The Forde report into Labour party factionalism under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership is deeply critical of staff members who were supportive of the Labour leader and those bitterly opposed to his time in office.Here are 10 key takeaways from the 138-page report: Debilitating factionalism Martin Forde QC paints a depressing picture of two rival camps – based around Corbyn’s office and Labour HQ in London’s Victoria – locked in a bitter struggle for control, which hampered the functioning of the party. The factions ended up in a cycle of attack and counterattack, with each side assuming that the other was acting in bad faith (sometimes justifiably, sometimes not) and responding in kind. Weaponising antisemitism Both sides used antisemitism as a weapon, with some denying its existence and others using it primarily as a means to attack Corbyn. Some anti-Corbyn elements of the party seized on antisemitism as a way to attack Jeremy Corbyn, and his supporters saw it simply as an attack on the leader and his faction – with both ‘sides’ thus weaponising the issue and failing to recognise the seriousness of antisemitism, its effect on Jewish communities and on the moral and political standing of the party. Dysfunctional discipline Labour’s disciplinary systems were “not fit for purpose” and exploited by different factions. In 2016, there were 5,000 unresolved complaints, almost of third of which related to antisemitism. But Forde did not find evidence of “systematic attempts” by Corbyn’s team to interfere in disciplinary process. The problem was principally a lack of clarity – on both sides – about how involved Loto (the leader of the opposition’s office) should be; and this was aggravated by the mutual antagonism between HQ staff and Loto. ‘Trot hunting’ and bellringing There was concerning behaviour by senior staff opposed to Corbyn attempting to expel party members. Staff described this process as “hunting out thousands of trots”, “trot busting”, “trot spotting”, “trot hunting” and one suggested searching the pro-Corbyn hashtag “#imwithjezza” to see if users had posted abuse. One employee described regular “bellringing” in Labour HQ. I was advised that the bellringing was conducted by the ‘compliance’ unit and represented the successful suspension or expulsion of a member – often surrounded by the description of such members as ‘trots’. Abusive WhatsApps A leaked 2020 report, which triggered the Forde inquiry, was a “factional document” that “selectively quoted” some messages. But the Forde report found that the quoted WhatsApps from a group of senior management overall were not misrepresented or misleading. We find that the messages on the SMT [senior management team] WhatsApp reveal deplorably factional and insensitive, and at times discriminatory, attitudes expressed by many of the party’s most senior staff. The substance of the quoted messages is concerning – and totally inappropriate from senior staff of a purportedly progressive political party 2017 election campaign clashes Anti-Corbyn staffers in Labour HQ did not deliberately try to throw the election, as some leftwingers have suggested – but did set up a secret operation, channelling funds to MPs who they wanted to protect. Loto, meanwhile, sought to support its own favoured MPs. We find that both HQ staff and Loto staff wanted the party to win with as many of their favoured MPs in place as possible, which prevented fully objective decision-making; the two sides were trying to win in different ways. Racism There was “overt and underlying racism and sexism” in the abusive WhatsApp messages included in the leaked report, pointing to a deeper problem with racism in the Labour party. Racism in the party is not experienced by individuals solely through acts of aggression or microaggression towards them personally – it is experienced through seeing colleagues being passed over for promotion; being the only person from an ethnic minority background around a meeting table; being managed by a near-exclusively white senior team; and hearing the particular disdain which colleagues reserve for (for example) ethnic minority MPs, councillors and CLP (constituency Labour party) members. Chaos in Corbyn’s office There was hostility from Labour HQ towards Corbyn’s office, but his operation appeared deeply dysfunctional. We have heard from a number of staff who worked in Loto in this period that the operation was unstructured and at times chaotic, with a lack of clear decision-making and reporting lines and, in particular, a reluctance on the part of Jeremy Corbyn himself to make and communicate unequivocal decisions. Factional hires Recruitment became a battleground in the struggle for control of the Labour party under Corbyn’s leadership, with both sides seeking to shore up their power base by hiring sympathisers – leading to a lack of diversity. Recruitment practices were weaponised by both HQ and Loto in the relevant period … The effect was to entrench and exacerbate the divisions between the two camps. It also meant that people deemed factionally appropriate were routinely hired or promoted (by both sides) to roles for which they were not an ideal fit. Corbyn’s cooperation Almost no named individuals are criticised by Forde. But he observes that the former Labour leader did not himself respond to requests for interview, instead signing a joint submission. Regrettably, certain prominent members of the party – including those central to the factual matrix – either declined to meet with the panel or failed to respond to our requests for evidence. Most notably … Jeremy Corbyn did not engage in our requests to interview him.