This page provides all the documentation that preceded the hearing – including the Charges Pack, my Response, witness statements on my behalf, and communication with the Party and General Secretary over the serious procedural irregularities. What you will not find here is the evidence supporting the allegations against me, because there is none. The Party chose to overlook asking for any.
My Full Response to the Charges
In addition to my analysis of the hearing, I have added below my complete response to the Party so you can make up your own mind. This includes all the allegations made against me and my complete rebuttal of those. It is a pretty long and detailed document – over 500 pages in total – because unlike the complainants against me, I provide full detailed documented evidence not unsubstantiated, fabricated and mendacious allegations and assertions.
There is another reason for making this information public. On 24th October 2016, Gordon Pattison the East Midlands Regional Director attended a meeting of West Bridgford Labour Party and said (I have a recording of the event):
The two suspended members currently will have all the paperwork and they’ll be able to share it with you and you will be able to see what I’ve seen – and some of it is disgusting, I’ll be honest with you. I’ve never seen anything like it in twenty-eight years in politics
So, I am happy to “share it with you”, in the spirit of honesty, transparency and democracy, so you too can see. I have to agree that making unfounded false allegations is disgusting; I personally have never seen anything like it in 40 years of politics. However, I suspect that is not what Gordon Pattison meant.
I provided all this to the NCC. I can only conclude they ignored it because of their desire to remove me from party activity. I believe however that complainants waive their right to anonymity once they make false allegations. Indeed were any of these allegations at all justified, my publishing them would be doing them a service. Decide for yourselves.
Response: Introduction and Executive Summary
This introduction provides a very brief overview, an index and a five page executive summary of my rebuttal of all allegations.
Response: Section A – Main Material
This section provides essential background to the case and covers the key issues which allow the reader to understand some of the history. This section also provides all the detailed documentary evidence that rebuts all allegations in the Charges Pack (Section D2). At 150 pages it is a very detailed read.
Response: Section B – Additional Material
This section contains a 100 page collection of key documents, referred to in Section A. It comprises letters, minutes of all relevant meetings, and exchanges of emails which together demonstrate very clearly that all allegations made by the complainants were fabricated. The Party chose not to investigate or look for evidence – if they had, this is what they would have found.
Response: Section C – Witness Statements
This section contains my 20 witness statements from local members, local CLP and Branch officers, City and Borough Councillors and a member of the Shadow Front Bench.
Response: Section D(1) – My Subject Access Request (SAR)
This section contains the response from the Party to my Subject Access Request as provided in the Data Protection act 1998. It is clear here the Party has withheld key significant documentation, but even so, this contains no evidence to support any allegations against me. All redaction was made by the Party before the paperwork reached me
Response: Section D(2) – The Charges Pack
This section contains the full Charges Pack that I was sent – only after two years of suspension and innumerable letters and emails. The document is a mess. It contains incorrect information, missing pages, irrelevant information, matters that relate to other people, a lack of any evidence or substantiation. In a court of law, it would have been thrown out as inadmissible. As you read it, bear in mind all allegations are fabricated in order to remove me from the Party. The more you know about the situation in Rushcliffe, the more ludicrous they will be to you.
The chair of the NCC Panel tried to intimidate my witnesses with the claim that I had no right to show parts of this to my witnesses as the charges were all confidential. We were able to point out this is indeed not the case, and is nowhere stated in Labour Party rules for very good reasons. I appreciate the sensitivity of this document, but consider it important this is transparent. Surely anyone making well-founded allegations will have no objection to the publication of this document. Only those making vexatious and false allegations will be concerned – and rightly so. In addition, the Regional Director assured local party members they would be able to see all this information. However, I have redacted home addresses which were left on by the NCC.
Response Section E – Response to Additional Material
Once my response (Intro and Sections A, B and C) was received by the Party, I received three more documents. These were very sinister. One made unfounded accusations against the CLP, another was an attempt to cover up a CLP investigation into the potential fabrication of the minutes of a key meeting, and the third – even more sinister – was an email that appears to have been forged. This section contains my response to these.
Response Section F – Communication With NEC and General Secretary Over Procedural Irregularities
This section contains a letter to the General Secretary and 10 members of the NEC over serious procedural irregularities in the procedures. No acknowledgement or reply was ever received to this letter.
Response Section G – Letter before Action
My solicitor had pointed out to the General Secretary very serious procedural irregularities in the process. This was ignored. I had made a formal complaint of harassment by the NCC. That was ignored – which is a beach of the Party’s Bullying and Harassment Guidelines. We were left with no alternative but to issue notification of legal proceedings. This section contains the Letter before action and the response from the Labour Party solicitor.