Analysis Announcement Breaking comment

Vaz found guilty of ‘sustained’ bullying – but still not suspended by Labour

And why was he allowed to run – and blow – recent by-election?

Former Labour MP Keith Vaz has been found guilty of ‘sustained and unpleasant bullying’ toward a member of Commons staff, leaving an ‘enduring psychological impact’ on her, by an official ‘Independent Expert Panel’ (IEP) inquiry.

Vaz is no longer an MP, having been automatically deselected as a result of his suspension from Parliament in 2019 for expressing ‘willingness’ to procure cocaine’ for sex workers and failing to cooperate with an investigation – but the IEP has recommended in its findings that he never be allowed another pass onto the parliamentary estate.

Vaz has never been suspended by Labour, despite the string of findings against him, and indeed has served this year as the party’s ‘campaign coordinator’ in Leicester East, where he was accused of ‘hijacking’ the Humberstone and Hamilton by-election campaign – and blew it, with Labour fielding an unlisted candidate, losing disastrously and locals from other constituencies claiming to have been discouraged from helping to campaign.

Labour won the seat in the last local government elections with more than 2,000 votes – but in the by-election this year the party’s tally fell to below 800, behind the Tories’s 1,062.

Labour allowed his supporters in Leicester East to name him the CLP’s ‘honorary president’ – a role that doesn’t exist in the party’s rules. Vaz also serves as the CLP’s representative on the area’s ‘local government committee’.

A CLP tweet referring to Vaz as ‘Hon President’, a non-existent role

Vaz has been involved in a string of other scandals during his career, from helping his wife conceal payments in the Hinduja scandal to making false allegations against a former policewoman.

Yet despite the IEP report’s findings, Skwawkbox understands that Vaz has still not been suspended by Labour – whose press office said this afternoon that it was not able to comment.

At a time when Labour conference delegates are being suspended on a whim by the party despite the stress and cost it causes them, as Labour scrambles to protect Starmer sidekick David Evans from democracy, a ‘sustained’ bully has still not been suspended, despite a long list of previous ‘form’ including offering to buy drugs for sex workers.

The IEP also rejected claims by Vaz’s medical adviser that he was too ill to participate in the inquiry, because it said that ‘publicly available material’ showed h had continued to be publicly and politically active.

However, Vaz’s office has claimed about the proceedings and findings, “He has never seen the report, nor has he had the chance to question any witnesses or provide a response” and that he had been denied the opportunity to bring witnesses or respond to the charges.

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. There’s a particular tag at end of article that vaz “the waz’ deserves – a life ban from the party.

  2. “He has never seen the report, nor has he had the chance to question any witnesses or provide a response” and that he had “been denied the opportunity to bring witnesses or respond to the charges.”
    I’ve been trying to recall – Haven’t one or two other people been finding that they haven’t seen a report of their alleged conduct, have been denied the opportunity to bring witnesses or to attend a hearing to respond to charges? I think it was in some UK political party or other.

  3. Vaz seems to be up to his ears in sleeze and corruption, but no matter. He finds favour with Starmer’s clique. His conduct reminds me of that of a certain former leader of Islington council who called Jeremy Corbyn “a f@cking antisemite” during his leadership and got away with this, without so much as a warning.

    It seems that if your politics are RIGHT you will not be LEFT on the sidelines to face disciplinary charges and exclusion. The untouchables indeed.

    1. jobsworth description

      flexible, eager to please, clubbable, biddable, hard career ambitions with soft responsibilities, averse to ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses, sensitive and nimble when faced with climate changes and shape shifting, embrace advantageous opportunities while evading low reward demands from constituents. Only recruit office staff who display stress behaviour (if the client can’t be helped their disappointment will be defused).

  4. Apologies for being off topic.

    Did any one see the picture in the tweet from John Edwards (@JohnEdwards33) that Damien Willey (@KernowDamo) had retweeted:

    “The only one in the room who couldn’t be bothered to comb his hair and wear a mask is the arrogant pig from the UK.
    Total embarrassment.”

    I would’ve described “BlowJob” as a fucking arrogant scummy twunt myself. What I don’t understand is why the others in the room allowed such arrogance!

  5. Hes a very medicre politician the ‘moderates’ know they can rely on to deliver the results required. When sent to oversee Internal Elections and deliver the result ‘moderates’ want ie the right candidate gets selected the Left remains on the subs bench, so theres little or no chance of him being suspended its not like the Labour rules apply to the right

  6. I used to like him because he once bought me a kebab on a Newham 8 demo – but for me his worse moment was the balls up he made about Chris Williamson, when he found him not guilty of “anti-Semitism” & then changed his mind because he thought that was what the Party wanted but then it seems it didn’t and … what? was he glue sniffing?

  7. Vaz loves nothing more than he loves himself. He preens and postures thinking himself to be suave and erudite – a bit like Hodge. His part in the Chris Williamson affair was not a balls up. It was an utter disgrace, not just on his part but on the part of the LP too. Once a committee makes a decision it cannot be rescinded without going through the correct channels. The correct channel is NOT for some buffoon to say that he has changed his mind. Williamson should have been subject to the original decision and Vaz should have been expelled for bringing the party into disrepute by virtue of his utter incompetence (or maybe it was venality). I could have been more critical but I’m feeling magnanimous today.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: