An extensive internal investigation into the way Labour handled antisemitism complaints will not be submitted to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, after an intervention by party lawyers.

The 860-page report, concluded that factional hostility towards Jeremy Corbyn amongst former senior officials contributed to “a litany of mistakes” that hindered the effective handling of the issue.

The investigation, which was completed in the last month of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, claims to have found “no evidence” of antisemitism complaints being treated differently to other forms of complaint, or of current or former staff being “motivated by antisemitic intent”.

Instead, the report concludes that there was a lack of “robust processes, systems, training, education and effective line management” and found “abundant evidence of a hyper-factional atmosphere prevailing in Party HQ” towards Jeremy Corbyn which “affected the expeditious and resolute handling of disciplinary complaints.”.

As well as 10,000 separate emails, the dossier uncovers thousands of private WhatsApp communications between former senior party officials and singles out for criticism some who gave whistleblower evidence to last year’s highly-critical BBC Panorama investigation on antisemitism within Labour.

These include the former General Secretary Lord McNicol and the former acting head of the governance and legal unit, Sam Matthews.

“This report completely blows open everything that went on”

“We were being sabotaged and set up left right and centre by McNicol’s team and we didn’t even know. It’s so important that the truth comes out”, the source added.

The report claims private communications show senior former staff “openly worked against the aims and objectives of the leadership of the Party, and in the 2017 general election, some key staff even appeared to work against the Party’s core objective of winning elections”.

The report says the WhatsApp communications in question, which included some of the most senior figures in the party headquarters and Lord McNicol’s office, were leaked by one of the group’s members.

The examples from chat archives published in the document include:

  • Conversations in 2017 which appear to show senior staff preparing for Tom Watson to become interim leader in anticipation of Jeremy Corbyn losing the election
  • Conversations which it is claimed show senior staff hid information from the leader’s office about digital spending and contact details for MPs and candidates during the election
  • Conversations on election night in which the members of the group talk about the need to hide their disappointment that Mr. Corbyn had done better than expected and would be unlikely to resign
  • A discussion about whether the grassroots activist network Momentum could be ‘proscribed’ for being a ‘party within a party’
  • A discussion about ‘unsuspending’ a former Labour MP who was critical of Jeremy Corbyn so they could stand as a candidate in the 2017 election
  • A discussion about how to prevent corbyn-ally Rebecca Long-Bailey gaining a seat on the party’s governing body in 2017
  • Regular references to corbyn-supporting party staff as “trots”
  • Conversations between senior staff in Lord McNicol’s office in which they refer to former director of communications Seamus Milnes as “dracula”, and saying he was “spiteful and evil and we should make sure he is never allowed in our Party if it’s last thing we do”
  • Conversations in which the same group refers to Mr. Corbyn’s former chief of staff Karie Murphy as “medusa”, a “crazy woman” and a “bitch face cow” that would “make a good dartboard”
  • A discussion in which one of the group members expresses their “hope” that a young pro-Corbyn Labour activist, who they acknowledge had mental health problems, “dies in a fire”

The investigation also accuses the former General Secretary Lord McNicol, and other senior figures of providing “false and misleading information” to Jeremy Corbyn’s office in relation to the handling of antisemitism complaints, which the report claims meant “the scale of the problem was not appreciated” by the leadership.

The report has yet to be made available to the public.

However we have all of the evidence:

If you like our content, join us in helping to bring reality and decency back by SUBSCRIBING to our Youtube channel: AND SUPPORTING US where you can: Award Winning Independent Citizen Media Needs Your Help. PLEASE SUPPORT US FOR JUST £2 A MONTH

To report this post you need to login first.
Previous articleNo other G7 leaders have been infected, every other leader was responsible enough to follow their own guidance on social distancing
Next articleLabour Antisemitism Report: There was a conscious attempt to frame people, deny others their justice for seemingly purely political reasons…
Dorset Eye
Dorset Eye is an independent not for profit news website built to empower all people to have a voice. To be sustainable Dorset Eye needs your support. Please help us to deliver independent citizen news... by clicking the link below and contributing. Your support means everything for the future of Dorset Eye. Thank you.


  1. The frustrating thing is that many pretty much knew that the ‘stab Corbyn in the front’ Labour contingent were actively working against the leadership and members, but many that otherwise would have supported Labour kept saying that Corbyn just couldn’t unite the party. In a way they were correct as the right of the party would never accept left and left-leaning Labour leader in any position of power, yet Corbyn got the blame. He arguably should have purged the party more of opposition, and I guess being decent has eventually got Corbyn out when the back-stabbers have now got back in.

  2. It’s the kind of offendedness and kind of willful anti-party sabotage that can only result from a collective narcissistic sense of entitlement to control the party among careerist professional-managerial class enemies subconsciously channelling their anti-democratic snobbery at the possibility of ordinary voters and members, and by implication therefore the working class, regaining control over the party founded by them and for them which their hostile, snob class had turned into a source of high status sinecures for themselves in return for embracing Thatcherism.

  3. It’s impossible to find out who commissioned it, who wrote it, what is its status within the Labour Party, and why the lawyers (who are they?) have stopped it being sent to the EHRC. The only other journalist who’s seen it is Owen Jones, who gives a bit more info on twitter. It suffers from all the problems of a leaked document, with selected quotes the journalist has chosen. It’s potentially very important but this isn’t the way it should be made public.

  4. Completely agree with Clare. We should be told who commissioned the investigation/report, and who carried it out, and what was the objective in doing so if it was intended to remain an internal party document. I mean given the length of the report and the detail, I can only assume it must have taken many months to put it all together, so why go to all that time and effort (and expense) if those who commissioned it didn’t have some objective in mind. The only thing we do know in this respect is that the WhatsApp communications in question ‘were leaked by one of the group’s members.’

  5. Implications are profound. The Machiavellian, six-blanket, Blairite hangover that never went away has quite demonstrably ‘changed the world’ – by not changing it. Hypothesis: Three years into a [albeit smallish-majority] Labour government, the emphasis on Tory/City of London-friendly, parasitic, vanity projects shifted to proper public-services, including a response to Exercise Cygnus, done in the first year [2017/2018], making this current crisis into something other than the wilfully-neglectful, murderous rampage of a psychopathic regime. Lives prematurely ended being a speciality of our current cabal of Trump-sucking, neo-Fascists in sharp suits. No? See: DWP/homeless/sick/disabled/Windrush/Grenfell/foreign ‘intervention’/etc. death-toll. McNicol, Blair, Mandelson, Starmer, coup-plotters, functionaries, all blood-soaked. At least now we all know how it’s done, should we want to have a go ourselves. Which we don’t.

  6. An impressive share, I just given this onto a colleague who was doing a little analysis on this. And he in fact bought me breakfast because I found it for him.. smile. So let me reword that: Thnx for the treat! But yeah Thnkx for spending the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love reading more on this topic. If possible, as you become expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more details? It is highly helpful for me. Big thumb up for this blog post!

  7. I really like your blog.. very nice colors & theme. Did you make this website yourself or did you hire someone to do it for you? Plz reply as I’m looking to design my own blog and would like to know where u got this from. thank you

  8. Have you ever considered about including a little bit more than just your articles? I mean, what you say is valuable and all. However imagine if you added some great photos or videos to give your posts more, “pop”! Your content is excellent but with images and clips, this blog could definitely be one of the most beneficial in its niche. Good blog!