We have in our possession the document issued as guidance by the NEC for investigations of any alleged Disciplinary offenses NEC Advice Note:

`How to carry out an investigation into a breach of rule by a Member`

The document ends with an example of the bundle to be presented to the disciplinary panel.

The first paragraph refers to the member as: Mr A Member.

But after that the member under investigation is referred to as DONALD DUCK!

Model Charge Sheet

Charge Sheet for Mr A. Member (Membership Number), Anytown CLP

The charge is that Mr A. Member is in breach of rule 2.I.8 regarding the following:

Charge 1

That on 18 January 2013 during the AGM of Littletown Branch, and subsequent Littletown Branch meetings on 7 March and 4 April 2013 and also a CLP General Meeting meeting on 26 February 2013,

Donald Duck behaved in an intimidating, threatening and/or uncomradely manner towards other members present and/or encouraged other members of the ward to behave in an uncomradely fashion.

This strongly implies that whoever compiled the document thinks it’s a laughing matter when it’s not. Secondly the Donald Duck would have been removed by any conscientious discerning person as it’s disrespectful, and even if only seen by the investigating person is dismissive and patronising.

It is further extraordinary that ANYONE seeing this does not lodge a formal complaint against it. But then the Labour Party bureaucracy doesn`t provide a way to complain about them directly does it!

We cannot think of any procedural guidance issued by any organisation that would produce and circulate such a document containing such a ‘joke’ on such a serious matter.

We at the Members Compliance Support Team are astonished and incensed on behalf of members that they are referred to in such a joking fashion. We have been privy to some heartbreaking stories of the effect of the `purge` on people, and this just beggars belief.