Analysis comment

3 Labour MPs owe Pidcock apology for false criticism – but wriggle and self-justify instead

MPs attacked Pidcock for not answering questions on antisemitism – but evidence showed she did
Laura Pidcock and her trio of ill-judged critics

Three Labour MPs shamed by their public attack on colleague Laura Pidcock have so far failed to make a public apology – and two even ‘doubled down’.

Ms Pidcock was accused of dodging questions about antisemitism at Durham Miners’ Gala last weekend, after a misleadingly-edited video of her and an aide complaining to journalists who focused on the issue instead of asking questions about the gala as agreed.

London MP Wes Streeting tweeted snidely about ‘get[ting] used to’ hard questions:

Streeting also retweeted similar attacks and told arch-Blairite MP Phil Wilson “You’re a good man, Phil” for his own jibe.

Wilson made a number of tweets on the topic, including one that clearly implied Pidcock had dodged the questions:

Rosie Duffield joined in along similar lines:

But it quickly emerged that the short video that was put out by a former Tory staffer was heavily edited, when another film-maker present released the full footage – and that Ms Pidcock had answered all the questions put to her at length, before her aide’s complaint that journalists had misled about the questions they intended to ask.

Laura Pidcock put out her own rebuttal:

The film-maker she referred to put out his own message to correct the record:

But none of the trio who ‘piled on’ when the 15-second edited version was released apologised. Instead, Streeting claimed he had criticised something else instead – that he disagreed with her answers:

Streeting’s response was retweeted by Duffield, but she did not comment directly.

Curiously, Phil Wilson’s response to the exposure of his poor judgment closely followed the same lines as Streetings:

But the tactic fell flat when Twitter users pointed out that, at the time the two made their original criticisms, ‘her answers’ weren’t public – they only became known this morning (Monday) when the Labour film-maker’s full footage was released.

Labour supporters took a dim view:

Both men’s attempted excuse was thoroughly “ratioed” – usually a sure sign of a disastrous tweet.

Yet again, MPs shame themselves by attacking colleagues on a flimsy – and ultimately discredited – pretext. Yet again, so-called ‘moderate’ male MPs attack a left-wing female. Yet again, the exposure of false claims on which attacks are based led to self-justification rather than apology.

Yet we’re still relentlessly fed a line by the Establishment media that misogyny and other forms of abuse are left-on-right phenomena.

Wes Streeting, Phil Wilson and Rosie Duffield were all contacted for comment and asked whether they intended to apologise. None responded.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. Sweeting needs to answer this question, “What have you done to combat Antisemitism?”

  2. We know who most of those MPs in the Labour Party are who are either cowards who go along with the Zionist bullies or who are Zionists themselves determined to destroy Corbyn.

    In either case they need to be gone from the Party. It’s up to their CLPs to do the right thing and take action to de-select them and put genuine Socialists in their place.

    We must reverse this Zionisation of the Labour Party escalated by Tony Blair.

    1. Jack , yes altho in principle I agree re the CLP responsibility the tools to do that job are severely limited IMO.
      It is up to us the membership via our Conf delegates this year to try and get some amended version of the mandatory reselection motion back on the agenda.
      The 3 yr rule prevents exactly the same worded motion coming back , but if the clever wordsmiths out there in the Party can come up with a re-vamped but still workable worded solution there is the avenue open via the CAC to get it back on , so I believe.

    2. Jack T – and when the MSM and our other enemies deliberately misread “they” as “Jews” instead of “Zionists” in your comment?
      What then? “Not my fault, Guv’nor – I knew what I meant – they distorted my meaning”

      When all the MSM are looking to crucify us on AS and the Pano-drama is hardly a week old you still just can’t fucking leave it alone, can you?
      You fucking KNOW that dog bites but you just – keep – poking it.

      Being right isn’t enough when the media is out to get us – we have to be right in a way they can’t turn back on us – not keep handing them stones to throw at us.

      1. David McNiven, your approach has been tried, has it worked?

        Refusing to recognise and identify the elephant in the room is not going to encourage it to pack its trunk and leave. Neither is my approach going to cause it to take a hike but at least by identifying it the public will be better informed.

        Zionism – the hate whose name we dare not speak… according to David McNiven.

        Will the Zionists be annoyed? you bet they will but it will give us the opportunity to fight them in the open where they can be seen.

      2. Jack T, you imply that “my approach” is craven surrender when I’m advocating the opposite.
        I want to take the fight to the lying MSM and the lying Tories and the lying Blairites.
        Notice who I left out?

      3. If Israel is a white imperialist construct – and it is – then so is every Commonwealth country.
        Indigenous people have been oppressed by the West throughout the history of the ‘civilised’ world.
        One can criticise the Israeli government’s actions without condemning Zionism – that lumps Zionists together as all having the same views and I believe they’re entitled to find that offensive.
        Some might draw the line at the wall or the nation-state law or the settlements that deny Palestinians a defensible homeland and their own self-determination and some might draw no lines.
        Some will believe that antisemitism is implicit in anti-Zionism and that it denies Israel’s right to exist.
        There will be shades of opinion in Zionism as there are everywhere – condemning Zionism and Zionists as a piece condemns all who identify as such and that must be wrong.

    1. I’d never heard of him before. His seat is Sedgefield isn’t it, was he parachuted in?

      1. No Sedgefield was Tony Blair’s seat and Phil Wilson was Blair’s election agent.

      2. I know Sedgefield was Blair’s seat but thanks to that info on Wilson re Blair.

      3. Yes, wilson’s dad was 40 years a miner, apparently. I guessing his dad took him to the gala every year for canapes and prosecco – or in the younger phil’s case, elderflower-infused sparkling mineral water.(1)

        …A bit like his idol tony b-liar sitting (2) in the Gallowgate end watching ‘Wor’ Jackie Milburn(3) beating Dixie Dean’s record.(4)

        (1) Oh, I’m sure wilson’s never claimed as much, but he lies about his fellow, near-neighbouring MP’s so I wouldn’t put it past him to *ahem* ‘wax lyrical’ about his own past.

        (2) The Gallowgate wasn’t seated until the 90’s – 30 odd years after Milburn retired.

        (3) bliar had been living in Australia at the time he (later) claimed to have been ‘sat’ in the Gallowgate end.

        (4) in fairness bliar never claimed Milburn beat Dean’s record; I added it to show what a lying bastard the rat is, and to remind everyone of the feats of football’s greatest ever goalscorer, bar none 🙂

      4. I take it all back. If football can prove a known bullshitter and war criminal guilty of padding his CV and of not being a real football fan then it is of some use after all.
        When’s the trial?

      5. Toffee
        jimmy greaves, george best, shearer, henry
        phil wilson is rarely spotted in these parts anymore,
        vexatious assistant war criminal,
        non debateable
        was he at the ‘big meeting’ i doubt it,
        if he was, what did he go as !

      6. Doug,

        Of those mentioned, only Jimmy Greaves has a better (top flight) goalscoring record.

        But Jimmy never got 60 in one season (82 in all games) and his goal/game ratio’s far smaller than Bill’s nor did Greavsie tell the nazis where they can get off when they demanded a nazi salute from the team during Everton’s tour of Germany in the Early 30’s.

        That’s ‘No Pasaran’ for ya!! You wouldn’t see weaselly screeching doing anything like that, no matter how much he stamps his feet over ‘antisemitism’.

  3. Tremendous speech at the Durham Miners Gala by Laura Pidcock MP.

    The other three aren’t worth typing a comment about.

    1. If you will permit I shall do it for you Maria… “Spineless cowards.”

      1. That’s a bit tame Albert Swift but I don’t object in the least.

  4. One could be forgiven for concluding that certain members of the PLP are intent on causing the maximum possible damage before the release of the EHRC report that Labour has committed to implementing.

    The last thing these MPs want is for Labour to have in place is a EHRC endorsed procedure for dealing with accusations of racism. They’d have to actually start attacking Corbyn on his policies (which is where their real objection to him lie) instead of all these false smears.

    How else does one explain all this anti-Semitism smear activity when (if their accusations are true) all they have to do is wait for the EHRC to get rid of JC for them.

    Could the ‘usual suspects be getting a little nervous that the EHRC won’t support their smears and will in fact condemn the McNicol regime whilst saying the current regime although not perfect has been doing its level best to sort out the mess they were left with whilst being under continual attack from disgruntled members of the former regime.

      1. We don’t really have much choice in the matter. We are going to have to embrace the results. All we can do trust in the strength of our national institutions and hope that their investigation is rigorous and impartial. If they are then we shouldn’t have too much to worry about. It may even prove to be a blessing in disguise if we end up with disciplinary procedures that are approved by the EHRC. The Tories would be forced to implement similar procedures and who knows where that might lead.

      2. Maria 16/07/2019 at 12:19 am

        Wow – That’s hot off the presses, I’m impressed.

        Thanks for the link, it’s an interesting read. Realistically we can’t expect a completely free bill of health but if we’ve been getting it anywhere near right we should have little to fear.

        The important thing is that we are found to have (for want of a better expression) our heart in the right place and, even if we haven’t got it 100% right, we are doing our best under difficult conditions to sort out any problems.It is undeniable that the current regime has done a lot to rectify the mess that McNicol made of the job.

        I guess we are all going to have to trust in their integrity

      3. SteveH, I wish I could be so optimistic. The BBC has shown a blatently biased documentary without the slightest fear of being censored for it. They have even gone on to repeat parts of it on various news outlets and have defended it without any hint or admission that any part of it could be wrong.

        How have they been able to do it? It’s because they have the confidence to know that there is hardly an official body in the UK which is not complicit in the conspiracy against Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party.

        We even have in the Party, people who have been put in position to make sure Jeremy Corbyn does not become PM and who will spin whatever story they can to misdirect the EHRC who will be willing receptors.

      4. I know Jack – But I have to try and balance my natural cynicism with a certain degree of optimism because without hope their is nothing but despair.

      5. SteveH, I had just read it so it was quick to find.

        I’m afraid my trust in so called ‘independent’ bodies is at very low point but you never know, I might be pleasantly surprised.

      6. Jack T 16/07/2019 at 1:05 am

        I have placed my faith in the membership which is why I have some optimism that the EHRC report will on balance be OK.

      7. But what are they gonna do? What powers do they have over the Labour party?

        Precisely fuck all. All they can dish out is a slap on the wrist or some other form of mild censure and their word doesn’t carry much influence outside the politico-media bubble, whose inhabitants don’t realise the wider public couldn’t care less.

      8. A few thoughts on this.

        Rebecca Hilsenrath is clearly badly conflicted. Effectively she had prejudged the issue. By the looks of things, she has recused herself, so that should be resolved.

        I have no fears about David Isaac. A city lawyer who takes up a post with EHRC clearly has a passion for justice. Many of them do, it is what brought them into the law in the first place. He is giving up income to take this role, so it isn’t about the money.

        And because of these issues, the EHRC is going to be exceptionally sensitive to accusations of bias, so will bend over backwards to be scrupulously accurate and fair.

        I have worked with the EHRC on a few things, and I have always been impressed by the commitment to justice of their staff. I could not say I am anything like 100% confident that the report won’t be a stitch up, after we saw how the OPCW has been compromised by Western establishment politics.

        But I think the biggest risk is that we know the media will take whatever minor and legitimate criticisms are made and blow them up into a vindication of their smear campaign.

      9. Given that the Jewish Chronicle lavished swooning praise on both the Chairman and the Chief executive, neither do I.

      10. An EHRC finding that Labour is not institutionally antisemitic will make it very difficult for our main (wealthiest) accusers to defend themselves in court.
        It’s always been my view that a way should have been found to have the courts (preferably the criminal courts) rule on this – I think not doing so at the earliest opportunity might turn out to have been a mistake of historic significance, sadly.

      11. We shall see. Rebecca Hilsenrath’s 2017 comments are well known, and certainly contained the sort of pre-judgment that should have excluded her from *any* part of the decision-making process. Having participated in planning committees and various complaint and disciplinary procedures in a past life, I have no doubt about the ructions that would follow parallel pronouncements about issues involved in any proceedings.

        Isaac’s connections would also raise questions about a clear and visible separation of interests in a sensitive case.

        I have felt for some time that this will be as much a test case for the EHRC as for Labour.

        But let’s wait and see.

      1. FFS Jack, we only have to win one lawsuit with big damages and the AS smears stop.
        The bonus is that the MSM is completely discredited.
        Sue the rest of the MSM and Labour is funded for a generation.

        Netanyahu? It’s about winning an election – remember?

  5. The Gala, the biggest gathering of the left in the country presented the MSM with a perfect opportunity to level the charge of being antisemitic in a party of antisemites led by an antisemite at any number of the 200,000 present . Their replies would have given the MSM great insight into the feeling of the people at he Big Meeting about the anti semetism issue.
    It strikes me as odd that the MSM chose to raise the matter with representatives of the people rather than the people themselves who were present and available for interview.

  6. sabotage by McNichol and criminality by staff is more than enough to blow out of the water any stitch up by EHRC
    all other things being equal we have nothing to worry about with investigation,
    Its upto party how they play their cards
    In addition to reselections
    need a trigger policy for mp’s who go rogue, need to be able to get rid midterm, i have no clue if this can be done by party
    need to disaffiliate JLM and LFI, bring into tent JVL
    i agree with automatic expulsion of anti semites and vexatious claiments,along lines of gross misconduct, with a limited appeals process,
    VONC next week Laura lays down challenge to TWatson week after
    when does CW get hearing and tell me Lansman will be nowhere near it
    invoice in the post

    1. Automatic expulsion! Do you actually understand what this means?
      I accuse you of having improper sexual relations with my pet poodle. You are automatically expelled. In order to be reinstated you have to appeal and prove that you did not shag Poppykins.

    2. Why automatic expulsion for those accused of antisemetism Doug? I know that this is what some members of the PLP want but if our aim is to eradicate antisemitism from society as well as the party expelling anti semites won’t advance this one inch. They will be antisemites,still making disgusting comments just not party members.
      As I have posted previously I think what we need to do is arrange special awareness training for members who have been found to have made antisemetic statements followed up my some sort of restorative justice programme where they would meet up with Jewish members ,get to know them individually and hear first hand how such comments effect them.
      This way there is a good chance the antisemite, seeing the hurt and damage they have caused could change their ways. If they don’t the option to expel remains.
      The same process should be applied to those who make malicious antisemetism complaints- training followed by meeting up with members who have been victims of malicious complaints, again with the option to expel if there is any repetition.
      Expulsion solves nothing and should be a last resort not the first port of call in respect of antisemetism or other complaints.

  7. Poor weaselly.

    Perhaps he’s finally reaching puberty, and his hormone levels are all over the place, leading him to not be fully aware of his words/actions.

    Or maybe just he’s a shithouse rat that has a problem with women who are far more popular within the party than he is.

    I’ll go for option 2 meself..

  8. Re the EHRC (having read the Morning Star article yesterday ) , perhaps it is a forgone conclusion that it will be a stitch up , I hope that the Leadership team have in place all the rebuttal options and have been planning for this as a virtual guaranteed outcome.
    It is sadly ,to me, unsurprising just how far the tentacles of influence have gone into our society , from the Zionist Netanyahu Govt .The Jewsish people deserve so much better than Netanyahu IMO some one who isn’t hell bent on racism and destruction , but peace and co-exisitence/understanding and accommodation .
    It will be interesting to see just how the results of this investigation compares to the findings of the Shami Chakrabarti report.
    If there are wildly differing findings then that in itself is open to conjecture as to why …
    Also of note is that the organisation that bought the case ( Campaign Against Antisemitism ) to the EHRC is not exactly a bastion of unbiased and level argument .
    Their website lists only 3 of the BOD there are 5 more but are not listed due to privacy reasons, why is that , what have they to hide , so we don’t know who they are .
    One of the many Headlines on their site is …

    “BBC Panorama’s exposé of Jeremy Corbyn’s meddling in antisemitism cases is further evidence that he is racist and unfit for office”

    Well for a NGO and registered as a charitable incorporated organisation on 1 October 2015 it seems a pretty much like all the other MSM if you ask me in its cool ,level , FACTUAL , balanced reporting of the FACTS ,,, NOT

    Hence my somewhat cynical conclusion that this EHRC will be nothing more than a window dressing exercise of impartiality .
    BUT it will find against Labour in no doubt very but extremely subtitle damaging ways.
    We can only keep pointing to the facts of the many findings done so far which indicate that Labour has no more and slightly less AS than our society as a whole and this MUST be hammered home by the Leadership , it’s team, and us the membership.

      1. Didnt know much about Laura but any criticism from the scum,can only be veiwed as accreditation for me.I will look with Interest from now on regarding Laura pidcock….unusual name,…..good luck to Laura and watch your back from double barrel Bailey!

  9. Like the rich and powerful they hate that we are getting organised.
    Just need to remain calm and rational and select 620 left wing democratic socialist PPCs who will back JC and a transformative Labour Govt to the hilt.
    But analyse our Right opponents – they are generally poorly read, frightened of being radical, timid (but the myth that you can only win from the centre was destroyed by the Corbyn surge), some have some self interrest (make a cosy living and just toss a few crumbs to working people) and they enjoy fighting the Left (whilst we see them as a nuisance like a noisy neighbour) you would almost pity them if some of them did’t act like Right Wing Barbarians.
    Labour is for all diverse working people including the 1.1% Jewish citizens who experienced Hate Crimes in 2018 plus the 4.4% Muslims, 7.9% Disabled and 14% LGBT. Labour & Unions will be on the front line fighting alongside you and we can say to our detractors – WHERE WERE YOU?

  10. The EHRC report on the Labour Party is absolutely crucial for the Zionist lobby.
    The Chair and Chief Executive of the commission are appointees of the Conservative government and, I quote, ,’prominent members of the Anglo a Jewish community’. If the Commission, therefore, gives the Labour Party a clean bill of health it will be a kick in the teeth for the Zionist lobby from which it can never recover, and will exonerate the Party from every accusation over the last three years.
    Given what is at stake, I believe it would require more than super human strength and integrity on the part of EHRC officials to resist the massive pressures that will be brought to bear.
    So, batten down the hatches!

    1. Ceredig, the more people who conspire in the lie the more people to sue for damages and the more careers ruined – and the movie will make ten times as much.
      “You can [only] fool all the people some of the time.”

      1. Firstly, there is a longstanding tradition in the Labour movement that we do not wash our dirty linen in the courts.
        Secondly, we have very limited financial resources.
        Thirdly, the Zionist lobby has effectively unlimited financial resources.
        Fourthly, quite a few people have been libelled, some of them are suing, who are they suing? That’s right, the Labour Party!
        No point taking bankrupting legal action in a hostile legal system.

      2. Ceredig – heard of crowdfunding?
        “Longstanding tradition” be fucked.
        Evidence for the UK judiciary being hostile to Labour or to truth please.

    2. If as seems to be the case there is a conflict of interest and clear prejudice in relation to senior people in the EHRC battening down the hatches won’t help. If the EHRC issue an unfavourable report it will be too late then to point out the conflict of interest and prejudice. This needs to be done now openly and publicly and the reasons for our concerns spelled out plainly.
      This investigation if not carried out honestly has the potential to do a lot of damage and we have to take whatever steps necessary to ensure we get a fair hearing.

      1. Or maybe, just maybe the EHRC will condemn the McNicol regime whilst saying the current regime although not perfect has been doing its level best to sort out the mess they were left with whilst being under continual attack from disgruntled members of the former regime.

    3. On May 28th the EHRC announced that it was opening a formal investigation into the Labour Party and its handling of allegations of anti-semitism (NOT investigating individual cases), and lo and behold, they just announced it again yesterday. I think THAT tells us all we need to know about the EHRC. I’m pretty sure it was widely reported by the MSM at the end of May, but it was of course overshadowed by the Alistair Campbell story – ie him being expelled from the LP for voting for the LibDems (or so he claimed….. he probably didn’t vote at all). So anyway, they obviously figured that there’s no harm in announcing it again!:

      1. Reply to Steve
        The major problem with the terms of reference is that EHRC will look at how complaints were dealt with under Iain McNichiol former General sec as well as currently.
        It is absolutely clear than in the past neither Iain nor his staff dealt with complaints in a timely manner ,
        This and other deficiencies which occurred under his watch will simply be reported as having been found and Jennie Formby will be blamed by the media, elements of the PLP and the Tories.
        We need to ensure we have all the facts and figures available to show how things have improved under Jennie despite the time wasted due to the mass submission of complaints by Margaret Hodge approx 80% of which related to non members over whom we have no control.

      2. David McNiven
        Fri, 28 Jun, 18:57
        to LPI

        Any report on alleged Labour Party anti-semitism that failed to address the issues brought to light by the four parts of the Al-Jazeera documentary “The Lobby” would be deficient in scope.
        Whilst not superficially related to any individual allegations the question of possible political motivation of accusers cannot be ignored or discounted in the circumstance of a political party – my political party – accused of such foulness.
        If EHRC’s remit does not allow such consideration then it must recuse itself and a different forum must be sought.
        When unlawful discrimination is alleged the accuser’s right to fair recourse must not outweigh the right of the accused to defend itself from false accusations.
        Speaking as a non-legally-trained private citizen my contention is that the Courts are the appropriate forum to judge the merits of this matter, upon which the democratic process may stand or fall.

        David McNiven

      3. Anyone else wishing to make a submission to the EHRC can do so by emailing

        Subject: Investigation into The Labour Party

        Solid proofs, or possibly witness testimony concerning the motivations of the actors in the Pano-drama programme – or proof of falsehood on the part of any other accusers might be particularly helpful.

  11. Ultraviolet 16/07/2019 at 8:01 am I really hope your confidence is well placed and that the temporary undertaking to suspend income from his employers , knowing that he will return to it , will guarantee impartiality . BUT …..

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: