Wednesday, 30 November 2016

Lucy Allan's 'Unless you die' email - one year on and here are my answers to 10 key questions

On 1st December 2015 Lucy Allan caused a national outcry when she published an email she had received from a constituent on her facebook page to which she had added the words 'Unless you die'. She claimed that those words came from a second email. One year on I give my answers to 10 key questions.        

1. Has Lucy Allan shown us the second email yet?

 After a year Lucy Allan has still not published the mysterious second email. I think we have more chance of catching a glimpse of the Loch Ness monster than the fabled second email. Many people have asked Lucy Allan on facebook and twitter why she will not publish the second email but they have been simply ignored and blocked.


2. But didn't Lucy Allan actually receive a death threat?

 It was reported that Lucy Allan received a death threat by telephone which you can listen to here .

This phone call was received several days after Lucy Allan published the altered email from her constituent on her facebook page.

I do not know the outcome of the police investigation into this phone call but it would be interesting to know if the caller was ever traced. What I find quite strange is that Lucy Allan rushed to release this tape to the media but she has still not published the email which she alleges contains the words ‘Unless you die’ (or indeed explained why she cannot publish it) in spite of a widespread call for her to do so. Little wonder that many people have concluded that she simply made up those words in an attempt to gain public sympathy.  

3. What became of the police investigation into the online harassment of Lucy Allan? 

As far as I am aware, in spite of Lucy Allan's allegations of harassment, nobody was arrested or charged with any offence. In my view, Lucy Allan's reports to the police were just a smokescreen to deflect attention away from her altering of her constituent's email and the outrage she had caused by adding the words 'Unless you die' to the email.

Genuine online harassment of MPs is unacceptable as is online harassment of anyone. What Lucy Allan did, in adding the words 'Unless you die' to give the appearance that someone wished her dead, and then not showing the second email, was a huge disservice to all the genuine victims of online harassment.  


4. Isn't it time to forget about Lucy Allan because there are more important things to worry about?

There are certainly more important things going on in the world than Lucy Allan, such as Brexit, Syria and in my own town the planned closure of Telford's A&E and Women's and Children's unit. 

However, I personally believe that if we are to have a healthy democracy in this country we need our MPs to be open and accountable to the electorate (they are supposed to be open and accountable under the House of Commons Code of Conduct paragraph 8). 

If MPs are not open and accountable, then the already significant mistrust in politicians will just grow and people will become increasingly disaffected. After all, didn't Donald Trump, who has never held a political post in his life, get elected as President of USA partly because people were so fed up with politicians?

Let us not forget what Lucy Allan did. She received an email from a constituent which asked her to vote against the bombing of Syria, and 4 days later she chose to publish that email on her facebook page, but only after she made wholesale changes to that email and to make it appear that her constituent wished her dead. She still denies doctoring the email in spite of all these changes being made which you can see here.   

5. Why didn't the media succeed in getting an answer from Lucy Allan? 

Some people have claimed that there was a media bias in favour of the Conservatives that meant that journalists backed off from challenging  Lucy Allan to publish the second email. There might be some truth in that, but I think that after many journalists tried to get an answer from her, it was more to do with the story no longer being seen as newsworthy, especially after the 2015 Christmas break which came at the right time for the beleaguered Telford MP. 

Remember that promise that Lucy Allan gave to Channel 4 about returning to give her account of the story? Here it is Sadly that follow-up interview never materialised. So perhaps Lucy Allan really didn't want to give her side of the story after all.

The BBC Sunday Politics West Midlands programme and in particular journalist Joanne Gallacher emerged with great credit because they stood up to Lucy Allan by not allowing her to veto questions about the 'Unless you die' email. Because of this Lucy Allan chose not to appear on the programme. 

6. So, did anyone ever interview her about the email?

Because we felt that the media had not got to to the truth of the Lucy Allan 'Unless you die' email, earlier this year a group of us produced a short video which included interviews with the constituent who sent the email, and other Telford constituents including myself. The video also includes Lucy Allan being questioned at the Queen's birthday celebrations about her constituent's email and her astonishing denial of ''I didn't alter any email Sir''. The video can be seen here.  

7. Why didn't the complaints to the Parliamentary Watchdog get upheld? 

In an interview published in the Shropshire Star on 18th January 2016 Lucy Allan stated:

 ''Some of the allegations were very serious and if they were accurate then there certainly would have been something the Parliamentary Standards Committee would want to look at.''

I think Lucy Allan's statement was misleading because the complaints made to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards about her conduct were simply outside the Commissioner's remit. Currently the Commissioner can investigate allegations that an MP has breached the rules of conduct set out in paragraph 10-16 of the Code of Conduct whereas I believe Lucy Allan breached paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct by not being open and accountable in explaining the 'Unless you die' email. 

8. Why didn't the Conservative Party take any action against Lucy Allan?

I think many people hit on the real reason very quickly. Lucy Allan has only a slim majority of 730 and the Conservative Government itself only has a small majority and so the Conservatives cannot afford to lose the Telford seat. When I wrote to complain to the then leader of the Conservative Party, David Cameron, I received a predictable response from 10 Downing Street which effectively ignored my complaint.

Locally, whereas I have not seen members of the Telford Conservative Association condemn Lucy Allan for what she did, they have certainly not defended her actions either.  I believe that it is still more likely than not that Lucy Allan will be deselected before the next General election because the local Conservatives are aware of how deeply unpopular she is. 

9. Can't we just forgive Lucy Allan, as she is only human and we all make mistakes?

 Personally, I could have forgiven Lucy Allan if, at the time this happened last year, she had admitted that she had made up the words 'Unless you die' and apologised to her constituent. After all, we all make mistakes (although adding 'Unless you die' to a constituent's email to make it appear that the constituent wishes you dead is in a category of its own).  

However, rather than holding her hands up, Lucy Allan continued to deny making up those words and she ignored or blocked most people who dared to challenge her on it. In my own case, she even went as far as fabricating a lie that my behaviour amounted to stalking her, whereas all I had done was email her, asking her why she would not publish the second email. 

So no, I will not be forgiving Lucy Allan as Telford deserves an MP who does not make false accusations and outrageous claims that are not supported by evidence. 

10. Has long-term damage been done to Lucy Allan's re-election chances?

Even if Lucy Allan is not deselected before the next general election, I believe she will be trounced next time round because Telford voters will not forget what she did (in addition to her being a rather useless MP in my opinion). 

Her lack of popularity can be seen in how few people now like her tweets and posts on facebook (although this is also due to the number of people she has blocked!)

 Lucy Allan already has a slim majority of 730 and she also faces the prospect of losing more votes with planned boundary changes and so I think she needs to start thinking about booking a one-way ticket back to Putney.

  Neil Phillips

 Telford resident 

Tuesday, 10 May 2016

The MP, The Doctored Email and a Year of Silence

'' I didn't alter any email Sir''  

said Lucy Allan MP on 21/4/16 - hear her astonishing denial in this video

This video has been made by Telford residents and it tells the story of Lucy Allan's doctoring of the email sent by Telford resident Adam Watling including how she added the words 'Unless you die' to the email before publishing it on her facebook page on 1st December 2015.

Many people have interpreted Lucy Allan's actions as amounting to faking a death threat. She denies this and claims that the words 'Unless you die' came from a separate email, but she has never published that email or explained why she cannot publish it.

My own view is that, based on the evidence, there is no separate 'Unless you die' email and I believe that Lucy Allan made up these words herself and added them to her constituent's email to try and gain public sympathy by making it appear that a Telford resident wished her dead. I therefore believe that Lucy Allan has still not given an open and full account of the 'Unless you die' email to the public and to the media.

This video features Lucy Allan being interviewed on camera about the 'Unless you die' email as she attended the Queen's birthday celebrations in Telford (about 11:20 mins into the video). Her response is simply astonishing as she now denies making any alterations to Adam Watling's email.

The full extent of the changes made to Adam Watling's email before it was posted on Lucy Allan's facebook page is graphically demonstrated here . It shows substantial changes, radically altering the tone and content of the email, making it appear as if a Telford resident wished Lucy Allan dead. As well as the obvious alterations, look out for the subtle changes which have the effect of making the email look more of a personal attack on Lucy Allan.

Other people who you see in this film are Adam Watling ( the victim of Lucy Allan's doctored email) and three other Telford residents, including myself.  We give our account of how we tried to get a simple answer from Lucy Allan to a simple question - ''Why won't you publish the 'Unless you die' email ?''

The interviewer in the video is Alistair Mitchell who I believe is the first person to succeed in questioning Lucy Allan about the doctored email on camera.

In my view Lucy Allan should now give a further statement, which is a truthful explanation of the 'Unless you die' email, and resign.

Neil Phillips

Friday, 29 April 2016

Standing up for our Junior Doctors And why Lucy Allan’s comments are so absurd

Over the last three days I have been shocked by the comments made by Telford MP Lucy Allan against junior doctors both in tweets she has made and in a statement she made on her website.

On 27th April she tweeted:

Junior doctors: privileged young people, with tax payer funded training, who will become well paid consultants. #putpatientsfirst @TheBMA

In a statement made on her website yesterday she ended by saying:

“Having been afforded excellent life opportunities, junior doctors are holding the British public to ransom. People need to look past the lines being trotted out by the BMA to justify this action and question what is the real motive for these strikes.”

I am stunned by and ashamed of Lucy Allan’s comments because she is my MP and she has got her facts so horribly wrong.

The one profession I admire more than any other is the medical profession. This is something I could never do myself and I thank God that there are people who want to train and become doctors. There is a common saying that we trot out -  ‘it is not a matter of life or death’. Well, in the medical profession it often is a matter of life or death and in my view there is no greater responsibility than having someone’s life in your hands.

My family and I have had first-hand experience of hospital care with the NHS. We have found that doctors and nurses have always done a fantastic job, but it is clear that there is a shortage of resources. In my view the National Health Service is one of this country’s greatest assets but significant investment is needed to protect this valuable asset.   

Comments such as those made by Lucy Allan and the way in which this Government are mishandling the junior doctors' contracts will have the effect of making many doctors move abroad or change careers and will deter new doctors from entering the profession. We already have a crisis in the NHS through underfunding but the position will only get worse with a growing shortage of doctors.   

I do not understand why Lucy Allan is so spiteful in her attacks on junior doctors.  She is clearly wrong in what she has said as has been quickly pointed out by many irate junior doctors and also in some cases their parents.

Many junior doctors are not from privileged backgrounds, many are not ‘young’ (whatever Lucy Allan’s definition of young may be), many have huge debts through funding themselves through medical training and many do not go on to be well paid consultants.

I do not agree that junior doctors are holding the British public to ransom. Many of them have pointed out that they would earn a lot more under the new contracts the Government is seeking to impose but those doctors are still against the contracts because they are worried about patients’ safety and about making sure the NHS  is not dismantled.

Lucy Allan has to date not retracted her comments or issued an apology. Her track record of being in office has shown that she often deletes comments she regrets making but she generally does not apologise or admit that she is wrong.

I am afraid that Lucy Allan has a track record of making unsubstantiated allegations.  For example, she has made absurd claims about local councillors’ behaviour and she has alleged that she did not make up the words ‘Unless you die’ when she added them to a constituent’s email to make it appear as if he wished her dead.  In both of these examples she has failed to provide evidence to support her claims.

Following her attack on junior doctors Lucy Allan has been challenged by many people, including a large number from the medical profession, to provide evidence to support her claims but, predictably, she has largely ignored those claims and failed to provide the evidence.

I want to reassure junior doctors that many people in Telford, as well as myself, find Lucy Allan’s comments disgraceful. If it is any consolation, and I hope it will be to those reading this blog, the last paragraph of this article fromTotal Politics from 3 months ago stated :

‘But the member of the 2015 intake who has caused the biggest headache for the Tory leadership and generated the most controversy yet is Lucy Allan…..

...Rather than climbing the ministerial ladder, Tory sources suggest that Allan may have to instead focus on fighting off deselection threats as the next election approaches’.

 Neil Phillips 

Wednesday, 24 February 2016

Reply from West Mercia Police to my Freedom of Information Request for a copy of the 'Unless you die' email

Lucy Allan MP has implied that she passed a copy of the unpublished 'Unless you die' email to the West Mercia Police. I felt it was worth asking the Police for a copy of the email under the Freedom of Information Act . This was their response.

Dear Mr Phillips


I write in connection with your request for information which was received on 1st February 2016.

Please find below the response to your request:
Could I please receive a copy of the email sent to Lucy Allan MP which contains the words 'Unless You Die' believed to be passed to West Mercia Police by Lucy Allan on 4th December 2015.

REPLY: Your request for information has now been considered and I am not obliged to supply the information you have requested.
West Mercia Police can neither confirm nor deny that it holds the information you requested as the duty in s1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the following exemption:

Section 40 (5)   Personal information

Please be advised that any information released as a result of a Freedom of Information request, in effect, is being released into the public domain. Therefore, it could subsequently be published or would have to be made available to any member of the public if it were requested.
Any information that relates to an individual, or from which an individual could be identified, constitutes personal data and to release information that constitutes personal data into the public domain contravenes the Data Protection Act 1998. The information that you have requested pertains to personal data of a third party and therefore it is exempt from disclosure, the exemption that applies to this type of information is Section 40 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
In accordance with the Act, this letter represents a Refusal Notice for this particular request.
This action cannot be taken as confirmation or denial that West Mercia Police holds the information you have asked for.
Your attention is drawn to the below which details your right of complaint.
Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write or telephone the Information Compliance Unit quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Mrs R Williams
Information Compliance Unit
Warwickshire Police & West Mercia Police
PO Box 55
01905 331545 / 331565
West Mercia Police in complying with their statutory duty under sections 1 and 11 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed information will not breach the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. However, the rights of the copyright owner of the enclosed information will continue to be protected by law. Applications for the copyright owner’s written permission to reproduce any part of the attached information should be addressed to The Force Solicitor, West Mercia Police Headquarters, PO Box 55, Hindlip, Worcester, WR3 8SP.
Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the decision is incorrect?
You have the right to require West Mercia Police (WMP) to review their decision.
Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to discuss the decision with the person that dealt with your request.
Ask to have the decision looked at again -
The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to telephone the person named at the end of your decision letter.
That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and assist with any problems.
If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of WMP made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding access to information, you can lodge a complaint with WMP to have the decision reviewed. WMP must be notified of your intention to complain within 20 working days of the date of its response to your Freedom of Information request. Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:
West Mercia Police Headquarters
Information Compliance Unit
Hindlip Hall
PO Box 55
In all possible circumstances, WMP will aim to respond to your complaint within 2 months.
The Information Commissioner
After lodging a complaint with WMP if you are still dissatisfied with the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in accordance with the requirements of the Act.
For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner please visit their website at Alternatively, phone or write to:
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Phone: 01625 545700

Friday, 12 February 2016

Here is my letter to the Prime Minister about Lucy Allan copied to the Chairman of the Telford Conservatives

7th February 2016

The Rt Hon David Cameron MP
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street

Dear Mr Cameron


I wish to make you aware of the damage that my MP Lucy Allan is continuing to do to the Party and urge you to take action.

I should immediately make it clear that until now I have always voted Conservative in elections. I have lived in Telford for most of my life and last year I voted for Mark Pritchard as I lived in his constituency at that time, but I supported Lucy Allan on social media and thought her success was well-deserved.  However, because of Mrs Allan’s lack of openness and accountability with regards to the ‘Unless you die’ email and because of her conduct towards me personally the Conservatives have now lost my support.

Mrs Allan is continuing to avoid questions about the source of the words ‘Unless you die’ that she added to a constituent’s email and published on her facebook page in December 2015.    

She claims that these words were taken from a second email that she has received but she refuses to publish that email (which she has confirmed was anonymous and non-threatening) or a relevant extract of it and she refuses to explain why she cannot publish it.

In the absence of any evidence to support Mrs Allan’s claim, the only logical conclusion that I and many other people have drawn is that those words did not come from a second email but that Mrs Allan herself made those words up before adding them to her constituent’s email.  If this is the case this would mean that the official statements that she has been making to members of public and the national media are false.

Last month Lucy Allan MP pulled out of a scheduled interview with the BBC because, as the BBC have officially stated, they ‘couldn’t agree to avoid questions on the ‘’Unless you die’’ email.’   
Last month I explained to the local Conservatives Association that I had emailed Mrs Allan concerning the ‘Unless you die’ email but had not received a straight reply from her. They were very helpful and advised me to contact Mrs Allan to arrange a surgery appointment to discuss my concerns. Later that day I received a shocking email from Mrs Allan in which she accused me of conduct that could be described as ‘stalking’ and she told me that any further contact with her office would be considered ‘harassment’.  I was appalled at receiving this email because all I had done was to correspond by email asking for clarification of the unpublished ‘Unless you die’ email. I immediately went to the police because if Mrs Allan was going to wrongly accuse me of stalking I was concerned that she might later wrongly accuse me of harassment.

Another constituent was last week refused a surgery appointment with Mrs Allan last week because he wanted to discuss the ‘Unless you die’ email.

Numerous people have asked Mrs Allan via social media why she will not publish the ‘Unless you die’ email and she has responded by ignoring their question and then blocking them.

I believe from speaking to people in Telford that Mrs Allan is losing a great deal of support because of her lack of openness and her blocking of voters who dare to question her.

Because the Conservative Party has so far taken no action against Mrs Allan many people have interpreted this as the Party condoning her actions.  Others have pointed out that Telford is a marginal seat and they believe that the Conservative Party will do anything to hang on to that seat and so will support Lucy Allan come what may.

In my view, if the Conservative Party continues to take no action there will be longer-term damage done to the Conservatives’ election chances in Telford and possibly further afield. However, if decisive action is taken now to distance the Party from the actions of Mrs Allan this can only reflect well on the Party as a whole.

Yours sincerely

Neil Phillips 

cc Mr David Wright, Chairman of Telford Conservatives


Wednesday, 27 January 2016

Here is my complaint to the Parliamentary Watchdog about Lucy Allan

I thought it would be helpful if I published my complaint I made to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards about Lucy Allan earlier this month, even though, like many other complaints, it was not taken up for investigation by the Commissioner.

The statistics of complaints made last month to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards are now available online and they make astonishing reading. There were more complaints received in the month of December than the whole of the previous 12 months added together. I had previously presumed that most of these related to Lucy Allan but I have now learned that they related to a different MP.   

I think the conclusion that it is fair to draw from this is that complaints about Lucy Allan just don’t fall within the Commissioner’s remit! How mad is that? As I see it MPs do not appear to be accountable for their conduct during their term of office and they expect the electorate to wait up to 5 years before they are held to account at the ballot box. Clearly reform is well overdue.

I set out my complaint below, except that where I had enclosed a hard copy of documentary evidence with my complaint I have either given the online link or stated that it is not available online.

Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards
House of Commons
London SW1A 0AA

6th January 2016

Dear Madam


I am writing to complain about the conduct of my Member of Parliament Lucy Allan MP in respect of the doctoring of a constituent’s email. I appreciate that you have previously ruled that this matter did not warrant an investigation but I believe that an investigation is now required in view of fresh evidence.

The fresh evidence is that Mrs Allan has now provided conflicting explanations of the source of the words ‘Unless you die’ which she admits adding to the email of Adam Watling.  In addition, she has demonstrated that she is avoiding the question of why she does not publish the email which she claims contains the words ‘Unless you die’. 

This as yet unseen email which Mrs Allan claims to have been sent to her on 27th November 2015 is the only evidence that Mrs Allan has to support her claim that the words ‘Unless you die’ came from a separate anonymous email and yet she has failed to publish that email in spite of widespread calls for her to do so.

I believe that Lucy Allan MP has breached Paragraph 16 of the Code of Conduct.

I believe that through the doctoring of a constituent’s email and the lack of a credible explanation for adding the words ‘Unless you die’, which have been widely interpreted as a death threat, Lucy Allan has damaged the reputation and integrity of MPs generally. The condemnation of her conduct has been from voters across various Party allegiances and has been national rather than just restricted to her constituency, with wide coverage in most national newspapers and on social media.  

Voters do not expect their MPs to be perfect and we all make mistakes.  However, voters do expect their MPs to offer credible explanations for when they have done something wrong and to be accountable and open. By failing to provide any evidence to support her claim that the words ‘Unless you die’ came from a separate email, Lucy Allan MP has left me and many others believing that her explanation is untrue, especially when there is substantial evidence which already points to her explanation not being credible. 

I personally have always voted for the Conservative Party until now and, although I did not vote for Lucy Allan MP in the May 2015 election because I lived in a neighbouring constituency at that time, I did support her on social media and felt that she deserved her election victory because she conducted a very energetic campaign. However, Lucy Allan’s conduct, in doctoring a constituent’s email including adding the words ‘Unless you die’ without a credible explanation, has reduced my trust and I believe other voters’ trust in MPs generally and I can now fully understand why so many people do not feel it is worth voting at all in elections. I believe that Lucy Allan’s conduct has worsened voters’ perception of MPs generally and it will have made more voters feel disaffected and not wish to be engaged with the political process.


The evidence enclosed is categorized as follows:

A)     Evidence of the widespread public interest in this story by reference to national media

B)      Evidence of the conflicting and confusing explanations given by Lucy Allan MP for the doctored email

C)      Evidence of Lucy Allan’s lack of openness in avoiding questions over the non-publication of the email she says contains the words ‘Unless you die’.  

D)     Other evidence of the lack of credibility of her explanation that the words ‘Unless you die’  came from a separate email

I comment on each item of evidence below:

A)     Evidence of the widespread public interest in this story

1.       Exhibit A/1 is an online BBC report dated 7th December 2015 shown under the news for England. It sets out Adam Watling’s (using the pseudonym of Rusty Shackleford) original email of 27th November 2015 and how it was later presented by Mrs Allan four days later on 1st December 2015. The report provides Lucy Allan’s explanation for her actions and it states that ‘the BBC is yet to see the email, which Mrs Allan said police were investigating’ which demonstrates that the BBC clearly felt that this email was important in understanding Lucy Allan’s explanation.

2.        Exhibit A/2   is an online article from The Telegraph written by Brendan O’Neill dated 7th December 2015. Towards the bottom is reference to the action of Lucy Allan MP. Mr O’Neill mistakenly used the word ‘Until’ rather than ‘Unless’ but states ‘To my mind, such dishonesty from an elected parliamentarian is infinitely more worrying than the fact that some members of the public say maddening things online’. Mr O’Neill’s use of the word ‘dishonesty’ in my view demonstrates the seriousness of Mrs Allan’s actions.

3.        Exhibit A/3 is an online Metro article dated 8th December 2015. This includes some examples of comments made on Twitter. One is from Channel 4 News presenter Krishnan Guru-Murthy which was re-tweeted 662 times in which he says that Channel 4 are trying to contact Lucy Allan MP for comment.  Another twitter comment states ‘What’s the betting she’s gone and ‘accidentally deleted’ the original email with the death threat in it, eh?’ which I believe reflected how people were feeling sceptical about Lucy Allan’s explanation.

4.        Exhibit A/4  is an online article from The Independent dated 9th December 2015. The article concludes with these words from the writer Mikaela Brunt: ‘I hope that the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards looks into this, because when MPs vote in parliament on our behalf and post publically on their social media platforms, they should be accountable to their electorate. ‘

B)      Evidence of the conflicting and confusing explanations given by Lucy Allan MP for the doctored email

1.  Exhibit B/1 is an online article from the well-known right-wing political blogger known as Guido Fawkes. It is dated 2nd December 2015, a day after the publication of the doctored email by Lucy Allan and Guido Fawkes therefore appears to have been the first journalist to have reported the news of the doctored email . The article includes the initial explanation of the doctoring given by Lucy Allan on her facebook page which says:

‘Comments were added to the post as they came in. I posted them to show examples of the type of unacceptable online abuse that comes in most days and that most people tolerate silently’.

It is not at all clear what is meant by ‘ Comments were added to the post as they came in’. This begs the questions of ‘from whom did those comments come ?’  and ‘which comments are Mrs Allan referring to?’  It also seems odd that Mrs Allan should refer to the words ‘Unless you die’ as ‘comments’. 

 Guido Fawkes then quotes a further explanation that Lucy Allan gave to him on 2nd December 2015:

‘I took the unpleasant stuff from one of his emails and posted it on my Facebook to expose some of the relentless stuff we get. More stuff then came back by response, which I then added to my original post. I added more of the abuse received to my facebook’

It is not clear what is meant by ‘More stuff then came back by response’.  Guido Fawkes himself comments that Mrs Allan would not say whether or not ‘unless you die’ also came from ‘Rusty’.

2.  Exhibit B/2  is the official statement on the website of Lucy Allan MP dated 12th December 2015.  It makes it clear that Mrs Allan’s facebook posting of 1st December 2015 in which she quoted Rusty from Dawley ‘drew upon two separate anonymous communications’.

3.  (Link not available online-post now taken down by Lucy Allan) is a screenshot of Lucy Allan’s facebook page which shows the statement dated 11th December 2015. The wording is the same as the statement on Mrs Allan’s website except that the following words are included in the facebook statement:

 ‘I did not claim that either anonymous message was a threat of any kind’.

4         Below is a copy of facebook comments made on Lucy Allan’s facebook page on 11th December 2015, which Mrs Allan subsequently deleted. Facebook user Pogle Jones asked Lucy Allan a question, Lucy Allan replied and then Pogle Jones made a further comment that Lucy Allan did not reply to. 

Pogle Jones Just wondering Lucy - if the telephone threat was made on the 7th December how on earth were you able to refer to it or conflate it with another email on the 30th November?
UnlikeReply1018 hrs
Lucy Allan As previously stated it was two online communications which I quoted from. Thanks for pointing out that is not clear.
LikeReply318 hrs
Pogle Jones It would be much more clear if you shared both online communications
LikeReply1118 hrsEdited

Lucy Allan clarified the position by saying:

 ‘as previously stated it was two online communications which I quoted from. Thanks for pointing out that is not clear’.  

This therefore reaffirms Lucy Allan’s official statement which is that the words ‘Unless you die’ came from a single separate online communication.

5         Exhibit B/5  is the trail of emails between Lucy Allan and myself in which I asked her about the non-publication of the email which she claims contains the words ‘Unless you die’.  Lucy Allan’s email of 24th December to me states:

‘Please note the police have a file containing various online malicious communications, which include communications containing the words to which you refer’.

This statement left me baffled because rather than saying ‘which include a communication’ Mrs Allan stated ‘include communications’. By writing these words Mrs Allan is now being inconsistent with her previous statements which is that the words ‘Unless you die’ came from a single separate email.

I was very frustrated with this answer as it did not add any clarity but simply added confusion. I emailed Mrs Allan on 4th January 2016 seeking clarification and received an automated response, but I do not expect a reply in the near future and when Mrs Allan does eventually reply I have no confidence that her answer will be any clearer, based on her previous correspondence to me.
C)      Evidence of Lucy Allan’s lack of openness in avoiding questions over the non-publication of the email she says contains the words ‘Unless you die’. 

1.    (Link not available online-post now taken down by Lucy Allan)are comments that are currently still on Lucy Allan’s facebook page as of today underneath the statement originally posted by Mrs Allan on 11th December 2015 which she then reposted on 14th December 2015 after taking it down. I enclose this as evidence that many people were feeling unhappy about being blocked from using Lucy Allan’s facebook page and having their comments deleted simply because they challenged Lucy Allan over the issue of the doctored email. Many of these people, including myself, remain blocked, even though we were supporters of Lucy Allan. It is clear from these comments that outrage is felt by people with different Party allegiances.
       As examples, please see the comments from Kate Rutkovski, Paul Alan Taylor, Alana Pugh, Nate Spencer, Gavin Mattocks,, Ken Marshall Stringer, David Yapp, Diana Wright and Phil Marsh. 

2.       Many of the several hundred comments of 11th December that were deleted by Lucy Allan were simply asking Lucy Allan why she did not publish the email which contains the words ‘Unless you die’. Rather than explaining this to everyone by issuing an additional statement Lucy Allan responded by deleting their comments and blocking them from her facebook page. I am one of many people who have been blocked simply because I posted the following comment on Lucy Allan’s facebook page on 11th December 2015: 

Neil Phillips Hello Lucy, I am one of your constituents and I supported you at the election in May. I hope therefore you will be good enough to respond to me. I believe that much of the criticism you are receiving can be addressed if you publish the email you received in which you say someone stated 'Unless you die''. If for some reason you cannot publish it you should explain why. You have released the phone call of the verbal threat and so I do not understand why you cannot release the email with the words 'Unless you die'. Until you do so I am afraid that many people will just not understand where these words came from and will believe that you simply made them up. You were, of course wrong to attribute these words to Adam Watling (Rusty) and that is something I have never seen before in my life. You have put Telford in the national media (Telegraph,Independent,Daily Mail,Spectator,BBC to name but a few) for the wrong reasons and I believe that unless you now give us the full picture with the explanation of the second email that you must now step down.

3.       Lucy Allan has so far failed to explain why she will not or cannot publish the email which she says contains the words ‘Unless you die’.  What Mrs Allan has told us is that ‘the Metropolitan Police are investigating a cyber harassment campaign’ (her statement of 11th December 2015) and that ‘the police have a file containing various online malicious communications, which include communications containing the words to which you refer.’ (her email to me of 24th December 2015). However, she has failed to confirm whether or not the police have advised her not to publish the email. It would seem unlikely that the police would advise against  publication for the following reasons:

a)      According to Mrs Allan the email is anonymous

b)      According to Mrs Allan the email does not constitute a threat

c)       Mrs Allan published ‘Rusty’s’ email and so it is hard to understand why she cannot publish the other email

d)      Mrs Allan was very quick to release the tape recording of the telephone death threat which was reported to police on 7th December 2015 and so it seems inexplicable that she cannot release the email with the words ‘Unless you die’ which did not amount to a threat.

e)      Even if Mrs Allan did not feel she wanted to publish the whole email she could publish enough of it to make people understand the context in which the words ‘Unless you die’ had been written

Although, according to Mrs Allan, the unseen email with the words ‘Unless you die’ is amongst others with the Metropolitan police, Mrs Allan presumably still has a digital copy on her email account, which she could publish to back up her claims.



4.       Exhibit B/5 shows my email to Lucy Allan of 12th December 2015. I was shocked to receive the reply from Lucy Allan on 22nd December 2015, which avoided my question altogether. Clearly my own MP was not being open with me and so I emailed her again on 22nd December 2015, As I was feeling very anxious that I was just being ignored by Lucy Allan, I emailed her again on 24th December 2015.  I wished to give Lucy Allan an urgent deadline because I felt she was taking this matter too lightly and I felt that she thought it was acceptable not to be open and accountable.  Her reply was sent later that day, but rather than clarifying the position on the unpublished ‘Unless you die’ email, it clouded the picture even more by suggesting that the words ‘Unless you die’ did not come from one single email. Hence, I felt in necessary to send my further email of 4th January 2016, which I do not expect a clear answer to because I feel Mrs Allan does not wish to be open.

D)     Other evidence of the lack of credibility of her explanation that the words ‘Unless you die’  came from a separate email

In addition to the non-disclosure of the email which allegedly contains the words ‘Unless you die’, I  believe that the following evidence points to Lucy Allan MP’s explanation lacking credibility.

1.       Lucy Allan introduced her facebook post by saying ‘This is from Rusty from Dawley’

Straight away Mrs Allan represents that ‘Rusty’ was the author of the whole of the text she quotes. Not only does she name ‘Rusty’ as the only author of the text without naming the other anonymous author of the words ‘Unless you die’ but she says ‘This is from Rusty’ making it very clear that she wants us to believe Rusty wrote the whole of the text including the words ‘Unless you die’.

2.       Lucy Allan’s use of quotation marks makes us believe Rusty wrote ‘Unless you die’

Lucy Allan introduces the alleged extract of Rusty’s email with a double quotation mark and then there is no further quotation mark until right at the end of her quotation, which gives the clear impression that the words ‘Unless you die’ came from Rusty. There is no quotation mark after ‘hope’ and before ‘Unless’ which should have been the case if Lucy Allan wanted us to believe the words ‘Unless you die’ came from a separate author. 

3.       Simply quoting the three words ‘Unless you die’ is meaningless

Lucy Allan has said that these words were posted as an example of ‘unacceptable online abuse’. However these three words on their own make no sense. Surely, if Mrs Allan had received an anonymous email containing those words she should have published the whole of that email or enough of that email to allow us to understand the context in which the words ‘Unless you die’ had been written.   

4.       Adding ‘Unless you die’ fits perfectly with Rusty’s email to turn it into an apparent death threat

I find it hard to believe that, out of all the examples of daily online abuse that Lucy Allan says she receives, Mrs Allan chose to extract only the three words of ‘Unless you die’ from another single email and, rather than quoting other parts of that email, she decided to add just those three words to Rusty’s email, the effect being to turn three words which are meaningless on their own into something that appears like a death threat from Rusty. Those three words were added immediately after Rusty’s words of ‘in which case there is no hope’. They were not shown in a separate paragraph and they were not even shown on a separate line as the words ‘Unless you’ immediately followed ‘ in which case there is no hope’ on the same line with the word ‘die’ then appearing on the next line. 

5.        Lucy Allan altered Rusty’s email to make it appear worse than it was

Lucy Allan did not just add the words ‘Unless you die’. She actually misquoted Rusty’s email as follows:

(1)   Lucy Allan omitted altogether the first 5 paragraphs of Rusty’s email which in my view were polite and made valid points, even if Mrs Allan did not agree with them. Rusty’s comments, which Rusty took from a template from anti-bombing campaigners, appealed to her to oppose Syrian air strikes while offering an alternative approach to defeating ISIL.

(2)  Lucy Allan omitted the signing-off words that Rusty had put on his email which were:

‘Think about it, yeah?



(3)    In the text from Rusty’s email that Lucy Allan did publish she changed Rusty’s text of:

‘Look, I know that you’re probably just a robot or at the very least a person so detached from reality that they have no empathy for anyone but their super rich buddies and benefactors…’

to her altered version of :

‘Look, I know that you’re just a robot or at least a person so detached from reality that you have no empathy for anyone but your super rich buddies and benefactors…’  

Mrs Allan must have spent some time consciously making these changes, the effect of which was to make Rusty’s email appear more like a personal attack on her. I cannot imagine why else Mrs Allan would have changed ‘they’ to ‘you’ and ‘their’ to ‘your’.

In my view Lucy Allan’s conduct in, not only doctoring a constituent’s email, but then failing to provide a credible explanation for what she did, has damaged the reputation and integrity of MPs generally. This is reflected by the widespread outrage expressed across the United Kingdom and from people and news organizations with varying political allegiances.

I very much hope that you will investigate this complaint. 

Yours faithfully

Neil Phillips