In the (slightly censored) words of John Wayne: “Who wrote this sh!{?”

It seems a confidential report on a Labour Party investigation into allegations of abuse and intimidation against MP Angela Eagle and her staff by members of Wallasey Constituency Labour Party has been leaked to the press, after it was used to persuade Labour’s National Executive Committee to support the claims.

But does it stand up to scrutiny? One of the main claims was that Ms Eagle was subjected to homophobic abuse at a meeting of Wallasey CLP on June 24 this year.

Tessa Jowell, speaking on the BBC’s Daily Politics on July 8, said: “I talked to Angela [Eagle] about her meeting. She faced homophobic abuse at that meeting.”

But Angela Eagle did not attend that meeting and in addition – well, read this:

The confidential report on the investigation into Wallasey Constituency Labour Party says: “The investigation has found that some members have truthfully claimed that homophobic instances occurred during the AGM. Others truthfully said that they were not aware of those instances.

“It is possible for the events to have occurred without the knowledge of all members. The allegations are not that the CLP is institutionally homophobic or that members were aware of homophobia but took no action, but are specific to individuals. These allegations will be reported to the Disputes Panel regarding individual disciplinary action.”

It seems unlikely that Ms Eagle would have actually faced homophobic abuse if the alleged comments could only be heard by a certain number of people, while many others truthfully told Labour’s inquiry they never heard any such words at all.

While it is not acceptable that Labour members utter homophobic words – or any that single out a member of a particular group for abuse – the claim was that Ms Eagle was subjected to abuse by Labour members, and this is demonstrably false.

There is a connected claim that Ms Eagle received “hundreds of ‘abusive, homophobic and frightening’ messages from party members.” Considering the size of Wallasey CLP, this suggests that every member – or as near as makes no odds – sent abuse to her. Does this seem even remotely likely? Has anybody checked whether the messages came from Wallasey Labour members – or indeed, from Labour members at all?

It is entirely possible that one or two members behaved in this way – but the numbers described in the report? No.

Another claim was that Wallasey Labour members had thrown a brick through Ms Eagle’s constituency office window at Sherlock House:

“Untrue rumours were subsequently spread that the building was occupied by many companies and the window was in an unrelated stairwell. This was based on a Companies House search which found that the landlord had a number of companies registered there; in fact the only other occupant is the landlord on the upper floor. Once this incorrect rumour was spread, members repeated it as clear evidence that Angela Eagle was lying. This is categorically untrue.”

And see this:

The report said: “It’s highly likely that the brick thrown through the window of Angela Eagle’s office was related to her leadership challenge. The position of the window made it very unlikely that this was a random passer-by.” It said that claims it could have been targeting another company and Ms Eagle was “lying” about being targeted are “categorically untrue”.

Here’s a photograph of the broken window, along with the part of Sherlock House that it illuminates:

And here’s a video clip of Sherlock House, taken shortly after the incident, showing the locations of the stairwell and Ms Eagle’s constituency office (which is on another side of the building):

It is very clear that the brick (or whatever projectile was used; it was never recovered) certainly did not go through a window in Angela Eagle’s office.

Meanwhile, police concluded an investigation into the incident without identifying any suspect or motive for the crime. They say there is not enough evidence – so why is Labour’s NEC so keen to point the finger?

And, if a brick was thrown into the building, why was so much broken glass found on the ground outside?

Put it all together and this report is impossible to take seriously. You’d have to be stupid to accept the allegations in the report rather than the visual evidence.

And what does that suggest about all the other claims in this document?

Source: What the report into allegations of abuse in Wallasey Labour Party says – Liverpool Echo

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here: