When Abusers Collude, Forgetfulness Intrudes


25th November 2018 

When Abusers Collude

Love and marriage,

Go together like a horse and carriage,

Mutually compatible… nothing is missing,

But who spends a penny and shits without pissing?

Answering the riddle, is one foul creature,

Angry, corrupted, hideously featured, 

Wirral Council Corporate, revolving Janus-face,

Shits in the courtroom, and pisses back at base.






Posted in General | Leave a comment

A Terrible Dream.

We woke up screaming last night after the most horrific, traumatising nightmare.

We only have ourselves to blame, after stupidly following this link to a Daily Mail article which appeared yesterday:


In our dream, we were in London, in some noisy pub.  We were sitting with a group of regulars who were having a boozy night out, downing a few drinks at their local watering hole.  As the evening went on it became clear to us that this was the South Norwood Conservative Club.  We also got the names of our drinking companions and the age of another:

Bobby Connell, 19.

Cliff Connell, 49.

Mark Russell, 49.

Paul Bussetti, 46.

A N Other, 55.

But one of these lads put a downer on the whole night.  He’d left us at one point, but returned carrying a 3-foot tall hunk of cardboard.  It looked like a scaled-down replica of a building.  He said, “Wait ’til yer see this lads.  What a fuckin’ brilliant wheeze.”

He’d printed “GRENFELL TOWER” on the top of it and in the windows he’d placed lots of paper cut-out, dark-skinned figures with their arms raised.  As he pointed them out it caused general hilarity to those assembled.

In our dream, we were just stunned.

He explained to the group – between bouts of laughter – how these figures were Muslims and foreigners and on bonfire night, he was going to put it on a stove and set fire to it in his back garden.

We were horrified, thinking this was offensive in the extreme, but our opinion wouldn’t have mattered anyway, because we weren’t even there, just dreaming the whole thing.

The other four were inspecting it in close-up and it met with their approval.  They thought it was “superb, great”, said they couldn’t wait to see it in flames, congratulated him on his handiwork and on “a brilliant idea”.

But then a deep voice piped up from a corner, “You sick bastards.  What the hell do you think you’re doing?”  It was a much, much older man, obviously a pensioner, and probably well into his 90s.  His voice was shaking. “I fought fascism.  My ship was torpedoed on the Atlantic convoys during the war as a lad.  And I was bloody lucky to survive and make it back.  But do you know what?  I never thought I’d live to see Nazis walking amongst us, and even drinking in my own pub….”

The old man had tears streaming down his face as he got up and walked slowly out of the room, closing the door behind him.

We ‘followed’ him in our dream and he was now in the next room, explaining what was going on to a young girl, then asking, pleading with her to use her phone to alert the police.  She rang the police, but after 5 minutes of what seemed to be fruitless conversation with the operator, she threw her phone down in disgust.  “The police aren’t coming.  They said it’s not an emergency and anyway, they’re short-staffed due to cuts and it’s not as if a celebrity’s house is being burgled.”

The old war hero got up.  “I’m goin’ ‘ome,” he muttered as he shuffled off through the club and towards the exit door.

Howls and raucous laughter were still coming from next door, the room at the back of the club.

Our dream then suddenly jumped forward in time.  It was 3 am.  A barman was shouting, GET OUT, GET OUT, GET OUT!!!!!

The building was on fire and filling with smoke.  Screams were ringing out.  The barman was onto the fire brigade and shouting into his phone as he ran for the exit.  I was right behind him as the last few punters emerged safe into the cold night outside.  Turning around, we saw huge, billowing flames leaping from the top of the club.  The entrance we’d just emerged from collapsed onto the street.

Five, ten minutes went by. The barman was shouting into his phone.

Just then, we heard volleys of blood-curdling screams coming from the small room at the back.  Oh Christ.  There were still people inside the building, trapped.  The fire bobbies should have been here by now, but they weren’t, and there was no way any of us could re-enter the building.

Whoever those trapped people were, it was too late for them now…

The barman was slumped down on the pavement.  He said he’d pleaded with the 999 operator and they’d apologised, saying the nearest fire station, just down the road, had been closed by Boris Johnson.  We’d have to wait because the next one that wasn’t too busy to respond was 8 miles away.

So we waited, and we waited, and we waited.

By the time the first fire tender arrived, the building was fully alight and the roof had collapsed in onto the floor below.

It was a cacaphony of noise as the hoses fired up and several thick jets of water forced their way through the flames.

And the terrible screams from the room at the back could no longer be heard, because they’d stopped.




Posted in General | 1 Comment

Leasowe Abbey’s in Ruins. And we’re in the gutter, or is it the sewer?

ron abbey on merseytravel board

Some excellent, heart-warming news has just emerged from Wallasey’s Leasowe Ward.  The big cheese who’s been stood astride this working class stronghold for the last 22 years – yes, we know it feels like much longer – has been democratically voted out as Leasowe Councillor candidate at a recent selection meeting.

So it’s out with Ron Abbey and in with Karl Greaney.

Ron is the local Labour Council’s Chief Whip, no less.  He’s a long-term public servant, predating even his hero Tony Blair’s entry to Downing Street, but will soon become a helluva lot poorer than Tony as his lifestyle takes an unplanned hit and he loses many thousands of pounds per year in public money.

As a result, he’s absolutely fuming and making us all aware of his unhappiness via happy to oblige, captured, sensationalising local newspapers.  He’s also been busy himself, in his own inimitable words, on Twitter and Facebook.

Wirral Globe: 


So Ron no longer fits the bill and his time is up.  But there’s been absolutely no guidance on what to say from Liverpool Central Station’s Martin Liptrot this time (see the resignation of Councillor Mike Sullivan).

And Ron appears to possess little or no concept of what is appropriate or dignified.  His toys have been flung straight out of the pram and he’s hitting out at “loony lefties” in the manner of the UK’s toxic, right wing tabloids and fellow, departing, hard right friends Mike Sullivan and Moira McLaughlin.  Bullying and intimidation doesn’t feature this time Mr Liptrot.  We wonder why?

For us, these antics have both of Ron Abbey’s feet (and Mike’s and Moira’s) squarely planted into the ignorant, nasty, hard right camp of The Sun and The Daily Mail.  Because there’s absolutely no difference in tone.

But let’s face it, he does originate from the same dubious, political stamping ground as criminal ex-councillor Jim “Britain First” Crabtree, another helper to Frank Field (along with Mike and Moira).

Jim Crabtree was Ronnie’s former Boss who chaired Wirral’s Audit and Risk Committee while boasting little Ronnie as his eager Deputy at a key moment in time, helping to conceal the CEO Graham Burgess’, the Leader Phil Davies’ and a barrage of senior officers’ relentless lies about hundreds of thousands of pounds in squandered EU grant money.

Because he doesn’t appear to know any better, Poor Ron has made it clear – unwittingly perhaps – that he’s a throwback to an earlier age.  He looks like a very willing adherent to the hang-em-high style of Jim Davidson, Richard Littlejohn, Jeremy Clarkson and others, with his half-baked, “I say what I like and I like what I bloody well say and sod the consequences” mode of grabbing attention, hijacking the issues, steaming ahead with them and firing off his blunderbuss at phantom, half-formed enemies. 

This was @Ronnieabbey1 on Twitter recently, singling out our esteemed blog with his own very odd take on calm evaluation, balanced appraisal and sober, intellectual scrutiny:

Cheers Ron.  We appreciate your input.  And putting aside your stream of consciousness, the omission of key words and an abysmal failure to punctuate – caused perhaps by uncontrollable, red-faced rage and jets of steam issuing from your ears and nostrils – we’d like to step forth as a calming and steadying influence, put a hand on your shoulder, take a pause and thank you for signposting potential subscribers to our previous catalogue of work – which goes right back to 2011.

Thanks and much appreciated.

So Ron – to address your accusation about the sewer and the gutter, that looks like a hell of a lot of gutter-wallowing and sewer-dwelling we’ve been doing – seven long years of it.

Or perhaps Ronnie is mistaken and the truth is rather more mundane, non-sensational and a lot less incriminating.

You see, readers, we’ve been engaged in steady, boring, intense research of Ron’s abusive Council and the conduct of its senior officers and councillors for the last seven years.  And Ron doesn’t like anybody exposing his sins in great detail, so he’s hitting out in the only way he knows how and summing it all up as “filth”.

Unlike Ron’s councillor duties, our research is all unpaid – yet it seems obvious to us that we’ve been putting a hell of a lot more time into what we do than Ron does for his £multi-thousand pound return in public money.

Here’s a small one to prove the point, on the vexed subject of Councillor performance.  It’s an excerpt from Wirral Council’s official councillor.net performance management system and the total reported figures for constituency cases completed during 2017:

ron abbey wirral councillor performance

…so Ron’s personal achievement for his constituents (6 items of casework completed in one year compared to Pat Cleary of the Green Party’s 183) is the very least of the problem.  The sheer depth of scandal here on Wirral goes back well into the last century and is far more wideranging.   These hard right Labour councillors have been plummeting a lot deeper into their own chosen gutters and sewers for years.  And to unseen depths that the writer of this blog could only imagine in his own worst nightmares.

We should also emphasise, we’re not keen on Ron’s  impulsive, anger-fuelled, finger-jabbing criticism of our quality back catalogue.  “Hard-left” indeed !

Just so you know Ron, we’ve had UKIP supporters cheering us on behind the scenes, because even they share our disgust at yours and your colleagues’ reckless and wanton negligence over the council’s long-flouted statutory obligation to care for Wirral’s children and vulnerable / disabled people.

We made sure to respond to Ron’s tweet though, using a relaxed, satirical method of approach.  We find irony and humour can be deployed very honestly to defuse a situation, to educate those who are not politically aware and to attune them to Ron and Co’s sickly, unforgiveable, ongoing conduct.

And this job is far from finished:

So the truth is…

… we’ve been wallowing in your sewer Ron, and we’re just off for a much-needed scrub and hose down.

Enjoy your retirement !

Toodle Pip!







Posted in General | 3 Comments

From Wirral Leaks: A statement by Councillor Tony Norbury, would-be MP candidate for Birkenhead

Birkenhead CLP Norbury

Here’s the original Wirral Leaks post:


To assist the public, and to get the message out there, we’ve copy-typed the statement as it stands, including all typos and errors.

Like a retweet on Twitter, the publishing of the statement here does not correspond to our endorsement of its contents.

It appears to be authentic.  Your comments are welcome.

MP for Birkenhead personal statement Tony Norbury

History in the trades union movement and Labour Party

I was a child of the Thatcher Tory government leaving school at 16 and entering the world of the Tory YTS Youth Training Scheme.

Having worked in a building firm in Rock Ferry, then the old Asda Birkenhead, followed by Cammell Laird ship yard where I learnt to weld.


My life as a trade’s unionist really started at Vauxhall Motors on the production line where I became a shop steward for the Transport and General Workers union at the tender age of 21.  This is where I met Tony Woodley and the shop stewards committee.  My fondest memory of this time was campaigning for the Labour Party candidate in Wallasey, Lol Duffy one of the Cammell Laird 37.  We collectively reduced a majority of over 20,000 to a recount which we narrowly lost and built the platform for a Labour MP to be there today.  I wish that MP had of been Lol.

I spent a short time working in pubs across Wirral and Ellesmere Port the contrast between union organised work places and those that weren’t could not have been starker.


I became self-employed and worked on the taxis in Birkenhead where we formed the first ever union branch for private hire taxis through Unite the Union.  Our branch along with the hackney branch embedded training into the licensing process enabling taxis to be recognised as a profession and protecting driver’s health and safety.

If selected to be the Labour candidate for MP by the members and elected as MP by the people of Birkenhead I will certainly work hard with the minister and shadow minister for transport to support the taxi and private Hire drivers of Birkenhead as they are still very vulnerable workers who lack the workers’ rights others get.


I was then employed by Merseytravel as part of their Merseylearn team they trained me to be an effective Union learning rep with both Unite and Unision I will always hold these skills close to myheart as they are the building blocks of any struggle, education of working-class people and those who deserve a second chance in life are life changing experiences.

It was because of the skills that I gained as a Unionlearning rep I felt the confidence to help and represent others.  I choose to do this by becoming an elected councillor for Labour to give something back.  I first stood for election in the West Kirby ward where I met some great socialists and cut my teeth regarding campaigning.  I was later chosen by the ward I live in Prenton, to be their candidate for Labour in the Birkenhead constituency.  I was elected in 2012 and then again in 2016 at my panel interview I did say it is my ambition to move our party locally to the left using socialist values, I don’t think they took me seriously.


After struggling in a Blairite Labour Group opposing cuts and most of the worst privatisation policies I maintain my resistance by voting with the whip at full council this is a difficult thing to justify to yourself and others as nobody wants to vote for cuts in the public sector particularly in a place like Birkenhead.  I always argued at Labour Group meetings to protect the most vulnerable and shield them from the worst cuts I was not always successful and often out voted and the way democracy works you have to go along with the collective decision or get out.  It is against Labour Party rules and policy to set an illegal budget and leave the most vulnerable at the whim of Tory administrators and we have seen an example of that in Northampton.  I have never been a quitter and can always see the bigger picture the end game.  Enter Jeremy Corbyn.


Jeremy Corbyn and me

As soon as Jeremy was on the ballot as leader I got behind him.  I spoke at his very first public meeting at Birkenhead Town Hall.  It was packed to the rafters and I said it was so good to see good comrades here who had left the Labour Party or had been asked to leave.  I stayed to reclaim our Labour Party for the many and was so proud to speak on that historic occasion.  I feel you have to believe before things can come true.  Having campaigned to get Ed Miliband elected to be so disappointed by the lack of socialism and vision, here was a true socialist leader who spoke our language and had values and principles that I knew would help Birkenhead.  Hundreds of people started to join the Labour Party Labour councillors like me Jo Walsh Christina Muspratt were not on our own anymore the rest is written in history with brave comrades stepping up to take the fight for Corbyn to our national and local party.


We in Birkenhead CLP encouraged the members to take part in the democratic process they could see another Birkenhead Labour Party was possible they organised themselves around national Labour Party policies and values.  As a Birkenhead councillor on the Left I took the fight to the Labour Group whilst others organised the Birkenhead Labour Party it was a privilege to work alongside John Maher, Sarah Evens, and Robert Smiley and so many others who all showed tremendous courage and resolve in helping members take part.  Democracy is a beautiful thing when the right people get involved.


If I was chosen by you the members to be your representative in parliament I would take a working wage and use the rest of the tax payer’s money our money to open a constituency office in the centre of Birkenhead employing people from the local area to help us do the very best, we can for the people of Birkenhead.  This job for me is about what I as your representative in parliament can do for you and all my resources will go into that.


Sustainable Transport

With your permission when I become the member of Parliament for Birkenhead I would like to first start working on the infrastructure building up affordable and sustainable transport links.  This is so important to bringing jobs and industry back into our town.  We invented trams, I will work hard to bring them back home creating links to all our visitor destinations.  Plus building the trams here at Cammell Lairds.


I will continue supporting the rail unions in their struggle to have a guard on the train I think this is so important to help increase accessibility and safety on the trains. public opinion is right behind the guards and the unions in this Struggle and the Labour Party pledge at national conference to work with the rail Unions and other experts to re-nationalise the trains.


Cammell Lairds is vital to the future of this town it is a place where we can build ships again and so much more.  I will work hard to bring back ship building to Lairds the loss of Lairds as a ship yard that built ships like the Mauritania and Ark Royal was a death blow to Birkenhead which has been in decline ever since.



I am devoted to the NHS and will work with a Labour opposition or a Labour government to rid our NHS of privateers.  The NHS was founded to be free at the point of use and collectively owned and funded by the tax payers of the UK


Wealth retention: Cooperative models

I have recently joined the Cooperative party and am excited about the alternative economic models we can link into to help grow Birkenhead whilst keeping the wealth we create here to benefit us all.  I know my partner and comrade councillor Jo Bird the recently elected councillor for Bromborough and New ferry is working hard to embed land trust models into the infrastructure projects that will revive the devastated New Ferry.  I will support Jo and the council in working with the people of New ferry to create a living community they can again be proud of once again.


Equality and diversity

I want to work with all our brothers and sisters across Birkenhead to make our communities welcoming and diverse where people can live in hope and peace and we can see our children laughing and smiling once again.  Diversity starts in the schools I will work hard to have a dedicated team of equality and diversity experts working with the council and the local communities nobody should feel uncomfortable in any setting in Birkenhead.  I will Show racism The Red Card wherever it raises its ugly head.


Progressive enforcement

I will work with the enforcement authorities to create an environment where crime is not the only hope for some people, an environment where we respect each other’s values and cultures, we work with our youth services and schools to create early interventions and recognise when a person is going down the wrong road.  I will create wrap around services that will bring them back to hope and progression.  The type of policing we need in Birkenhead is up stream policing with community servants working on the streets to create alternatives to a life of crime



I have plenty of experience with young people as I have helped to bring six kids up of m own one of whom Amy has got the political bug and is now our CLP women’s officer for Birkenhead.  I think there is more to come from my children who have been brought up in Birkenhead. living with me in various locations but mostly Kirkland Avenue Prenton Birkenhead


Free Education for all under a comprehensive system with democratic accountability is important to me we have some of the best special needs schools in the country here on Wirral we need to build on that and make sure every child has a fair chance of becoming all they want to be no matter what their status is or where their journey starts.  I believe education is an escalator that runs alongside you during your whole life and it’s up to you when you get on and off it.  My job as your representative in parliament will be to make sure nothing gets in your way of getting on the education escalator.  I am a firm believer in Adult education and will fight with you to make that as accessible to all as possible.  Everybody deserves to have a second chance and also have the facilities in work to gain the skills they need to do the job they want.


Housing for the many

It will be part of my work as your representative in parliament to work alongside housing associations and trusts to create a model of housing that creates homes that are affordable secure, warm, sustainable and decent.

I will work with the local council in creating our own council houses built by our own work force and owned collectively by our own people.  Everybody should have the right to have a warm and safe place they can call home no matter what their circumstances are.  We owe it to the people who are to come and the people who have been to stop the Tory austerity and create an economic system for the many not the few


The environment

We need to create a sustainable environment for us and those to come.  If selected as your M.P I would create a dedicated team of environmental experts and innovative architects to embed environmental impact assessments into everything we do as a town.  My work on the Merseyside waste Authority has shown me the positive impact that a sustainable recycling strategy for Birkenhead could bring.  I

(the statement ends here and appears to have become truncated).


Posted in Frank Field, General, Labour Party Upheaval | 2 Comments

Liverpool Echo claims Councillor Moira McLaughlin is as clean as a whistle. WE KNOW DIFFERENT. #DisabilityDiscrimination

25 10 18 - MX comment from January 2011 on disability discrimination

Link to a few historical tweets:

We’ve been going back over our extensive records to a time when abuse most foul had proliferated and spread unchecked like a malignant cancer through the body corporate of Wirral Council.

Metaphorically speaking, that stubborn disease, originally diagnosed in the early part of the century is still there, raging out of control, fully embedded and going nowhere, because the cowardly patient decided it didn’t fancy facing chemotherapy, radiotherapy or emergency invasive surgery, and got up from its hospital bed and fled.

Because the miserable bastard only ever looked out for its damned self, it was too craven and petrified to even ponder the idea of submitting to dangerous, debilitating, life-threatening, career-damaging, pocket-emptying procedures.

So it went for the much easier option: alternative medicine.  Thinking it was being smart, it called up the services of a quack.  This was a homeopathic practitioner known as the Local Government Association.

They forced the repulsive twat down, knelt on its chest and the treatment commenced in earnest.  They…

  • gave it a quick once over
  • fed it some magic potions in tiny amounts
  • took its temperature
  • searched for a pulse
  • gave up
  • told it it didn’t have cancer anymore
  • told it everything was gonna be all right
  • told it it was “most improved[TM]”
  • told it the public’s fears had been seriously misplaced

They then deducted their whopping consultancy fees from our council tax payments and buggered off into the night.

Well, what a load of shite that was readers.  We said as much at the time.  But our view was reinforced later when the penny dropped and Wirral Children’s Services fell over.

Countless kids were suddenly put at heightened risk of abuse, and here was the Wirral basket case rearing its ugly head once again as it plunged, flailing back down into the gutter.

Fast forward to 25th October 2018, and we’ve now had a small number of longstanding occupants of that stinking gutter – including the leader – clambering out, peg on nose, dusting themselves down, pretending to innocence, fleeing the nest and while they do it, being careful to lay a trail of lies, distraction and feigned victimhood across any newspaper that’s up for indulging in a bit of juicy “trial by media”………(The usual suspects: Liverpool Echo, Wirral Globe, The Guardian, etc.)

These sensationalist newspaper articles tend to be lacking something.  And it’s very easy to locate what that something is.  They omit to mention anything about the factual, historical record of:

corporate bullying


  • Successive scandals
  • alleged racism of senior councillors and their wives
  • toe-curling abuses of power
  • accreditation of gangster care organisations
  • nine long years of calculated theft from disabled people’s bank accounts

(not exhaustive)

The above sordid behaviour has been the cashflow or stock in trade of the same long-serving, departing councillors who are now being painted as saints.  And all this from the same newspapers that brought us the scandals… i.e. the very people who should know better.  These hard right councillors’ hands are irrevocably soiled, they’ve dodged all accountability and have never been brought to justice after being heavily complicit and up to their necks for years in a cesspit of slime.

They believe our memories are as short as theirs are selective, you see readers.  But luckily, we community bloggers and activists are a resourceful lot, we’re here to stay, and we’re also here to remind them in some detail about the abuses they’ve carefully chosen to ‘forget’.  We do hope they tune in to these bulletins, follow our words closely and take the opportunity to refresh their memories.

So here we return to the title of our post…

#DisabilityDiscrimination – what do we know that’s different?

Seven years ago there was a meeting of Moira McLaughlin’s alleged Health and Wellbeing Overview and “SCRUTINY” committee, which she chaired.

A Conservative councillor at the time – Simon Mountney – had attempted to present copies of this Equality and Human Rights Commission letter which found that Wirral Council’s Social Services Department, led by senior member Councillor Moira McLaughlin, had engaged in disability discrimination.

Councillor Mountney handed out copies of the letter to the attending councillors for their consideration and scrutiny when it sat on 18th January 2011. 

However this was questioned forcefully and quickly blocked by the chair, Moira McLaughlin for the reason that she hadn’t been advised about it before the start of the meeting.  Upon taking advice from a solicitor seated next to her, and reading the contents of the letter, she was heard to say to the room in general, You don’t believe everything you read in the newspapers  do you?  This was a reference to the following news article, which had appeared in The Wirral Globe that same week:


What we witnessed that day was a deeply abusive council department’s version of “scrutiny”.

And what an ironic statement for the Matron to make in Februry 2011, particularly when we examine it again now in October 2018 through far wiser, far more jaundiced eyes.

But to address her question 8 years later… no Matron, we certainly don’t believe everything we read in the papers.  And particularly not your pile of warmed over bollocks which appeared today in the Liverpool Echo, in a far-fetched story packed with #FakeNews, which tried and failed miserably to invoke the ghost of Militant here on Merseyside.

You’re going to have to do far, far better than that Moira, and if this is you throwing down the gauntlet as an independent councillor, it’s no more than a timely swan song and even though the people of Rock Ferry will now have to suffer another four years of your snout in the public trough… your days are numbered.

25 10 18 - PaulCa January 2011 comment on disability discrimination

Posted in General, Labour Party Upheaval, Whistleblowing | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Wirral’s Hard Right Labour getting a taste of democracy as The Matron resigns from the party

25 10 18 - Matron McLaughlin resigns

Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of the party…

Or maybe not?  Maybe now is the time for all hard right enablers of disability discrimination – who’ve outstayed their welcome – to bail out, betray their constituents and go independent?

Somehow we don’t think hard right Moira McLaughlin – the councillor resigning this time around – will have consulted her voters, the people who put her there, before doing the dirty on them.  She’s obviously seen the writing on the wall, and put herself and her own fortunes first.  In the same way hard right Frank Field did, and in the same way hard right Mike Sullivan did, when he threw his toys out of the pram in a very public manner, aided with stringing the sentences together by his (outgoing) hard right leader and by a man who recently appeared on a British Transport Police “WANTED” poster, hard right Martin Liptrot.

And yes, in a very premeditated and managed way, she’s also publicly filed to the slavish, captured mainstream media – this time the Liverpool Echo – with her poison pen bleatings.  But let’s face it, the Echo have been carving out a reputation for this sort of thing.  They’re well-accustomed to engaging in trial by media.

Look what the Echo and the Guardian did for local MP hard right Angela Eagle a couple of years ago when she invented ‘bullying, homophobia and intimidation’ allegations against innocent members of her own Wallasey CLP, which got them suspended for 18 months

– allegations which collapsed very quietly and very curiously.  And then, when the deceit was exposed and the CLP were reinstated, the Echo suddenly shrank back, and didn’t want to get involved in making the news public and explaining where they’d got it so badly wrong. 

Anyway, onwards and downwards.

Cast your minds back to 2010 if you can readers.  Back then was a terrible time for vulnerable, disabled people on Wirral who’d wrongly assumed the Matron had their backs.

It was revealed they were being stolen from by Wirral Council, and when we say ‘stolen from’ we don’t mean some brief pilfering or misappropriation of a few pennies.

We mean a whole NINE YEARS of ongoing, week in, week out, calculated theft from disabled people’s bank accounts!

A grand total of £736,756.97 disappeared from the accounts of a number of Wirral Council’s disabled tenants of supported living accommodation in Angela Eagle’s constituency – in three locations in Moreton to be precise.

This was just a small part of the wide-ranging Martin Morton whistleblow.  Moira McLauglin, who had actually been involved in providing council accreditation to care organisations run by gangsters, was the Member for Adult Social Services whom, along with the Council Leader Steve Foulkes, tried and failed to have this all covered up!

And despite her po-faced chairing of ‘Health and Wellbeing’ meetings, she also had a long standing, undeclared personal friendship with the previous Director of Adult Social Services, Kevin Miller, who had been in post when the grand theft commenced.

Can you see how this kind of abuse multiplies, festers and digs itself in yet, readers?  And once it’s there, how it proliferates and feeds on its host body like a cancer, one that can’t be surgically cut out and removed?

And tragically, this Matron was not there to tend for her disabled patients.

A lot more money was stolen from residents of Balls Road Supported Living in Birkenhead, but never investigated by Anna Klonowski, who told us she ‘didn’t have time’ and who also failed to interview the Matron presiding over the abuse and her 65 failing colleagues.

If it wasn’t for social services whistleblower Martin Morton (who was forced out of his job by Foulkes, the Matron and friends), the amount stolen by now would be way over £2 million! And Moira McLaughlin wants us to believe she serves the public and she’s clean and honourable??!! 

Here’s a link to the FOI request which exposed the exact amount of the sum stolen.  Note:  The review was never “independent” because Anna Klonowski Associates failed to declare their previous ties to Wirral Council as governance trainers for councillors and senior officers.  The period of the theft was nine years, not four years:

Stolen money link

25 10 18 - money stolen by wirral council


In 2010, we complained via our MP Angela Eagle – who had to be dragged kicking and screaming – to the Equality and Human Rights Commission.  We alleged there had been clear instances of disability discrimination on the part of the council, who had a statutory duty to protect vulnerable, disabled people under their remit.  This obligation obviously debarred stealing from their bank accounts even though they were easy targets, sitting ducks and disabled, but that was precisely what occurred.

Here is the letter we got back from @MikeDGSmith, the then Chair of the Disabilities Committee of the EHRC, endorsing our allegations of disability discrimination:

And another one from Eagle, TWO YEARS AFTER OUR INITIAL COMPLAINT, updating Mike Smith and chasing up Wirral Council and the Matron, who’d been refuting the allegations:


angela eagle smith letter 23rd Aug 2012


So in the end, not being courageous enough to follow up Mike Smith’s guidance, root out the true extent of the abuse and face up to investigating Wirral Council properly, Anna Klonowski instead used the public money assigned to her investigation to have our allegations and Mike Smith’s findings debunked by her own solicitors, DLA Piper.

How DLA Piper came to the aid of abusive Wirral Council in their hour of need

So she purposefully went against Mike’s advice, and instead of investigating, set about destroying all evidence of discrimination.  Mike Smith ended up losing his job as  one of the Chairmen at the EHRC not long after our complaint was lodged. 

It’s a very, very nasty world that Councillor Moira McLaughlin (Independent) still occupies, one where people trying to do the right thing get persecuted, and one that Klonowski departed recently “to go and care for her parents”.

This task will have been made a lot easier after she controversially trouser-suited £377,000 from Wirral Council and a hotly-disputed £90,000 in public cash from Bristol City Council. 

Now it’s up to us to stay strong, hold out for the interests of voters, the public and our vulnerable people and clear out what remains of these right wing, money-grubbing abusers.

Why?  Because not only are these highly-paid senior officers doing the dirty on the public, but the councillors we voted for in good faith – people like then Tory leader Jeff Green – instead of mucking the filthy stables out, appointed a conflicted investigator known to the council – Anna Klonowski.  She failed to declare an existing interest, failed to take any minutes or verbatim recordings of her interviews, failed to interview members whom it is alleged had links to gangsters, did what was required, left escape hatches for all of the senior abusers to clamber out of…

…and served up a £six-figure cover-up and a whitewash…!

Toodle Pip!

Posted in Frank Field, General, Labour Party Upheaval | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Suppressing cancer cures as a means of population control.

The Revelations of Dr Richard Day

During the meeting in Pittsburgh, Dr Day touched on the subject of cancer, and what he relayed to his audience shocked then, and many readers may find his revelations shocking also.

Dr Day said “We can cure almost every cancer right now [1969]. Information is on file in the Rockefeller Institute, if it’s ever decided that it should be released.”

Dr Dunegan recalls what Dr Day said very clearly, because he found it unbelievable (as did the other attendees) that an institute who could effectively treat one of the most destructive diseases known to humanity would withhold that knowledge.

Dr Day continued “But consider – if people stop dying of cancer, how rapidly we would become overpopulated. You may as well die of cancer as something else.”

He then went on to explain that treatment would be geared more towards easing some of the symptoms and making the sufferer comfortable…

View original post 2,691 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

With #WirralGiants in the news, let’s have a look at one of Wirral Council’s BIGGEST fibbers!

wirral council phil davies wirral giants

The BIG Fund

Many hundreds of thousands of pounds were lost here, then it was all frantically and guiltily covered up during secretly convened meetings of Wirral councillors and senior officers, right up to the level of CEO and Leader.

Wirral In It Together and others have been confidently going public for some time on these issues and branding Councillor Phil Davies a liar ever since the above immortal words fell from his lips inside a careless media statement.

He’s a bloody liar.  A BIG one. A giant one. And hundreds of grand of your council tax cash has gone west.  Meanwhile, supine, captured “news bringers” the Liverpool Echo and the Wirral Globe have fallen silent.

We’re quite confident that a libel writ, as thick as a telephone directory, will NOT come thudding onto the WIIT doormat.  Why?

Because we have reams of evidence to back up our position, and the council leader has no reputation left to defend.

None whatsoever.


For those keen to discover more, this is where he and his colleagues repeatedly lied and set about covering their tracks. 

… hereherehereherehere, and here.

Toodle Pip!!

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Is the Wirral Council member for Prenton – Councillor Tony Norbury – a “sleeper”?


Birkenhead voters… 

All 70,000 of you… 

Will Councillor Tony Norbury be YOUR man in Parliament? 

Or will Councillor Tony Norbury be WIRRAL COUNCIL’S man in Parliament?

It’s in your hands

Read on…

Here’s a statement dated November 2018 by this councillor

In the world of Wirral politics, huge tectonic plates have been shifting lately. But since Birkenhead MP Frank Field’s resignation of the Labour Whip, and the resurgence of a new wave of left wing optimism, all is not quite what it seems.

There have been further tremors.

Take it from us, some well-connected, sharp-eyed watchers and researchers have had a very close eye on Frank Field and his election agent George Davies for some time.

As these two recede into well-deserved obscurity, it’s now becoming clear that their would-be replacements also have big question marks over their heads and are worthy of some closer scrutiny. 

This much we know.

Birkenhead’s chances of starting anew with a *clean* slate after being plunged deep into almost 4 decades’ worth of Field’s self-seeking mendacity are absolutely minuscule. Nothing emerges spotless from a toxic, hateful, entrenched scenario such as that. 

So here’s a word to the wise. It would be a catastrophic error of judgment by the good, honest members of @birkolabour CLP to hurriedly anoint Wirral Council’s Tony Norbury as the chosen Corbynite candidate without first carrying out their own research and due diligence.

A good starting point would be to check out the Twitter timeline of Wirral In It Together with searches for the keywords “@wirral_in_it  @TonyNorbury2”.

Also, do some timely #Wirralgate research on Twitter or Google and discover what the local media and newspapers are too cowardly, too compromised or too goddam captured to report.

Then ask yourselves the question, “Why hasn’t Councillor Norbury, Labour’s very prominent, alleged racism champion acted on information received and taken steps to report Frank Field’s election agent Councillor George Davies to the local party for investigation?”

After all @birkolabour and the people of Birkenhead… this is an absolutely key moment and one which will impact heavily on yours and your children’s futures.

Whatever you do, be careful you don’t replace a dud with a *sleeper*, one whom it’s possible may have been groomed for purpose as the ideal “slot-in” with 78 year-old Frank Field’s retirement surely now in sight. Politics is a dirty game and – since 1979 – particularly sordid around these parts. 

And as we all know to our cost, once these MPs are cemented in and enjoying their £77,379* a year job, they’re often there for 5 years at the very minimum… and are notoriously difficult to unseat.

But more tellingly, Norbury has been a Wirral Councillor since early 2012. Six long years.

With a general election in the offing, let’s be mindful that he’s been keeping his nose clean, toeing the line, facilitating cuts and austerity and closing and demolishing disabled children’s schools at hard right Labour Wirral Council, and is now being pushed as ‘the likely candidate to emerge via open selection’.

I’ve placed an FOI request for Norbury’s voting record. This has been done to get an idea if he really is as left wing as he purports to be.

So let’s see if his actions speak louder than his words. 


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Anti-Semitism, Israel and the Labour Party [version 2] – by Paul Davies, suspended Vice-Chair of Wallasey Constituency Labour Party

Paul Davies suspended vice chair

Wallasey CLP vice-Chair Paul Davies remains suspended, two years after the alleged offence – follow the links below and the suggestion is there was no offence


How and why was Wallasey CLP suspended?

How and why was Paul Davies suspended?

Paul on BBC North West Tonight before his suspension

With Labour currently holding their National Conference just across the river in Liverpool, it’s the perfect time to remind ourselves of the title subjects, some of the history, the people and the organisations involved and where things currently stand.

The following is a measured, comprehensive and brilliantly-presented examination of these controversial issues.


Anti-Semitism, Israel and the Labour Party



“There is no smoke without fire”

“Corbyn is too relaxed about Antisemitism and supports Palestinian Terrorists”

“2000 anti-Semitic posts on Social Media by supporters of Corbyn”

“It’s a witch hunt”

“It is a campaign being orchestrated by opponents of Corbyn inside and outside the Labour Party”

“If you tell a lie often enough then people will start to believe it”


Much of the current criticism claiming Anti-Semitism in the Labour Party in general and the Left in particular emanates from the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism which published a “Barometer of Anti-Semitism” in 2017.


Paradoxically, considering the recent uproar, in this publication it states on page 6:

Our data also revealed patterns in antisemitism across political divides, with supporters of left-wing political parties and supporters of the ‘remain’ camp in the EU referendum  less likely to be anti-Semitic than those on the right or supporters of the ‘leave’ camp.


On the same page the report states that 40% of Conservative supporters show some sign of antisemitism in their responses when canvassed whilst the figure for Labour supporters is 32%


On page 9 however, reporting on a survey of British Jews, it reveals that 83% believe that the Labour Party harbours anti-Semites in its ranks compared to only 17% who believe the same of the Tories. (40% also believed the Greens and UKIP to harbour anti-Semites and the figure for the Liberals was 36%).


The apparent contradiction in the survey of Labour Supporters and the survey of British Jews is explained:


By comparing these responses with the data from the polls of the British population that we commissioned YouGov to undertake, we can pinpoint the problem.

The YouGov data shows, for example, that Labour Party supporters are less likely to be anti-Semitic than other voters, so the cause of British Jews’ discontentment with the Labour Party must be the way that it has very publicly failed to robustly deal with the anti-Semites in its ranks. This means that the Labour Party has fallen out of step with its core supporters, who are generally less likely to hold anti-Semitic beliefs.


The other possibility of course is that the perception of those Jews who were polled does not match the reality. Unfortunately we do not seem to have sufficient information to determine whether the conclusion reached by the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism is correct and it would assist in any discussion if we knew the exact number of Labour Party members who are accused of anti-Semitism and what exactly it is alleged constitutes their anti-Semitic behaviour.  In the meantime I have prepared this document to both clear my own head regarding this controversial subject and also to aid the debate among any interested Party members.

Historical Background

In any consideration of history there is always the question of where to start.


For many religious fundamentalists any discussion regarding Israel starts and finishes with the purported promise made by God that Israel is the Jews Promised Land. The modern history of Israel however starts at the end of the 19th Century.


For many hundreds of years Jews had suffered discrimination and persecution throughout Europe and by the end of the 19th Century this had led to the call by some Jews, known as Zionists, for the establishment of a Jewish State where Jews would be free from such persecution.


This call for a Jewish State was not supported by the mainstream of Jews at the time and was opposed mainly on one of two grounds. Some Jews believed that they were entitled to live as equals in the countries where they were currently living and that rather than move they should campaign for equal rights. Orthodox Jews felt that the Promised Land could only be entered when the waited for messiah led them into it and it was wrong to move to Palestine before then. 


After the First World War and the defeat of Turkey, the old Ottoman Empire in the Middle East was carved up by the British and French Governments. This carving up of countries and their populations as the spoils of war set the seed for most if not all of the problems in the Middle East that we experience today.


As part of this process the British had declared, by way of the Balfour Declaration, that they would support the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.


This declaration was made in a letter to Lord Rothschild who had been lobbying the British Government on behalf of the Zionist Movement.


His Majesty’s Government views with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing will be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.


No one thought to ask the opinion of the Arabs (Muslim and Christian) who were already living in Palestine as to what they would think of this proposal!


Given the persecution that Jews were suffering in most European States it is not surprising that many Jews longed for a Homeland but nor is it surprising that from the outset most Arab Palestinians did not want mass immigration of Jews from foreign countries. Arabs also felt betrayed by the Balfour Declaration because the British had previously promised them their own country as a reward for helping Britain during WW1.


The British took control of Palestine and ruled it from 1917 until 1948. In 1923 this position was formalised by a League of Nations Mandate.


In 1920 the British Authorities reported that the population of Palestine (which at that time consisted of the current State of Israel and the occupied territories on the West Bank) stood at 700,000 with the vast majority being Arab Muslims with 77,000 Arab Christians and 76,000 Jews. During the period of the British Mandate the overall population increased to 1.9 million and the Jewish population increased to 630,000.


The increase in the Jewish population reflects the persecution being fled from in Europe but the situation was still that the establishment of a Jewish Homeland in Palestine was not supported by the majority of European and American Jews.


An increase in the Jewish population from 11% to 33% was bound to lead to tension and there was violence towards the Jewish newcomers who in turn formed defensive militias. During the 1930s there was a failed 3 year Arab revolt against British rule, demanding Arab independence and an end to open ended Jewish immigration. This violent revolt was put down by the combined efforts of the British Army and Jewish militias.  The death toll was 262 British, between 100-300 Jews and between 2,000-5,000 Arabs (depending on whose figures you accept). In addition 4 Jews and 108 Arabs were executed by the British.


After WW2 the British attempted to restrict the number of Jews entering Palestine from Europe but survivors of the Holocaust and some of the Zionist Groups in Palestine were in no mood to accept any restrictions. The result was guerrilla warfare/terrorism against the British during which over 300 British Soldiers, Police Officers and civilian administrators were killed and between 50-100 Jewish Insurgents/terrorists.  


The term Terrorist is appropriate here in the view of many as the actions included the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem in which 91 people including 28 British soldiers died and the hanging of two kidnapped British sergeants. To others the Zionists responsible for these actions were justified and the perpetrators considered heroes fighting for a Jewish Homeland.


Not all Zionists supported those who killed British soldiers and civilians and David Ben Gurion the leader of the largest Zionist Group (and future Prime Minister) condemned the attack on the King David Hotel but Binjamin Netanyahu the current Prime Minister attended a 60th anniversary commemoration of the attack in July 2006 at which a plaque was unveiled.


Jewish heroic insurgents/terrorists robbed banks, blew up a Shell Oil Refinery, planted booby traps and IEDs to kill British Police and Soldiers and used lorry bombs. Over 300 British soldiers were killed.


One Group, the Irgun, attacked British Army facilities in Germany and another, Lehi, were stopped by French Police from flying a plane from France to drop a bomb on the House of Commons. The British embassy in Rome was bombed, several bombs detonated in London (the biggest, which would have caused major fatalities failed to detonate) and 21 letter bombs were sent to British politicians including Prime Minister Clement Atlee.    


Unsurprisingly following the horrors of the Holocaust the previous opposition to Zionism amongst Jews worldwide all but disappeared even among those Jews who had no intention of ever moving to Palestine. Non-Jews in Europe and America also had great sympathy for the concept of a safe homeland for Jews.


The British Mandate in Palestine ended in 1948 and Palestinian Jews immediately announced the establishment of an Independent Jewish State and this triggered a Civil War and the first of the Arab Israeli wars as the Palestinians living in Palestine did not want a Jewish State established.


The United Nations proposed the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Arab States but a look at the map shows that, as proposed, this would not have led to a viable Jewish State. The decision by the Jews to establish Israel did create a viable Jewish State but led to the Civil War and a massive expulsion or flight in the face of mass killings by Jews of Arabs of 750,000 Arabs from land they had lived on for generations but which was now occupied by the victorious Jewish forces. The Jewish forces then destroyed hundreds of villages to prevent the refugees ever returning.


Since then there have been a number of Arab Israeli wars each one of which has resulted in victory for Israel, the expansion of the State of Israel and an increase in the number of Palestinian Refugees. Since the war of 1967 there has also been a gradual shift to the right in Israeli Governments.


Since the declaration of Independence a number of countries (including most Arab ones) have refused to recognise Israel as a legitimate State and Palestinians who were expelled from Israel or who fled as refugees have demanded the right to return to their homes.


Israel has justified its actions of Occupation outside of its own boundaries, the development of Settlements in the Occupied Territories and refusal to accept Palestinian refugees back to their homeland by the fact that it feels threatened by the surrounding Arab States and the various Arab militias, some of which pledge the destruction of the State of Israel.


Many Israelis feel that they can only secure their borders by occupying the West Bank and building Jewish Settlements there. Some Zionists see the expulsion of Arabs,  the occupation of the West Bank and the Settlements as a step towards the establishment of a Jewish State in all the land promised to them by God. The United Nations has condemned the Occupation, the building of Settlements and the building of the Israeli security wall. It has called for the right of Palestinians to be allowed to return to their historic homeland.  The expelled Palestinian refugees still want to go home and those living in Gaza and the West Bank want an independent and viable Palestinian State.





The establishment of the State of Israel by an influx of European Jews, the displacement of Palestinian Arabs and the Arab Israeli conflicts will fuel controversy, heated debate and violence for many years to come. It should come as no surprise that this should spill over into the politics of other countries including Britain; a country which more than any other has been heavily involved in Middle East politics throughout the period.


The current question is whether the debates about Israel and Palestine within the Labour Party give rise to antisemitism.


The accusations against Jeremy Corbyn and the Left is that they are either anti-Semitic or tolerate anti-Semitic members because of sympathy with the plight of the Palestinians. It is further alleged by some that opposition to the policies of Israel is used to mask underlying anti-Semitism.


The accusation against those making the allegations of antisemitism is that they are looking for any excuse to make these allegations as a way of undermining the Left and is a tactic to close down any criticism of Israel.


Few members of the Labour Party, and none I have met, would consider themselves anti-Semitic any more than they would consider themselves racist.


Members on the left and right of Labour would universally condemn attacks on Jews or synagogues or desecration of Jewish graves. They would not indicate any support for Hitler, the holocaust or condone holocaust denial.


There are several however who are being accused of using anti-Semitic language and this has led to argument regarding the accepted definition of anti-Semitism especially when discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There may well be some members who are anti-Semitic just as there will be some who are Racist. The Labour Party will, to some extent, reflect the general population.


There will be some currently attacking the Left who feel genuine offence at the language used by some supporters of Palestinian rights and there will be some who will cynically see it as an opportunity to attack the Left. We should all be aware that enemies of Labour (and in particular of the Labour Left) will seize on any careless use of language whether it is intended to be anti-Semitic or not.


There is an internationally accepted definition of anti-Semitism which has been adopted by the UK Government and used by the Police when determining if a hate crime has been committed. It is this definition, and particularly the interpretation of it, which is fuelling much of the latest controversy.

I have highlighted the sentences in this definition which I believe have led to much of the current controversy over use of language. There are certainly some dangerous minefields to negotiate if anyone wishes to criticise the actions of the State of Israel whilst not falling foul of this definition of antisemitism as interpreted by some.

IHRA definition of anti-semitism

Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.

In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity (1). Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

  • Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
  • Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
  • Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
  • Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
  • Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, (2) than to the interests of their own nations.

Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the State of Israel taking into account the overall context could include:

  • Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor. (3)
  • Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation. (4)
  • Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
  • Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis. (5)
  • Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.(6)

However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).

Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.

Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.

Referring to each of the highlighted sentences in turn:

  1. In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity.

Of course Israeli Jews do not all share the same politics or the same views of relations with the Palestinians and the Peace Process. It is not difficult for Labour members to make sure when they discuss these issues that they recognise that all Israeli Jews are not responsible for the actions of their Government any more than all UK citizens are responsible for the actions of our Government.


  1. Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide

There is debate amongst Jewish scholars as to what level of support there should be from non-Israeli Jews for the State of Israel, which most Jews seek to defend at least in terms of its right to exist.


I cannot see how the question of where a person’s paramount loyalty rests can be determined unless it is put to some real test such as in a conflict between Britain and Israel and I cannot see any relevance in someone of the Left challenging the loyalty to Britain of a British Jew who also feels it necessary to defend Israel. We all know of British citizens who show some level of loyalty to Ireland, the West Indies or the Indian sub- continent. We on the Left have often been accused of having more loyalty towards International Socialism than British Nationalism!


Jews world-wide were singled out by the Nazis for humiliation, dehumanisation and annihilation. This was all Jews anywhere in the World. It would be very strange indeed if this did not result in some sense of unity amongst surviving Jews world-wide. Having been the victims of very real persecution for so long it is hardly surprising that most Jews all over the world have respect for a Jewish State that, as they see it, refuses to be pushed around.    .








  1. Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.

This is a much more tricky part of the definition to navigate.


Clearly any reading of history shows that it was not the original intention of all Zionists to establish a Jewish Homeland as a racist endeavour but most reasonable people who are acquainted with the history of the Middle East could easily come to the conclusion that the treatment of Arabs by the British and some Zionist groups prior to the establishment of Israel and by the Israeli State since its inception , both in Israel itself and the occupied West Bank,  is Racist. Many British and Zionist politicians had as little regard for Arabs as human beings on their own lands as the American Colonists had for Native Americans or the British Colonists for Aboriginal Australians and Africans.


Is it unacceptable to discuss the treatment of Arabs in the context of Racism? Are Arabs assured of equal treatment in Israel? Are Ethiopian  Jews in Israel treated the same as lighter skinned Jews? Can the treatment of West Bank Palestinians be compared to Apartheid?


The question of the “right to self-determination” can also lead to problems of interpretation. Can Israeli and Palestinian Arabs  have “self-determination” or is it reserved only for Israeli Jews?


From the beginning of the mass immigration of Jews to Palestine there have been Zionists who believed that Arabs should be expelled from their own country to make way for the Jewish State whilst other Zionists sought peaceful co-existence (just as there have been Palestinians who believed in expulsion of the Jewish immigrants and others who believed in peaceful co-existence).


Is it anti-Semitic to criticise the recent Israeli “Nation State Bill” which many Israeli commentators argue is racist and legitimises segregation between Jews and non Jews?  Would it be anti-Semitic to offer support to the tens of thousands of Christian Druze who protested in Tel Aviv claiming that the new law makes them second class citizens?


  1. Applying double standards by requiring of it a behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation

Double standards should always be opposed as hypocrisy but opposition to hypocrisy should also extend to defending the right to criticise the State of Israel. Sensitivity regarding allegations of  anti-Semitism cannot justify staying silent on the issue of the Palestinians.


Is it anti-Semitic to condemn Israel for developing nuclear weapons or is it double standards to turn a blind eye to this whilst waging war or imposing economic sanctions on other States in the Middle East who seek to develop them?


Should we not demand that all democratic nations should comply with United Nations resolutions?  Is it double standards to do nothing to enforce United Nations resolutions on the State of Israel whilst imposing sanctions on other countries that ignore UN resolutions?


Is it double standards to refer to the fighters of the Jewish Irgun who killed British Soldiers and bombed civilians in the cause of Jewish self-determination as heroes  whilst condemning those who kill Israeli soldiers and civilians in the cause of Palestinian self-determination as terrorists?


Is it anti-Semitic to even discuss such issues?


Israel is an anachronism in the context of the 20th century when Colonialism was coming to an end across the World. Most of the immigrants who founded the State in Arab Lands were Jews from Europe with a European outlook.


It is Geographically in Asia but is considered a Western Nation and participates in many European sporting events (including the Europa League) and the Eurovision contest. UK citizens travelling to Israel are covered by Travel Insurance for Europe. Is it wrong to judge the actions of Israel by comparing it to the standard of behaviour we would expect from European Nations? If it is right that sanctions are applied to Russia for occupying part of Ukraine would it be justified applying sanctions to Israel?


  1. Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

Any such comparison is ridiculous as well as offensive. People use this comparison too freely in a range of situations ranging from the actions of Traffic Wardens to recent Genocides when in fact there has been nothing I have seen anywhere in the world in recorded history that can be compared to the treatment of the Jews by the Nazis.


Whatever one feels about the treatment of Palestinians by Israel it cannot be compared to the Nazi Holocaust.


Even the most right wing Israeli is entitled to feel offended by comparison with Hitler and the Nazis as was Oliver Finegold the Jewish reporter on the Evening Standard who Ken Livingstone likened to a Nazi Concentration camp guard.


  1. Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

I have already referred to the differing views held by Israeli Jews and the same can even more obviously be said for Jews worldwide. Whilst most Jews worldwide support the existence of the State of Israel there are many different views about its domestic and foreign policies. There are Jews who support the Oslo Agreement and there are those who oppose it.


Jews as a collective are no more responsible for the poor treatment of Palestinians than the British population is for the invasion of Iraq or all Muslims for the actions of ISIS. It could however be argued that the Israeli Government judges all Palestinian Arabs as acting collectively or they could not justify to themselves the concept of Collective Punishment. (A tactic first used in Palestine by the British)


To many supporters of Palestinian rights, support for Israel appears to result in many Jewish Zionists completely ignoring the plight of the Palestinians and to justifying any action taken by the Israeli State regardless of any breaches of International Law. For many Jews, support for the plight of Palestinians is seen as support for groups that seek the destruction of Israel as a Jewish State.


Other tricky issues not specifically referred to in the definition of anti-Semitism

Is it legitimate to debate making it illegal to circumcise an infant other than for medical reasons? Is it legitimate to debate making it illegal to slaughter animals in line with religious doctrine? Is it legitimate to challenge the teachings of the bible?


Engaging in any one of these debates could end up with accusations of anti-Semitism being made but all should surely be acceptable in a Liberal Democracy.


Anti-Semitic Jews

One of the strangest facets of the current debate about anti-Semitism is the concept of the anti-Semitic Jew often referred to as “Self-Loathing Jews” or “Self-Hating Jew” by Jews who are on the right of the political spectrum.


It is a term used in a pejorative sense to refer to left wing Jews who criticise Israel in its treatment of Palestinians, challenge other policies of Israel or question aspects of the Jewish religion. It has led to Jews being suspended from the Labour Party for alleged anti-Semitism although to date I do not know of any expulsions.


I find it hard to accept that we should all be careful about our language when we discuss the policies of Right Wing Israelis but condone the use of such language as “Self Loathing Jew” to describe Left Wing Jews who do not conform to current mainstream Jewish and/or Zionist thinking.


Gerald Kaufman was a high profile Jewish Labour MP who was considered to be on the Right in the Labour Party. He was also, in a speech in the House of Commons in 2002 as reported in the Times of Israel in 2017, scathing about Israeli policy towards Palestinians:


“The current Israeli government ruthlessly and cynically exploits the continuing guilt among gentiles over the slaughter of Jews in the Holocaust as justification for their murder of Palestinians,” Kaufman said in a speech in parliament.


Referring to his personal background, as the son of Jewish refugees from Poland, he said: “My grandmother was ill in bed when the Nazis came to her home town. A German soldier shot her dead in her bed. My grandmother did not die to provide cover for Israeli soldiers murdering Palestinian grandmothers in Gaza.”


Kaufman compared Hamas’s fighters in Gaza to Jewish resistance fighters during the Second World War, saying: “The spokeswoman for the Israeli army, Major Leibovich, was asked about the Israeli killing of, at that time, 800 Palestinians. The total is now 1,000. She replied instantly that ‘500 of them were militants.’ That was the reply of a Nazi. I suppose the Jews fighting for their lives in the Warsaw ghetto could have been dismissed as militants.”


His opposition to Israel persisted into old age. In 2012, he penned a Huffington Post labelling Israel a “rogue state” and arguing that the fact that Israel is a democracy “means that the Israeli electorate is complicit in its government’s war crimes.”


I do not know if Kaufman is considered a self loathing Jew by those currently claiming Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party are anti-semitic but presume if a member of the Labour Party said such things today they would expelled pretty quickly after a storm of media protest.




The attitude of the press towards Ed Milliband the first Jewish Leader of the Labour Party could easily be argued as being anti-Semitic and some consider the widespread coverage of him, a secular Jew, being pictured eating a bacon sandwich as being anti-Semitic.


As a Jew who supports Palestinian rights Ed Milliband was certainly  never supported by the Board of  Deputies of British Jews and the press, of course, painted him as a dangerous left winger.



Various derogatory terms have been used about any individual Jew or group of Jews who have come to the defence of Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party.




Use of the Term Zionist

Most of the debate regarding anti-Semitism surrounds the right of Labour members to criticise Israel and Israeli politicians with regards to the treatment of Palestinians and the occupation of the West Bank. It is often the language used that is criticised although there are suspicions that those who make the complaints do not want any criticism at all of the State of Israel.

Some of the furore surrounds the use of the term “Zios” (referring to Zionists) by some on the Left.

The term “Zio”  is not mentioned in the Government definition but is specifically referred to in the Legal Opinion obtained by the Campaign Against Antisemitism regarding the meaning of the Government Definition of anti-Semitism.   .

“By way of a summary, our opinion is as follows:

(1) The Definition is a clear, meaningful and workable definition.

(2) The Definition is an important development in terms of identifying and preventing antisemitism, in particular in its modern and non-traditional forms, which often reach beyond simple expressions of hatred for Jews and instead refer to Jewish people and Jewish associations in highly derogatory, veiled terms (e.g. “Zio” or “Rothschilds”).

Personally I had never heard of the term “Zio”  as an abbreviation of Zionist until recently when I both read the Chakrobarti Report, which condemns use of the term, and saw a post on Social media which referred to “Zios”.

Apparently “Zio” is considered by some in the same way as “Paki” and if so should obviously not be used.  I would not have previously considered it offensive if I had heard it but would not have used it in this context.

I have often heard the use of the term Zionism to refer to Israeli policy and Zionist to describe those Israelis opposed to the “Two State Solution” but this seems to me to be usually used in an understandable error of oversimplification and does not signify anti-Semitism.

The history of Zionism is covered by many books and can be the subject of much debate but most scholars appear to consider the origin of modern Zionism to be a pamphlet called the “Jewish State” written by Theodor Herzl in 1895. In this pamphlet, written in response to the long running discrimination against and persecution of Jews in Europe, Herzl argued the need for Jews to create their own State somewhere in the world with both Argentina and Palestine being amongst the places that might be suitable.

Zionists in the original strict meaning of the word are simply Jews who believe in the establishment of a Jewish State where Jews can be free from discrimination and establish the right to self-determination.

Having said that Herzl did make his personal position clear in a letter to Cecil Rhodes shortly after he, as British Colonial Secretary, had defeated the Shona peoples of South Africa whose country was later renamed Rhodesia;

 “You are being invited to help make history. It doesn’t involve Africa, but a piece of Asia Minor; not Englishmen but Jews… How, then, do I happen to turn to you since this is an out-of-the-way matter for you? How indeed? Because it is something colonial… You, Mr. Rhodes, are a visionary politician or a practical visionary… I want you to put the stamp of your authority on the Zionist plan and to make the following declaration to a few people who swear by you: I, Rhodes have examined this plan and found it correct and practicable. It is a plan full of culture, excellent for the group of people for whom it is directly designed, and quite good for England, for Greater Britain….”

There was at its inception and continuing to this day considerable co-operation between Israel and white South Africans. 

From the very beginning of Zionism there have been disagreements amongst those Jews who consider themselves Zionists as to what form the Jewish State should take and, since the establishment of the State of Israel, what the policy should be towards the Palestinians. In addition there have always been Jews who are not Zionists and don’t support the establishment of a Jewish State. 

When someone declares themselves to be opposed to Zionism (when they actually mean they are opposed to the occupation of the West Bank by Israel and/or the return of Arab Refugees) then many (mainly right wing) Jews  and those claiming Anti-Semitism in Labour equate this  with opposition to the very existence of Israel even within the pre 1967 UN recognised  border.  The only logical way forward if one believes Israel should not exist as a Nation State they then argue is either mass deportation or destruction but I have never heard anyone in Labour advocate either.

I do not believe that all those using the term Zionist or Zio intend it to refer to all Jews but usually intend it to refer to those Jews who believe in the occupation of the West Bank and expansion of Settlements but nor do I find it difficult to criticise the policies of Israel without using either term. Avoiding their use avoids any genuine offence and removes the opportunity for any who are actually just looking for an excuse to accuse those who support the Palestinians as being Anti-Semitic.

It should also be remembered that the majority of UK citizens will have little knowledge of Middle East Politics so in discussing the plight of the Palestinians and the policies and actions of Israel it serves little purpose for those on the Left to use jargon as short hand if our intention is to raise the issues with the general public rather than just indulge in hyperbole amongst ourselves on Social Media.




High Profile Cases

There are several members of the Left who have been accused of anti-Semitism but the most prominent are Ken Livingstone and Jackie Walker.


Both are high profile figures on the Left and with that high profile comes responsibility.


Livingstone’s comparison of a Jewish reporter to a Concentration camp guard was offensive and could easily be seen as anti-Semitic. He argued that he did not know the reporter was Jewish (although his surname is Finegold, a Jewish name).


His reference in Radio interviews to Hitler supporting Zionism is even more questionable. His continued defence of his comments as being historically accurate is bizarre as is his suggestion that Hitler only went mad later on when he started killing Jews.


Hitler never supported Zionism but did briefly support the emigration of German Jews to Palestine and reached a temporary agreement with a Zionist group to help facilitate this. This was not because he supported a Jewish Homeland or was concerned about Jewish persecution but simply saw it as one way to get rid of Jews from Germany (and appropriate any wealth they had). To suggest that he only went mad once he implemented the Final Solution could be seen as implying that in everything that went before, including his vilification and persecution of the Jews, he was sane.


Whether Livingstone was ignorant, careless with words or being deliberately provocative he was wrong and should have known better. He certainly had a case to answer although whether he was being foolish, offensive or anti-Semitic is open to debate.  


The case of Jackie Walker is interesting in many ways.


She claims Jewish heritage and her partner is Jewish. In some articles she is described as Jewish in others that her father was Jewish (to be Jewish you are required to have a Jewish mother or to have converted to Judaism). As the Campaign against Anti-Semitism and Jewish Chronicle refer to her as anti-Semitic and not a self-hating Jew I presume that she is not recognised as being Jewish.


She is known as being anti-Racist and states that she opposes anti-Semitism. I have no reason to suggest she considers herself as either a Racist or Anti-Semitic.


She has however made comments that could be considered as falling under the definition of anti-Semitism.


Her first highly publicised controversial comments were in a Facebook post:     


“I’m sure you know millions more Africans were killed in the African Holocaust and their oppression continues today on a global scale in a way it doesn’t for Jews and many Jews, my ancestors too were the chief financiers of the sugar and slave trade which of course is why there so many early synagogues in the Caribbean.


So who are the victims and what does it mean? We are victims and perpetrators to some extent through choice. And having been a victim does not give you the right to be a perpetrator.”


As with so much in history there are different versions of the “truth” and many different numbers are quoted. Figures for the number of slaves who died in transit range from 1-3 million out of an estimated 9-12 million who were transported. This does not tell the full story of the suffering however as there are varying (but consistently multi million) quoted numbers of Africans who died in the wars that were fought in Africa to secure slaves or in captivity before they even reached the ships.


The question is; how can one compare two evil events and why would one choose to?  That however is not the biggest question that arises from this short Facebook Post.


Any thinking person on the Left is well aware of the stereotype of the “money grabbing Jew” which has been used by anti-Semites for hundreds of years. Any thinking person on the Left would realise that to apportion particular blame to Jews for financing the Slave Trade plays to this stereotype and would be considered offensive by today’s Jews.


The comment is also historically inaccurate according to most historians of the slave trade and Jackie fails to mention that the main reason for the number of synagogues in the Americas is because many Portuguese and Spanish Jews who being faced with a demand  to convert to Christianity fled to the Americas rather than face the Inquisition, torture and death.


There have been many hundreds of studies of the Slave Trade and considerations of the relative role of the British, Dutch, Portuguese, Arabs, Muslims, Christians (even the Quakers in the early days of slavery), Africans, Asians, the American Founding Fathers and Jews. The simple fact is that no one single group of people can be said to be responsible for the Slave Trade and there is no more need for today’s Jews to feel collective responsibility for the Slave Trade than today’s population  of Liverpool or Bristol.  It is not surprising that to single out the Jews gives rise to a suspicion of anti-Semitism.


Perhaps the strangest part of her Post is the comment;


“We are victims and perpetrators to some extent through choice.”


I doubt that one single African shackled in a slave ship or one single Jew entering the gas chamber felt that they were a victim to any extent through choice.


Jackie is certainly not afraid of courting controversy and hit the headlines again when she attended an anti-Semitism event at Labour Conference and asked:


“Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Holocaust Day was open to all people who had experienced Holocaust?”


I would always consider this an inappropriate question at an anti-Semitism event  the and would not be the slightest concerned if there was a separate Jewish Holocaust Day but, unfortunately for her, Holocaust Memorial Day actually commemorates the victims of the Nazis and the genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur.


Jackie had clearly made a mistake. When this was pointed out to her, instead of apologising for her mistake she allegedly blamed the organisers of Holocaust Memorial Day for not publicising this fact well enough.


As with Ken Livingstone, Jackie Walker whether she was ignorant, careless with words or being deliberately provocative was wrong and should have known better. She also had a case to answer although, as with Ken, whether she was being foolish, offensive or anti-Semitic is open to debate.


Jackie is also quoted as stating that there is no definition of anti-Semitism she feels comfortable with. This comment more than anything perhaps illustrates the problems some on the Left have with defining anti-Semitism. It is not ours to define.


I consider both Jackie and Ken to have been out of order and to have brought the Left into disrepute. That does not necessarily mean they should be expelled from Labour but they should be held to account in some way and cannot simply hide behind an allegation that they are being victimised or, as Jackie would have it, (another inappropriate use of language in my opinion) “lynched”.  They could start by recognising their mistakes.


I also think that comments like these made by high profile members of the Left undermines the cause of the Palestinians as discussion of their plight is lost in the debate about anti-Semitism in the Labour Party.



Other members with allegations of anti-Semitism

I am highly critical of both Ken Livingstone and Jackie Walker as they, albeit unwittingly, assisted opponents of the Labour Left and did absolutely nothing to further the cause of Palestinians. They clouded the debate and allowed the Press to have a field day. Partly as result of their actions we have few details of the exact allegations against the suspended members with a lower profile.


As Labour Party members we should surely be made aware of what charges are being levelled and the number of members involved.



Concluding comments

There is definitely truth in the suggestion that the media is biased against the Left in general and Jeremy Corbyn in particular and will look for any opportunity to denigrate a Socialist Labour Party. There is no point us complaining about this or getting upset about the biased reporting. It is what it is and how it always will be. We have to do our best to both counter this bias and avoid giving the Right easy opportunities to make accusations.


There can be no doubt that anti-Semitism exists and has done for thousands of years. It is likely that there will be a few Labour Party members who are anti-Semitic just as there will be a few who are racists, misogynists, homophobes or criminals.


I have no doubt whatsoever that the vast majority of Labour Party members do not fit into any of these categories but when it comes to anti-Semitism there will be an unknown number who get confused regarding what constitutes anti-Semitic language in today’s Labour Party..


What differentiates the Labour Party from other parties is that there will be more passionate feelings towards the plight of the Palestinians and the injustice they face. This concern for the Palestinians can easily erupt into emotive language especially when we see on our TV screens stone throwing Palestinian youths being shot by Israeli Defence Forces.


There may be some truth in the allegations that some Labour Party members (out of 500,000) either harbour anti-Semitism in their psyche or express themselves in language that could be considered as anti-Semitic.  


I can remember a time when decent people who would be horrified to be accused of being Racist would casually refer to the “Paki shop on the corner” or to going to a Chinese Restaurant as “going for a Chinkie”. We have moved on and such terms are seldom heard.


We should be prepared to consider the correct language to be used when debating Israel and the Palestinians.  As Shami Chakrobarti put it in her Report;


…..it is possible to criticise foreign powers (including the State of Israel), without resorting (by accident or design) to inflammatory (rather than persuasive) language.


There may well be truth in the allegations that the current campaign against Corbyn and the Left is part of a long standing campaign by some Zionists to undermine anyone who supports the Palestinians and/or criticises Israel.  It is clear that those same Labour MPs and members who pledged “anyone but Corbyn” during two leadership elections coincidently seem to have suddenly discovered anti-Semitism throughout the Labour Left (but don’t appear to have noticed it anywhere in the Tory Party). I do not know how many of these Labour MPs have been active in anti-racist demonstrations in the past or if they have ever issued a word criticising the actions of Israel or in support of the Palestinians.


Those of us on the Left should be wary however of developing a bunker mentality when we are under attack.  When there are people out to get us we should always avoid giving our opponents an open goal. We should also consider whether we are being deliberately provoked. We should also consider if we are falling short in our use of language.


It does not seem to be beyond our wit to ensure that when criticising the actions of the Israeli Government and championing the cause of Palestinian rights we can, as recommended by the Chakrobarti Report, avoid terminology that could be perceived as anti-Semitic, according to the established definition, without any restraint on genuine debate.


We must ensure that we engage in a genuine examination of what has really been happening in the Labour Party whilst ensuring that we are not bounced into self-flagellation by the ever hostile Press or those who wish to deflect attention from what is happening in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza.


Again in line with the Chakrobarti Report we should ensure that there is a Disciplinary Process in the Labour Party which considers sanctions other than expulsion and reserve that sanction for the repeat offender and the unrepentant. Also in line with the Report disciplinary procedures should be “clear and transparent”.


Jeremy Corbyn, Jennie Formby and Jon Lansman have all made recent comments suggesting that they accept there is more widespread antisemitism in the Labour Party than I have ever witnessed and we all deserve to be told not only the numbers who stand accused of anti-Semitism but details of what exactly they are accused of. Then we can all assess the extent of the problem for ourselves. Sweeping generalisations are simply not good enough.


I will end with an extract from the introduction to the Chakrobarti Report


An occasionally toxic atmosphere is in danger of shutting down free speech within the Party rather than facilitating it, and is understandably utilised by its opponents. It is completely counterproductive to the Labour cause, let alone to the interests of frightened and dispossessed people, whether at home or abroad. Whilst the Party seeks to represent wider society, it must also lead by example, setting higher standards for itself than may be achievable, or even aspired to, elsewhere. It is not sufficient, narrowly to scrape across some thin magic line of non-anti-Semitic or non-racist motivation, speech or behaviour, if some of your fellow members, voters or potential members or voters feel personally vulnerable, threatened or excluded as the result of your conduct or remarks. The Labour Party has always been a broad coalition for the good of society. We must set the gold standard for disagreeing well.


The actions of the Israeli State are such that they are easy to condemn while staying within these suggested guidelines even if it does seem rather too polite to engage in “disagreeing well” when discussing the Middle East, the building of Jewish Settlements on the West Bank, the bombing of Gaza, the launching of missiles towards Israel or when responding to those (including several Labour MPs)  who continually seek to undermine the concept of a Socialist Labour Party in Britain, a party that stands up for the rights of Palestinians.

Link to Google Docs [Version 1]:


Posted in General, Labour Party Upheaval | 4 Comments