Exclusive: Liverpool councillor Small dismisses claims by 5 witnesses of ‘bullying’ and discrimination toward disabled black woman as ‘politically motivated’

‘Blatantly discriminatory’ Nick Small also ‘barracked’ and showed ‘intimidatory’ behaviour toward another black woman and refused to be quiet when his interruptions prevented deaf woman member hearing a meeting, say witnesses in submissions to party. Small denies the claims

‘Politically motivated’: Cllr Nick Small has dismissed concerns of black members and others about his alleged behaviour to them

A right-wing Labour councillor who, even before Jeremy Corbyn became Labour leader, dismissed left-wingers in the party as ‘dinosaurs’ has been accused of ‘bullying’, ‘aggressive’ and ‘antagonising’ behaviour toward a disabled black woman member during a meeting of Liverpool Riverside constituency Labour party (CLP), by four separate witnesses at the meeting.

He has told the SKWAWKBOX that he denies the claims.

During a meeting of the CLP in early 2019, Small was singled out as behaving ‘especially’ badly toward a black woman member with limited hearing, who had been denied a microphone for the speakers and was struggling to hear what was being said.

According to witness statements seen by SKWAWKBOX, Small and his group – but ‘especially’ Small – talked constantly throughout a meeting despite requests to keep order – and ‘heckled’ and ‘barracked’ another black woman speaker who complained, through the meeting’s chair, about the conduct of the huddle of right-wingers of whom Small was a part. But witnesses say that he also continued his behaviour toward the woman after the meeting, in a way they felt was ‘intimidatory’.

The partially-deaf black woman member had informed the meeting that she was struggling to hear because of the lack of a microphone and because her hearing aid batteries had run out, yet witnesses say that even as she spoke, the ‘chattering and giggling’ of Small and his group continued.

One witness felt that Small’s behaviour was ‘blatantly discriminatory’ when the woman member had made clear her disability was causing her to struggle.

Another witness described Small’s behaviour and that of another right-wing – but ‘in particular’ Small – during and after the meeting as ‘disturbing’, ‘aggressive’ and ‘deliberately antagonising’.

A fourth witness described being ‘appalled’ at the conduct of Small and his cohort, which he considered to be ‘complete disregard and abuse’ for the disabled black woman. So disgusted at the conduct was the witness that they resigned from the party in protest.

A fifth described the treatment they had witnessed of the partially-deaf woman as ‘nothing short of bullying’

Breach of confidentiality

A separate complaint against Cllr Small alleged that he had read out a confidential disciplinary letter about a woman pensioner member to a group of people on an RMT picket line, with the complainant demanding to know how he had obtained the letter since it would not have been circulated to him in the course of CLP or party business. The member in question felt that she had been damaged by Small’s decision to read out the letter in public to a group of union members.

Labour enjoins all those receiving information concerning disciplinary cases to keep all information confidential.


The SKWAWKBOX contacted Cllr Small for comment. At first he demanded to know “how many of these” making the statements were still party members. When told SKWAWKBOX didn’t know, he replied “Well there you go then”. When asked whether their membership or otherwise excused his alleged conduct, the councillor denied any knowledge of the events in question, saying:

I completely dispute that, I’ve never bullied anyone in my life and this is a completely vexatious and politically-motivated complaint.

He additionally claimed that he had the disciplinary letter from the complainant and did not remember it being a picket line where he read it out.

In spite of the long period since the witness statements were submitted to the party, Labour does not appear to have pursued an investigation.

Cllr Small has, in the past, indicated in tweets that he believes dismissing as false or politically-motivated the concerns, complaints or ‘lived experience’ of those who make complaints of discriminatory behaviour is a facet of the same discrimination or racism and has said that it’s ‘not up to me’ to define discrimination felt by those of a different ethnicity.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to without hardship, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

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


  1. Starmer is ok with bullying as long as the victim is not Berger, Smeeth, Elman, whom the electorate rejected.

    Bullying Dianne Abbot and black people is fine with Starmer🔴🔴🔴

    1. Bullying and injustice towards Jews of faith and none, who speak out against the disingenuous hollow words of SIR Starmer & co, and against all who condemn his and his gang’s disgusting utterly atrocious insult to the precious memory of the many who suffered and died in the Holocaust, has been and is committed directly and indirectly by SIR Starmer, Evans & vile cabal. That is my firm view based on overwhelming evidence in the public domain.

      SIR Starmer, is the type picked out to guard the same old same old. They lack ethical restraint. They have an arid desert instead of a conscience. Starmer tries to hide that ethical depravity with thousands and thousands of bespoke stitching & sewing.
      He fools some.

      His type have ZERO care for any race nor faith. Their ONLY concern is keeping money and power for the 1%. Their sort are neither new nor localised. Their degenerate behaviour is recorded throughout the history of the world.

      That sort no matter of what race or faith, will abuse, maim then murder their own mothers just to gain and keep money and power for themselves.

      That has ALWAYS been the case. It is not our job to convert them. Just as well, because we can’t. Moreover, they are a minority. We are many. They are few. A few who have CHOSEN to protect the interests of even fewer. We have choices just as they have.

      That is all.

    2. And for that matter, neither, Berger, Smeeth, or Ellman were ever bullied. All that happened was that some people stood up to each of them when they smeared Corbyn as an antisemite, even though he’d never done a damn thing to deserve it.

      None of those three were going to let it go at just having their views heard- they weren’t going to settle for anything short of Corbyn losing the leadership, his supporters being purged, and exactly the sort of vicious, vindictive antidemocratic oppression campaign being launched in the party as the one Keir has launched now. None of those three were confronted over their Jewishness and they had no call to imply that that had anything to do with it.

      The absolute worst moment in all of this was Berger’s disgusting tear festival in the HoC- the one where she brought up death threats and abusive messages received on her constituency office email and clearly implied that Corbyn and his supporters were responsible for those- even though those were from 2012- THREE YEARS before Corbyn was overwhelmingly elected leader- and even though the Metropolitan Police investigation found that all of them were sent by right-wing extremists- by exactly the sort of people Corbyn- unlike anyone on the Labour Right- had spent his entire political career combatting.

      1. TOTALLY agree č u kenburch. Thanks for the vital clarification.

        Berger, Smeethe and Ellman were not bullied. I am yet to hear a single shred of substance to their claims.

        If there was substance, i would have heard it as they were all often on the radio LBC and BBC 5Live in particular. Berger specifically was indulged with several HOURS of MSM coverage to put lay on her allegations. On one particular occasion she was on for an hour on a DOUBLE hour slot with an extremely biased presenter.

        I heard nothing that justified her attempts to smear Jeremy. She and the host smeared themselves.

        Berger herself admitted that of all the thousands of abusive people, i think SIX were charged or convicted but FOUR were from the RIGHT and two who she claimed were from the left, she admitted were NOT Labour members. The biased presenter moved on⛔️

        Nuff said. Thanks for your clarification, detail and prompt. Many minds make light work even of heavy weights and high hurdles.

        True COLLECTIVE effort!!! Long may it continue ✨✨✨

  2. “call me any name you like, I will never deny it”……… allegations; accusations & facts?

    1. the first i heard of the extent of horrendous abuse dianne abbot suffered was after the amnesty report. she from amnesty’s research was abused more than all other mps combined.

      1️⃣ – why did we have to wait for amnesty international to report that abuse?

      2️⃣ – why was their insufficient sustained presentation of that confirmation of facts. not vague über theatrical unsubstantiated claims?

      3️⃣ – why, with this and more, there was zero robust rebuttals of the a-s lies?

      sir starmer’s utterly disgraceful deafening silence and racist inaction re this open racism except to encourage it by his failure to condemn the behaviour and suspend the guilty, is proof to me that he is a racists. it is clear by starmer’s action and inaction he is happy to allow racists under his watch.

      starmer was unfit. starmer is unfit. save for a damascene marvel, sir starmer will remain unfit. judge him by his actions and inactions, not his obviously hollow false words.


      1. “was there” and other errors i’m sure. apologies💐💐💐

      2. … is proof to me that starmer is a racist. not racists. 💐💐💐

      3. Just think, we thought that the tapeworms AS rubbish was over, worse has reared it’s unhinged head. RW Labour has always had a poor reputation with racism. Now they feel so secure that they parade their venom to anyone who is listening. Never mind it’s just a moment. How many innocents are rotting behind the bars of our private prisons? Who is culpable, not our Max Headroom. There is no centre, just them and us. Get your jabs while they are free, well freer than us especially those still members of the party. ☮️

      4. signpost asked:

        ‘why, with this and more, there was zero robust rebuttals of the a-s lies?’

        But there WAS!

        But each and every time Ken Livingstone, for example, tried to explain that he was stating an historical fact when he said that ‘Hitler was supporting Zionism’, he was just vilified and condemned again, albeit completely phony and confected vilification and condemnation. And he was of course promptly suspended for alleged anti-semitism when he initially said it in the radio interview with Vanessa Feltz.

        And then there was Chris Williamson, who defended the LPs record on fighting anti-semitism AND got pilloried and castigated for saying the LP has apologised too much AND was ALSO suspended for alleged A/S.

        And then there was Jeremy, who was suspended for stating the truth – ie that the ‘scale of the problem (of A/S in the party) has been dramatically overstated by political opponents inside and outside the party and the media’. And he ALSO denied that he laid a wreath on the grave of terrorists (but was just accused of lying anyway)……

        The reality is – and signpost KNOWS it – that anyone who refuted the A/S claims and allegations was just condemned as being in denial and, as such, part of the problem, and he is yet AGAIN lying through his teeth when he asserts that there were ‘zero’ rebuttals. The WHOLE of the MSM conspired in the A/S black propaganda op against Jeremy and his allies and the left membership and they were NEVER-EVER going to give the very people they were smearing the opportunity to expose the very lies and falsehoods that THEY – along with the Jewish newspapers and the JLM and CAA and LAA and BoD et al – were disseminating to tens of millions of people.

      5. When Jeremy held up a document during the leaders debate saying that it was proof that Johnson and the Tories were planning to sell off the NHS to US corporations, his enemies quickly came up with the Big Lie that he got the document from the Russians, and did so of course to smear and discredit not only HIM, but the document as well. Needless to say, the MSM et al were well aware that it was a Big Lie.

        Yeah, if only Jeremy had been MORE ‘robust’ in his denial that he got it from the Russians the MSM would have agreed with him. As if!!!

      6. Now if only Jeremy had been more robust in his rebuttal, the following could have been the front-page headline and first paragraph in the Sun, or the Daily Mail or the Express:

        ‘Jeremy Corbyn’s Robust Rebuttal’

        Last night Mr Corbyn, the leader of the Labour Party, made such a robust rebuttal of our claim that he got the document about the NHS from the Russians that we now have to concede that it was a falsehood and a big lie concocted and designed to smear and discredit him, and the document itself of course. Such robustness is impossible for us to withstand and, as such, we freely admit that we’re a bunch of lying fascist scumbags.

  3. These kind of people are buried deep in the vitals of the LP, and I wonder whether those comrades staying to fight fully understand what they are dealing with.

    1. john thatcher
      Political parties should be no different to any other organisation and subject to the same discipline and dismissal codes
      You would think we would have the best in the world considering our union connections
      What can never be discounted is how corrupt we are, its human nature

    2. Tapeworms are fatal. The host will collapse and just the parasites will survive.

    1. He looks as if he’s accepted Dudley Dursley as his role model- and possibly as his “Personal Lord And Savior”.

      Probably bought that suit will all the milk money he knicked from smaller kids every day.

  4. Starmer and his cronies are closet Racist where is the outrage. JC was called A/S Diane Abbott was ridiculed on Q/T BY 2 nasty racists Bruse/Oakshott along with a fucking tory audiance Labour has more tory values now and dosn’t represent the working class anymore or they would have got rid of these parasites,Just found out TOMMY ROBINSON IS GOING TO JOINED THE L/P

    1. BRIAN61 – “Starmer and his cronies are closet Racist”.

      If they are in a closet of racists then that closet is made of a most transparent invisible material.

      Sir Starmer and cabal of coup plotters and saboteurs of a TRUE Labour Party’s TWO GE victories 2017 and 2019 as openly racist.

      All races are equal. Starmer has not only dismissed the documented abuse suffered by black and brown races but suspended and allowed abuse to those who speak out against his racism and bigotry.

      Starmer has facilitated the protection and encouragement of racism and abuse by abusing many Jewish people who speak out and write against the open racism of the “Stop Corbyn” cabal.

      Starmer’s operators have been and continue to be on a fishing expedition to exclude and abuse anyone against their open deceit including very many Jewish people.

      From my viewpoint Starmer and his cabal are not in the closet. They are open, arrogant, determined, unreconstructed racist of the worst sort. The KNOW what they do.


    2. How can that be possible? Highly implausible even as a joke. No, just no!

  5. This is firm evidence that Black lives don’t matter and BAME racism doesn’t count in our party. The only racism Labour recognises is antisemitism. We rightly have zero tolerance of it but bigots can do what they like on our BAME members and the party will not lift a finger to defend them or take any sanctions against the bigots. Can you imagine the MSM’s and Starmer’s reactions if the victim here had been Jewish. There would have been a justified public outcry and suspensions and expulsions all round but because the victim is black – nothing. Racism is wrong and it doesn’t matter if the victim is Black Arab or Jewish .There is no hierarchy of racism . We need to stamp it all out but are making no effort whatsoever when it is directed at our BAME brothers and sisters because as I said at the start of this post Black Lives Don’t Matter.

  6. Here is how some “Politically Motivated” complains work.

    It goes:
    – You’re a bully, you should leave.
    – Who do you support?
    – The other side.
    – Ah ha! Politically motivated!
    – Yeah but, I support the other side *specifically* because you are a bully and they’re not. If you weren’t a bully, maybe I’d support you?

    But the last part is always lost on them.

  7. Oh, what a lovely piece of work, allegedly racist and hates disabled people so a normal right-wing attitude appears… So just your average cultist of new Labour 2.0 I feel sorry for the good people of Liverpool having to put up with this sort of BS.

  8. South Shields Labour party must comply with these rules, or else, do they think the members are children?
    1) No comments made under the breath, or to members during meetings.
    2) No raised voices or comments made in anger.
    3) No dismissive body language, including eye-rolling, tutting or head shaking whilst someone is speaking.
    4) No comments that make reference to personal characteristics, such as age, experience, gender or individual personal politics.
    5) No action which may be interpreted as aggressive physical behaviour, regardless of whether that was the intent, for example, finger pointing at other members.
    Those who display this kind of behaviour are being warned they would face sanctions.
    These include:
    A written warning which would remain on their file;
    Suspension from the party

  9. Now we can compare how corrupt Temporary Embarrassment is compared to the Tartan Tory wee Jimmy Krankie
    Legal advice consistently told her they would lose the case, result they lost the case and cost the taxpayer £600,000
    Temporary Embarrassment former DPP ignores legal advice that the party could win the case, result they conceded the case, cost to party £600,000
    One party was forced to publish the legal advice today and it wasn’t Labour
    Are we saying there is sfa we can do

  10. All going off in Liverpool again, this evening. Follow Liam Thorp, on twitter.

    1. Is it just me, or does anyone else think that nick griffin small looks like de piffle’s chief arse-kisser, harry cole?

      Definitely reminds me of someone from the media I don’t like.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: