Prior to the hearing, Gordon Pattinson, the East Midlands Regional Director, publicly said at a Branch meeting that the charges would be there for everyone to see. He said he had never seen anything so disgusting in all of his career in Labour. He said further things publicly in discussion with Penny Gowland, all of which pre-supposed a guilty outcome. At the hearing the Panel Chair manipulated his questioning by twisting what I had said deliberately to imply Peter’s guilt. I had said Peter was surprised that I knew about the 7th March meeting, and that Jean Stansfield had informed me during the previous weekend. In fact Peter asked me “How did you know about it?”. A supplementary question was asked by the Panel Chair that begun: “when Jean and Peter persuaded you to come to the meeting”, which was a clear manipulation of my evidence, I hadto point out this was incorrect. This was but one example where there was little evidence of any interest from the Panel members for asking questions to find out any deeper information, with only a desultory few questions asked by the panel.
Evidence. It was necessary for Peter to show me charges so that I knew what I was being called witness to, and to be able to write a supporting statement to respond to his solicitor. I did not disclose the contents to others. There were countless occasions when disclosure could have been used to respond to comments, but this never happened, so confidentiality throughout has been maintained appropriate to the procedure. The “evidence” consisted mainly of inference and hearsay, with little or no actual evidence to support the charges. In addition, as part of the evidence it was claimed, by Keri Howe, that I was one of the victims of Peter’s supposed exclusion of women, and my response as the “victim” was not given credit, whilst the accuser’s charge was upheld. Witnesses were limited by the NCC,who suggested some women could be excluded, although this would be naturally detrimental to the examination of facts.
Impact. The party meetings have repeatedly been brought low initially by the shock and subsequently by the long drawn out process and lack of justice. The lack of use of party procedures and then the Chakrabarti recommendations not being adopted, have caused repeated discussion and motions, which have been uncomfortable and destructive. We have, across the branch and CLP, worked hard for unity and positive working relationships, and clear political progress locally which was rewarded in closing the gap between Kenneth Clarke and our previous parliamentary candidate David Mellen. A new PPC has been chosen and the streets are being beaten by us again. Now people in key positions, the ones who are most active, most often campaigning, canvassing, have all been discredited by the finding of the panel. What sort of footing is this as a springboard for further progress? I have not begun to indicate the personal impact for myself or my colleagues. Suffice to say that the investment of time, mental effort and emotion has taken a huge toll and continues to do so, as despite the final shock, feelings of devastation and frustration at the findings of the panel, motivation for appropriate justice continues, in the hope of a positive outcome for both Peter and the Labour Party. Ultimately, time, mental effort and emotion needs to be expended on stopping and reversing the impact of disastrous Conservative government.
Mike is currently the Press Officer for Rushcliffe CLP. He is a retired TU Organiser and previously worked as a Social Worker in Nottingham.
I am a lifelong trade unionist and have recently retired after 20 years working as a full time Organiser for Unison. I rejoined the Labour Party after a long break when Jeremy Corbyn was elected as leader, but have not until very recently begun to get heavily involved in the activities of either the West Bridgford or Rushcliffe party, mainly due to time constraints. I was previously acquainted with a small number of local members via other organisations, but had never met Peter Gates. However, there are some points I feel I can usefully make in relation to the charges:
1. I have not seen any evidence of gender-discriminatory behaviour on the part of either Peter Gates or those he is accused of manipulating. Indeed, it was my view that the newly-elected officers of the West Bridgford branch and their supporters were if anything being too cautious in their interpretation of the rules on gender representation at the ward AGM, almost to the extent of trying to force any woman present to stand for various positions!
2. Misogyny is discrimination against women because they are women, not because they hold different political or other views. No organisation believes that men can never disagree with women under any circumstances, so it is essential that allegations as serious as misogyny are fully backed with evidence.
3. It was noticeable to me on first joining the ward party that there was a split between various groups, which seemed to be more based on length of membership and personal issues than politics. My personal impression was that the long-standing officers and members resented the new influx and were unhappy that their traditional way of operating was suddenly open to question. The differences covered such areas as the organisation of meetings, attempts to involve as many new members as possible, accountability of officers and Councillors to the membership, etc.
4. Most of the new members did not appear to be from backgrounds that had given them much experience of Constitutions, Rules, Standing Orders or the organisation of meetings and there was inevitable confusion over what could and couldn’t be done. Mistakes, most of which I believe to have been honest, were inevitably made and there were frequent queries and disagreements about process.
5. There was also a great deal of confusion (on all sides) about the status of Momentum, which was of course initially an entirely separate organisation consisting of both Labour and non-Labour members and subsequently an organisation of Labour members only, but distinct from the Labour Party itself. This resulted in some lack of clarity as to whether particular debates were taking place under the auspices of one organisation or the other, which was not helpful but not in my view intentional.
It is my belief that most – if not all – of the issues and allegations are a result of misunderstandings, personal and political disagreements and the tension between older and newer members. This view is supported by the lack of specific examples of discriminatory behaviour in the case against Peter Gates. As a Trade Union Organiser, I would have been surprised to see a case against a member based on such statements as:
“exactly to what extent, what I believe to be controlling behaviour, is being exerted I don’t know”
“I believe Peter Gates is manipulating a group of people that he has collected”
“I do think that some people’s behaviour needs to be investigated that may have been anti-democratic”
“I hypothesise that I have been intentionally excluded from communications”
“I hypothesise that I have been excluded as a woman”
There is a clear lack of evidence as to both intention and outcome – this is speculation at best and cannot be used to prove any sort of case.
Beryl is the Women’s Officer for West Bridgford Labour Party.
I can honestly say that I have never experienced, witnessed or heard of any negative behaviour from Peter, let alone against women. What I have seen is the enthusiasm in bucket loads from Peter. I have seen his high levels of enthusiasm, commitment and energy to the Labour Party before and during his period of suspension and later expulsion. I have seen him canvas for Labour in the EU referendum, the County Council Elections, the SNAP and the recent by election in Gotham.
I think that the Party needs to reinstate Peter and get him back to work and get Corbyn into number 10.
Zbyszek is member of West Bridgford Branch Labour Party and has served as Branch Secretary. He is currently Membership Secretary.
The failure to implement the complaints procedure proposed in the Chakrabarti Report 2016 by the National Executive Committee, the National Coordinating Committee Disciplinary Panel and the National Officers of the Labour Party hierarchy has meant that there has been a complete lack of natural justice in the procedures in dealing with the allegations and complaints made against Peter Gates. Even at the end we do not have a transcript of the disciplinary hearing or any details of how the decision was reached by which it can be scrutinised by his Rushcliffe Constituency Labour Party members. Therefore I believe we now need to continue to challenge the verdict of the Disciplinary Panel of the NCC.
Tom is a member of Nottingham East CLP and a member of CND and Stop the War Coalition. .
Peter’s case highlights many of the worst deficiencies in Labour’s disciplinary processes. His treatment has been frankly shabby, shameful and highly damaging to all concerned. With remarkable tenacity, Peter has comprehensively resisted and refuted the allegations against him. I find it hard to believe that anyone who reads details of Peter’s case would come to any other conclusion than that justice has not prevailed.
Jean is a long-standing member of Rushcliffe Labour Party, well known and respected throughout Rushcliffe and Nottingham. She is a long-standing Trades Union official and indefatigable campaigner for woman’s rights.
I am very upset and disappointed with the Hearing for Peter Gates. The NCC representatives seemed more concerned with proving Peter’s guilt rather than eliciting the facts. I was asked more questions by Peter’s solicitor than the NCC side. I explained how Peter volunteered to be Branch Secretary when no-one else wanted to do it; and how nothing had been happening to accommodate the members flooding in inspired by Jeremy Corbyn, but when Peter became Secretary his developments of activity led to extra officers for political education, Trade Union links, meetings for new members and a new format for Branch Meetings with group discussion and reporting back. This was met with enthusiasm by members and a collection of £60 for a meeting costing £40.
Peter was accused of misogyny, but many of the new Officers encouraged by Peter were women and I can’t understand how such an accusation can be given a moment’s consideration. I was Vice -Chair when Peter was Secretary and I am a woman and worked well with Peter. The NCC reps were not interested in that. I was asked if an unpleasant email supposedly sent by Peter was divisive; Peter had already said he did not send that email, but I was not asked who I thought might have sent it to undermine Peter. My response that emails can be falsified was not taken up.
Peter was accused of bullying and I was asked if Peter had pressurised me to nominate him for the CLP Secretary. I pointed out that I was not pleased that he had resigned from the post when he was upset by criticism and I had urged him to stand again because we needed a Secretary. If anyone pressurised anyone, I was pressurising him to stand. We didn’t know that one of the subsequent complaints against Peter had already arranged to be nominated and seconded. She was asked by the Chair (another complainant) if she could take minutes just before we voted, when Peter, suffering from dystonia, needs a minute taker, This was quite brutal. But that discrimination on grounds of disability didn’t seem to matter then or at the Hearing.
I expressed concern to the NCC representatives about two different lots of minutes for the meeting on 7th March 2016. This involved people in subversive activity aimed at undermining Peter Gates and totally against Labour Party rules or any organisation. My concern was ignored.
The decision to find Peter guilty of misogyny and bullying and expelling him for two years is not justified, and having no appeal rights does not match normal justice procedures. The Labour Party needs to correct this practice to ensure real justice applies in a socialist organisation like ours.
Eve is a member of West Bridgford Labour Party and was until recently one of its Political Education Officers.
Peter was one of the first people I met when I joined the Labour Party and certainly one of the most welcoming and enthusiastic. I always found him supportive and encouraging and find it hard to reconcile my impressions of him over the ensuing period with the allegations made against him. I was happy to offer to be a witness at the hearing ( and am still awaiting a response from Jennie Formby about my being prevented from doing so!!!). The whole process from the initial suspensions to the final “trial ” appears to me to have been protracted and far from transparent. A huge amount of time has been spent trying to first understand and then challenge the initial suspension(s) and this has, in my view, impacted negatively on the functioning of the branch (maybe this was the intention ?). Throughout the process from suspension to hearing, and since, Peter has continually worked for the party: canvassing, street stalls, while unable to attend meetings.
Jake is Trades Union Liaison Officer for Rushcliffe CLP
I have known Peter Gates from the time I rejoined the Party in 2015. At that point Peter was West Bridgford Branch Secretary. I saw that Peter was keen to open up debate and discussion and suggested new ways this could be achieved. Meetings became interesting again. Neither then nor since have I heard Peter utter anything which could be construed as misogynistic. None of the charges against him have any basis in word or deed. The so called hearing and “sentence “ is a travesty of natural justice aimed at thwarting the new political direction of the local Party.
Rosemary is a longstanding member of Rushcliffe Labour Party, a previous Borough Councillor and a CLP delegate to Labour Party Conference September 2018.
I have been a member of the Labour Party since 1979 and a Borough Councillor for Rushcliffe from 1999 to 2007. I have known Peter Gates for 18 months. Throughout that time he has been welcoming and supportive to me. I have been incredibly impressed by his commitment to the Labour Party, his hard work and unfailing enthusiasm. He has never given me, as a woman, cause to consider that he may be a bully or a misogynist. Quite the reverse. He facilitates discussion and debate and is open to listening to the views of others. I am shocked to learn that he has been suspended from the party on what can only be described at best as the flimsiest of evidence. The processes and delay he has endured have been completely devoid of natural justice. I am saddened by my party’s treatment of this man who has never given anything but loyal service to the Party. I hope he will be reinstated with a fulsome apology at the earliest opportunity and the witnesses called to give account of their lies and deceit.
Phil Is Branch Chair of Porchester Labour Party, Vice-Chair of Gedling CLP and Branch Manager of Notts UNISON, the Public Services trade union.
I have known Peter for many years and the charges against him are unbelievable. Peter’s treatment through the entire process has been disgraceful, lacking in any sort of natural justice and bring shame on the Labour Party. Anyone who takes the time to read and familiarise themselves with the case could only conclude that the Disciplinary Panel has ignored the overwhelming evidence in support of Peter and drawn conclusions based on speculation by one or two individuals with prior hostile intent towards Peter. The unjust and quite disgraceful decision of the Disciplinary Panel must be challenged and Peter reinstated as a full member immediately. Peter has been a longstanding Labour Party member, and he is a testament to the best ideals and principles of the Party. I remain in total solidarity with you Peter.
Alan a Labour Party member in Erewash. He is a former Parliamentary Candidate in Rushcliffe and a former Borough and Town Councillor in Cotgrave and West Bridgford.
As a long standing member of the Labour Party, with over 44 continuous years membership of the party, much of it in Rushcliffe. I have no hesitation in giving my full and unequivocal support to Peter Gates. There is no way that I recognise Peter from the unfounded allegations made against him. He has always been a warm, friendly and welcoming voice in the party. I believe the allegations made against Peter of being sexist and a bully are totally unfounded. In fact I have always seen him has an inclusive member, going that extra mile in welcoming and encouraging all members, irrespective of their gender. I would hope that Peter is re-instated back into the party as soon as possible. Peter’s only crime, is that he is a solid supporter of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.
Angie is a Labour Party member in Nottingham East and was for many years the headteacher, Beckhampton Centre PRU in Nottingham City.
I have known Peter for some years both professionally through his research work on teenage pregnancy and personally through political activity. I have found him to be one of the most personable, friendly and supportive people I know and I find it unbelievable that his stance in Labour party meetings is anything but that. This decision cannot have been properly investigated.
Louise is a past president of the NUT and Chair of Nottingham East CLP. She is also Chair of Nottingham Peoples Assembly.
I have known Peter for a number of years through our work in Nottingham to build people’s involvement in the Labour Party and in campaigning to get Jeremy Corbyn elected as leader of the Party. Whenever I have campaigned with him he has worked collectively as part of a team and in a respectful way. I continue to be concerned about the time taken to deal with disciplinary cases by the Party and the apparent lack of transparency for members facing such action.
Ben is a member of Rushcliffe Labour Party, and was Membership Secretary in both Rushcliffe and West Bridgford.
The phrase ” I have never encountered such behaviour from adults before” is sadly one that rings true over and over again with my experiences within the Labour Party. Well done for standing up to so much of this awful behaviour Peter, I hope this can at last be the start of getting the whole thing sorted and some actual justice delivered.
Phil is a Labour Party member and was Head teacher of The Holgate School, Bramcote Park School and Rushcliffe School, and was until recently CEO of Trent Schools Academy Trust.t I
I am not a Corbyn sympathiser, but I like and respect Peter very much. I have never seen him but as a force for good.
Kieran is a member of Gedling Constituency Labour Party, Arnold Branch. He was for many years a mathematics teacher and Head of Mathematics at Friesland school, Sandiacre.
I have known Peter for about twenty five years, both as a friend and as a colleague. In those early years, Peter was a university tutor and I was a head of a mathematics department in a local secondary school; his support of the students on placement, his delightful sense of humour, his professionalism and his commitment to education made a strong impression on both myself and my colleagues. What also stood out at even that early stage was his strong sense of social justice – interesting to note that his book on Issues in Maths Teaching is a recommended reader on so many maths PGCE courses. Later on as a colleague at university I was able to witness this commitment at close quarters; his support of students, including those on PGCE courses, masters courses and PhD and all spoke highly of his kindness and support – including myself who was trying to make the transition from school to university, where his patience, kindness, guidance and sense of humour made that process relatively smooth.
What stands out when you meet Peter, given all those qualities above, is this strong sense of social justice, not just in terms of schools and education but in the wider world and he asks those questions of us that maybe we don’t always want to hear – but that is what makes him such a delight to know and a joy to work with.
To me, social justice is about wanting equal opportunities for all groups in society, irrespective of wealth or income, not favouring one group over another, so I find the accusation of misogyny to be quite preposterous – it would be completely at variance with everything that I know about Peter and his belief system. As to the accusation of bullying, that too I find ridiculous but I would also want to point out that it is not bullying or harassment to be asked to justify decisions or to be held to account – isn’t that what Jeremy Corbyn has been doing throughout his parliamentary career? I would also add that as a member of the Labour Party I am incredulous that expulsions of this sort can take place without the opportunity to challenge and properly defend oneself – on the back of all our Labour Party membership cards it says “ The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party, it believes that….…we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.” Clearly tolerance and respect to the few, not the many!
Tina is a member of West Bridgford Labour Party. Tina was for many years a teacher. After gaining here PhD in social justice and widening participation from the University of Nottingham, she became a social researcher and then a senior academic at Nottingham Trent University. She now works at the University of Nottingham.
I have known Peter for over 16 years and find the allegations made against him absolutely ridiculous. He is a man of integrity with a strong and unwavering commitment to social justice. To be accused of misogynistic behaviour is laughable at best! I count Peter as one of my most loyal friends – someone I can turn to for advice and who goes the extra mile. What a farcical position to be in as a result of unfounded vexatious and malicious claims. What an absolute mockery of justice that there is no appeal process. The treatment of Peter has made me question whether I want to remain a member of the Labour Party!
Ian was a member of Battersea CLP until he was expelled. He is also Secretary of Lambeth & Southwark Unite Community. You can read about Ian’s case here.
I was expelled because someone had trawled through my Facebook account and found a photograph in my featured album of when I once belonged to Left Unity. I left it there as a ‘souvenir’ of my onetime membership. I was ‘autoexcluded’ after I had resigned from Left Unity and had been an active, campaigning member of Battersea CLP for 16 months. No right of appeal. Your suspension seems equally vacuous and doubtless a pathetic exercise in weeding out socialists and Corbyn supporters.
I’ve just been looking at your website. On one hand I’m shocked, on the other not surprised at all particularly as my experience of the party since I joined in 2015 has also been of ‘non-adult’ behaviour. I also wanted to say that your site is a textbook lesson in how to make a case online. It’s excellent.
The way you’ve been treated has been appalling, Peter. Many people would walk away but credit to you for keeping going. As you say there are others who have also been treated unjustly. We must continue the campaign for major reform to Labour’s disciplinary processes.
I have known Maggie for 42 years – my entire professional career. She was the “Head of Remedial” when I started teaching in Dagenham in 1976.
Blimey!! My mouth dropped open at misogynist. Can, t think of anyone less misogynist and we go back a very long way. All power to you. Will read it all when I can do it justice.
Helen is a doctoral student I taught at the University of Nottingham
That is all so ridiculous!! Unbelievable. Glad you’re going public with it and I hope it gets resolved. Couldn’t have anything to do with your allegiance to JC of course… 🙄
Dave and I worked on the same corridor at the University for nearly 20 years.
I have only spent twenty minutes looking through stuff here and on your website and I don’t think the risk of total apoplexy will allow me to revisit it. Joseph K indeed. Don’t let the ………. grind you down. All power to you.
Ann is as member of the Labour Party in Mansfield.
Peter, I have always known what a fine comrade you are; now you have nothing but my utmost admiration for your courage in seeing this through to the end. You are doing this for all of us really because we must not let such injustices be perpetuated in our Party.
Martin is the Chair of Mansfield CLP and a long standing member of UNITE.
I’d like to encourage all members to take the time to read everything that Peter has produced. He has suffered a considerable injustice but has never given up. His exclusion is the Labour Party’s loss and should be overturned immediately
I have known Alan since we were student “leaders” in Manchester in the mid 70s
Going out tonight and have had real difficulty pulling myself away from perusing your evidence. What is clear to me is that these attempts to exclude you are all made to prevent the development and politicisation of your branch and CLP and to wrest control from the bureaucrats and careerists who see you as a threat to their positions of power. A similar thing happened to me in the 80’s with a massive increase in my branch membership (similar to yours) and an attempt to introduce political education into my branch and CLP. Many officers/officials see the membership only as fodder. They are about to get a rude awakening.
The Party is insane to lose an activist as effective as you. I do not believe any of the allegations. You have my full support. I believe that they are worried about true Socialists taking control of constituencies and increasing JC’s influence. They’re on the retreat but will try any underhand trick against activists as good as you.
Thank you for sharing this brilliant account of your completely unjust suspension. You make very clear how you and presumably hundreds of other comrades suffered horrendous consequences under the Kafkaesque bureaucracy of the Blairite heavy LP central office and NCC. You have our unconditional support and admiration for putting up such a courageous longstanding fight for justice. Your paper Malice in Wonderland is also brilliant and deserves the widest circulation amongst the membership, have you sent it to the leaders office? I wonder how Jeremy would respond? We need to all learn from yours and others examples and challenge the “culture of totalitarianism” in many CLPs and Central Office and strive to change these institutions and introduce and evolve meaningful democratic structures which highly value dialogue, empathetic listening and diversity of opinion based upon underlying comradeship and mutual respect for those in common struggle. Complete support and solidarity Peter. I can only admire your resilience, compassion, strength of conviction to truth and resistance to Kafkaesque injustice.
I have known Robyn professionally and personally for over 20 years. She is Professor of Educational Equity at the University of Canberra. As the Ozzies say, “she’s a great mate” who knows me only too well!
OMG. this is almost laughable. You lost me at point one – a misogynist bully. If they say that, then the rest is the biggest pile of hogwash I have ever seen. What a pile of shite. Sadly from the Labour party. Unbelievable. I’m just shaking my head.
I have known Richard for many years, since I recruited him to a PGCE and a subsequent PhD.
I read this last night and it really impacted me and I didn’t know how to describe the depth and breadth of emotion that I was feeling. I chose to spend time staying with these feelings, allowing me a sense of the (huge) process that you have been through with this. So, clarity has emerged and I want to say this:
1) I don’t recognise the Peter that “they” (your accusers, in general) have described at all. He simply doesn’t exist, in my experience.
2) I feel a deep sense of betrayal and (intentionally-origined) confusion on your behalf. I trust this confusion as a symptom of twisting the reality for which they denigrate you.
3) This, both aggressive and, at times, passive aggressive attack on your character feels shameful, traumatising and abusive i.e. manipulative/exploitative in nature.
4) I feel your (immense) courage in standing against such outrageous and personally-hostile behaviour, anyone could have been forgiven for saying, ‘screw you’ and walking away! And, you haven’t.
5) This leads me to feel respect for your resilience and appropriate/healthy bloody-mindedness in the face of such bile.
6). I feel admiration that you have balanced your needs with the needs of members and the party (in the long-run)…..as I say, you would have been thoroughly entitled to quit that crap!
7) I feel contemptuous and furious towards your “accusers” as the lack of substance to their claims just illustrates the quasi-ideological, vacuous and downright abusive nature of their behaviour towards.
8) I feel sad for your suffering and your hurt. Finally, the shame – I want to say, It’s *not* your shame – it’s *their* shame – shame on them!- I hope this feedback on your post and experience serves by way of support, this is how it is intended.
Hackney is Secretary of South and Shoreditch/Hackney Central Labour Party. Heather and I have known each other for a number of years in our professional capacity as mathematics educators with an international interest in equity.
Peter, I feel both sad and angry reading about how the Labour Party has treated you. I hope that they look at your case again along with all the other unjustified exclusions. In solidarity, Heather
Kevin is a member of Aldershot CLP
Thank you for posting this. Solidarity! We’ll get there
Paul is a member of Scarborough & Whitby Labour Party
I would like to show my support for Peter Gates. I feel his exclusion from the Labour Party needs to be urgently reconsidered. As an ordinary member I would be devastated should I be treated in the same manner that Mr Gates appears to have been treated.
Dave is a member of Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport Labour Party. He has experienced much of the same in his CLP – read about it here. Dave’s case is on the Other Cases of Injustice in the Party page here.
Sorry to hear of your appalling treatment at the hands of the party. It has some parallels with problems we’ve had in Plymouth. I can’t get anyone to investigate it.
Bob is a member of Derbyshire Dales CLP, and was between 1978 and 1987 a member in Rushcliffe.
This is just outrageous and shows yet again how a small bunch of recalcitrant right-wingers are now wagging the Labour Party’s tail. Having seen some of the names of the people accusing Peter I am not at all surprised at the accusations and even more convinced of his innocence. I would just add that I was in Rushcliffe CLP from 1978 to 1987 when Ken Coates was CLP Chair. He was as Left as you can be and nothing like this would have happened in the CLP in his time. With EM regional officers colouring in this travesty, I can now understand fully why CLPs in the region get such a poor service from the Regional Office