Analysis Announcement Breaking News

Starmer and co still won’t release Forde report – but plan to name people they THINK leaked original report on right-wing staff conduct

Members kept in dark about conclusions of inquiry, but despite saying it doesn’t know who leaked the original Labour report, Starmer and Evans plan to name five supposed leakers, despite telling court it doesn’t know who did it

Keir Starmer and his sidekick David Evans are planning to accuse five former Labour staff of leaking a report on the behaviour of right-wing staffers during Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership – despite having told a court that they’re unable to say with any certainty who did leak it.

Starmer and his gangsters are still withholding the Forde report on the contents of the leaked document and the conduct it revealed, claiming this is because of an Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) investigation – even though the ICO said it has no problem with the report being released and had not requested any delay – keeping party members in the dark even though the Forde investigation was supposed to be released more than a year ago.

But they’re quite happy to name five people who in all likelihood had nothing to do with the leak.

The right-wing regime is accusing Seumas Milne, Karie Murphy, Georgie Robertson, Harry Hayball and Laura Murray as the leakers to try to get out of being sued by the right-wing staffers accused in the report, who are claiming their confidentiality was breached when the report containing WhatsApp messages and emails stored on the party’s computer system.

Current and former Labour members and the general public need to know whether the Labour right is racist and abused black MPs and others, whether right-wing staff sabotaged the 2017 general election, diverted election funds into their own projects and all the other allegations in the original leaked report.

Instead, as Skwawkbox predicted well over a year ago, Starmer and co are primarily pursuing the leakers – and are so desperate to divert attention that they are ready to accuse people with no proof.

The party admitted in court earlier this year – when right-winger Emilie Oldknow was trying to force it to name names – that they couldnt prove who was responsible for the leak. But now, as a statement from Carter Ruck, the legal firm acting for the wronged left-wing staff point out, they were due to make exactly that accusation in another court this afternoon – an accusation the party’s victims strenuously deny and that the party has failed even to properly describe in its documents:

In documents to be filed at the High Court during the course of today, the Labour Party will name the above-mentioned individuals as having been responsible for the leaking, in April
2020, of a Labour Party-commissioned Report entitled “The work of the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit in relation to antisemitism, 2014 – 2019”.

All five individuals were employees of the Party at the time in question. They strenuously deny, and have consistently denied, any involvement or complicity in the leak whatsoever. They also deny having any knowledge of who was responsible. As such, the individuals will vigorously defend themselves in the proceedings and will seek full reimbursement of their costs of doing so from the Party.

To the extent that the Labour Party has explained its proposed action, it is clear that it will be naming the individuals in an attempt to deflect on to them its own liability in claims brought by a group of Claimants who are suing the Party over the leak as well as the Party bringing a related claim direct against the five.

The Party apparently admits that its case against the individuals is purely circumstantial and inferential, but has failed even to set out that case properly in correspondence, despite its obligations to do so under the relevant Court Protocol.

Earlier this year, the High Court rejected an application (by a Claimant who was intending to sue the Labour Party over the leak) for a disclosure order requiring the Party to name those the Party considered responsible (the decision is currently under appeal). In those proceedings, the Party acknowledged to the Court that there was no “smoking gun” evidence to prove who leaked the report, and the Party’s solicitor stated to the Court that the Party “does not claim to know definitively and with absolute certainty the identity of the person(s) responsible”.

Rejecting the application, the Judge noted that the Party’s position that the individuals were responsible for the leak was “highly contentious”. The Court expressed its concern that the naming of the individuals by the Party (the position of which the Judge made clear was not neutral) in the manner anticipated in the application could cause “potential injustice” and “the risk that innocent persons” would be identified.

There is nothing to suggest that the Party has any more “evidence” implicating the five individuals now, than it had in March.

A spokesperson for the five said:

The individuals entirely reject these baseless claims. They did not leak the report. They fully cooperated with the Party’s investigation by an independent external investigator, and with the inquiry led by Martin Forde QC. They understand that neither of those investigations concluded that they were responsible.

The Party has already acknowledged in court that it cannot be certain who leaked the report and that its “case” against them is circumstantial. But it is now trying to make them foot the bill for legal action brought against it.

The Party should be focussing [sic] on the deeply troubling evidence contained with the leaked report, rather than trying to wrongly scapegoat and victimise former staff who documented it, and who have not been accused by either of the independent investigations.

Starmer and Evans have already shown utter contempt for the Forde report and the members and voters waiting for it, by capitulating in an earlier case against right-wing staff named in the leaked report, against the advice of lawyers who said the party was likely to win its case.

That surrender cost the party more than £600,000 in an out of court settlement – and a right-wing member of Labour’s national executive admitted last month that Labour’s near-bankruptcy has much to do with the more than two million pounds it is paying yearly in legal fees.

The leadership went on to pour even more contempt by re-admitting some of the right-wing staff who feature in the leaked report to party membership, despite Forde’s conclusions on their conduct being unknown.

A Labour insider told Skwawkbox:

It seems [Starmer and Evans’s] appetite for spaffing money up the wall in court is endless, but it’s especially cowardly to be accusing other staff when they’ve already admitted they can’t prove anything.

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. IIRC Mike Sivier’s case was to do with who leaked his personal data. The party said they couldn’t find the person responsible (sound familiar?) and the judge ruled that the party weren’t liable if the exact culprit couldn’t be found.

    In essence they’re hoping another ‘not me guv’ will put the kybosh on everything and that hurling out accusations will deflect from their shithousery.

    I’m afraid not…Not with their form, it won’t.

  2. Sue the fuckers. They’ll drag it out costing a fortune until they have to cave in due to their original admission.

    This is karma for that lawsuit they should have won.

  3. They’re more angry with these alleged leakers than they are with those alleged to have been involved in internal sabotage. Staffers, many on good salaries, ostensibly to help the party win power, are alleged to have wished the party nothing but failure. Shouldn’t that more concerning than whoever allegedly leaked the report’s findings?

    What sort of messed up priorities is Southside operating by? Unless of course, there was collaboration between the alleged saboteurs and some in the current leadership, that they are trying to conceal? Was there?

    1. The continuation by Starmer and Evans of burying the leaked report with the allegations contained in it. Plus their failure to release the Forde Report. Obviously I just see their actions as possible proof that some in the party were actively trying to bring Corbyn down. Which also leads to the fact that your suggestion of the “alleged saboteurs and the current leadership.” May not be too far from the truth.

      1. Does anyone think that people like Starmer really could give a monkeys about what members think when these people have conspired to fit up Assange and let him rot in prison and work with security forces to murder innocent civilians in Ireland and not prosecute senior officers and politicians involved in murder.I hardly think they are worried 😟 when backed up by the establishment including the courts and establishment trained QCs and barristers.Bleed the barstewards and cut the funding of the Labour party.

      1. Those involved in the plot to weaponise antisemitism and lose the election got rewarded.
        Oldknow – OBE
        Austin – Lord
        Woodcock – Baron.

  4. If Carter Ruck is involved it will be expensive. Please be sure to let us know Skwawky if crowd funding is needed.

  5. If this happens my hope is that the five accused successfully sue the party for slander. I am sure Chris Williamson’s legal fund along with the 150,000 expelled and resigned alleged ‘trots’ will be happy to support such an action. Bring it on!

  6. Is this libelous? Are they committing perjury if they give statements without substance? Vexatious claim?
    and the Red Knight a Lawyer to boot

  7. A message to Sir Keir Starmer……..the ‘TRUTH’ You must have read about it some 30 years ago in Murdoch’s ‘The Sun’. What about glasnost & perestroika? Can we apply these concepts today to the Labour Party? Will the gruesome twosome of Starmer & Evans be remembered for Truth; Justice & Freedom of Speech or just the shoddy, anonymous accusations that have accompanied so many groundless accusations of ant-Semitism against Socialist Labour members? Take instruction from your chief rabbi but you will never be absolved for your sins because even Jesus could never forgive what you do. Look in the mirror & mouth the words the ‘TRUTH’ because if you say them aloud, it will be another meaningless lie.

    1. Historically jesus hated the money changers and Tax collectors and attacked them in the Temple which was a place for worship and he saw it as blasphemy for them to operate inside the temple.I wouldnt life be better if we had operated in the same way as Jesus in throwing them out.?Thanks for the reminder Steve Richards.

  8. I know, I’m like a broken record, but this is not the actions of people who want to ever win elections (even on a right wing ticket), but of people who want to completely eradicate the Labour Party. It’s a scorched earth strategy. I don’t think even the so called “centrists” and “moderates” (right wing really) want that, apart perhaps Mr Blair who’s sweating at the thought of possible criminal convictions…

    1. Well said Ben. I’ve always maintained it was never about winning power but destroying the opposition to the Establishment that was the end game. Corbyn was too trusting and basically gullible to let this happen.

  9. Will the Labour party dare to name anyone of leaking the report? If they do then any of the accused when defending themselves would have a right to ‘disclosure’, therefore the Forde report would be exhibit No 1, if not then at least would be material evidence, does Starmer know what he is doing, Bring it on.

    1. The five are Seumas Milne, Karie Murphy, Georgie Robertson, Harry Hayball and Laura Murray. They intend to sue the party.

  10. Those staffers who deliberately undermined the 2017 election effort and were rewarded with pay-offs by Starmer, were fifth-columnists. Social democratic parties are always populated by right-wingers who are paranoid abut anything with a tinge of socialism. They are more right-wing than straightforward Tories. A Tory is just a Tory, but a fifth-columnist within a social democratic party is a malicious hater of socialism who will swing to fascistic tactics at the first whiff of radicalism. The staffers in question would be glad to see Labour destroyed. Effectively, as an even remotely socialist force, it is dead. What remains is the simulacrum of democracy. Remember, what socialism means is the end of the employer-employee relationship. No reason we shouldn’t accept reforms which help the common folk on the way: £15 and hour is better than £9, but a wage is a wage and an employee and employee. Free men and women will refuse to be employees, until than we are all diminished by being either employers or employees. Abe Lincoln said: “As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master.” That should be our slogan: “As I would not be an employer, I will not be an employee”.

  11. Why can’t Forde do anything about this?
    Seems to me he has been conned into a

    There are some who have the original report –
    so why not hand the whole thing over to the

    Remember the smug faces of those who swore
    they had watertight criminal cases for antisemitism
    against members of the Labour Party. Very little
    was indeed found.

    Well turn the tables on them – let the police have
    a scan at the racism contained in those emails
    and WhatsApps messages plus possible fraud
    of ones employer too .. possible interference in
    Democratric Election ..

  12. Jon Trickett has said he wrote Labour’s submission to the Forde enquiry and if it isn’t published, he will release it.

  13. Jeremy’s Labour would have probably got over the line in 2017 if a 100 Right Wing Labour MPs hadn’t attempted a coup (they should have been expelled & fresh selection meetings held within 3 months) and if many Right Wing Labour MPs hadn’t been slagging off Corbyn in public for years!
    And as the Forde Report shows if some Right Wing well paid Labour officers hadn’t had a project to undermine Corbyn & neglect Left PPCs but get plenty of resources to Right Wing PPCs – it’s all in the leaked report and some wonder if what these Labour servants did was criminal?
    Jeremy was actually too nice when faced with a ruthless Right Wing Barbarians.

    1. ‘Ergon House’ secret project by well paid Right Wing Staff SECRETLY using Labour money with a nod from some of the Right Wing at the top?

      1. Good point Bazza ..Does the leader of the Labour party act through the NEC as custodians much like a Trust fund or as a bunch of second rate criminals that think members millions are theres ?

  14. The internal report was a summary of the evidence gathered to quantify the level of anti semitism in the Labour party
    It was not produced to shine a light on the betrayal of the party by Red Tories, which means there is a lot more source material out there, who has it and how it can be used is entirely in their hands
    Problem is we don’t need any more evidence, what we need is for the Socialist group of Labour MP’s to stand up and challenge the Cockwomble leading our party

  15. I also want to express solidarity with Seumas Milne, Karie Murphy, Georgie Robertson, Harry Hayball and Laura Murray.

    I hope they do go on to sue the party and I will gladly contribute towards any crowdfunding if necessary.

    I also hope Jon Trickett goes ahead with releasing his submission to Force soon, he should give labour a maximum of 24 hours to publish the report and then go ahead.

  16. This whole thing is surreal – Starmer has turned the
    Labour Party into a continuing Court Drama ..

    Obviously he is more comfortable in this niche area
    than in Politics

  17. How warped do you have to be to hold the view leaking this is worse than the behaviour highlighted within it?

    Using members’ subs and union funding to drag honest leftists into a court battle, is beyond ridiculous.

    Increasingly convinced the ‘K’ in ‘Special K’ stands for Knob.

  18. Even the Guardian are questioning the latest development
    in an understated

    “It is not clear why ..”

    The sooner we get rid of Starmer and his toxic mate –
    the sooner we get our Labour Party back

  19. Sir Keir ‘deceit and betrayal’ Starmer will one day wish he had handled his management of the Forde Inquiry more honestly and ethically.

    The Inquiry panel, Baroness Lister of Burtersett, Baroness Wilcox of Newport and Lord Lawrence Whitty, messaged from their website :

    “As committed members of the UK Labour Party we were pleased to accept the invitation to be a panel member for this Inquiry chaired by Martin Forde QC. We have served the party in a wide range of capacities for many years and we want to see it flourish, prosper and return to power.

    “We are approaching our work with a desire to identify the problems in the culture of the Labour Party, including the impact of internal factionalism, and to recommend changes designed to resolve current challenges and promote future success.

    “Each of us is carrying out our role with no preconceptions and no set of ready-made solutions. We will approach this work independently and be impartial at all times; we will consider all the evidence before making our recommendations.”

    The Chair of the Inquiry, Martin Forde QC, specifically pointed out “I have told the Labour Party that its original proposal for a July 15th timescale is impractical and we are aiming to publish our final report by the end of 2020.”

    Update on the Forde Inquiry

    “The Forde Inquiry Panel (the Panel) has been unable to proceed with its work for a number of months now. This was due, in part, to the need to avoid any prejudice to work being done by the Information Commissioner (which might still affect the scope of our report), and in part due to logistical reasons beyond our control. However, the Panel has now resumed its work, and will use its best endeavours to report by early Autumn.”

    Logistical reasons beyond our control”? A divisive and sectarian party leader making no efforts to conceal his determination to denature and enfeeble the Labour party?

    Sir Keir ‘deceit and betrayal’ Starmer.

    One thing is clear to me, the panel’s findings and recommendations are possibly the reason for the indefinite delay in the Report’s publication date. I distrust the nominal leader of the PLP so much now that whatever the Report contains it will not reassure me that the Labour party is capable of repairing itself after the destructive factionalism that Sir Keir is promoting and championing.

  20. Baroness lister….barroness wilcox….Lord whitty “? Certainly nothing amusing or inspiring in these establishment stooges in the same club as the knight of the realm….God give me strength The New Labour party alarmingly produced over many years were a title hardly raises an eyebrow Lawyers the bottom feeders are always top of the cosy list for the next leader of the Labour party.Depressing?…..not in new liebor party alarmingly.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: