Matthew Goodwin, the Reform candidate in Gorton And Denton (Image: Getty)
Matt Goodwin, Reform’s election marketing campaign within the Gorton and Denton by-election, has denied performing inappropriately after it emerged he was accused of constructing inappropriate feedback to a younger lady. The GB News presenter was accused of constructing feedback to a junior workers member on the TV channel which she thought to be sexually harassment, the Guardian has reported.
The lady is alleged to have complained to the community’s HR division in 2025 following feedback together with one about her look. The Guardian reviews Mr Goodwin has denied performing inappropriately. A lawyer performing for him confirmed to the Guardian {that a} grievance had been raised relating to 2 alleged verbal remarks made months aside, and no disciplinary motion was taken.
Read extra: ‘Really misleading’ – Minister slammed over attack ad of Reform’s candidate
Read more: Meet Matt Goodwin – Reform UK’s candidate in the seat Andy Burnham wanted
A Labour Party Spokesperson said: “These are extremely concerning allegations – Matthew Goodwin needs to come clean with the public as to what happened here.
“From saying young girls should be given a ‘biological reality check’ to his plan to tax ladies extra in the event that they don’t have kids, Goodwin’s perspective in direction of ladies frankly stinks.”
Labour is combating a fierce battle to carry the seat, which it gained in 2024, with some polls suggesting it may come third behind Reform and the Greens.
Mr Goodwin is standing for the social gathering within the by-election on February 26, which was triggered when former Labour MP Andrew Gwynne stood down citing well being causes.
He is already combating a authorized battle over claims he broke election guidelines.
On Friday, legal professionals for the candidate and his election agent, Adam Rawlinson, instructed the High Court that a few of Mr Goodwin’s election leaflets failed to incorporate a “statutory imprint”, which constituted “inadvertent illegal practice”.
Under the Representation of the People Act 1983, election materials should embrace the title and deal with of these the doc promotes, the promoter, and the printer.
Failure to do that is classed as an “illegal practice”, which will be punishable by a high-quality of as much as £5,000.
The imprint was lacking from a leaflet containing an open letter by a pensioner who had switched her assist from Labour to Reform.
Mr Goodwin and Mr Rawlinson are actually asking the court docket to rule that they don’t have to face a sanction over the problem, which their barrister described as an “honest administrative error”.
Adam Richardson, for the 2, instructed the court docket in written submissions that the rule breach was “limited in scope, technical in nature, and had no material impact on the election”.
He continued that the Act permits a choose to order that an individual mustn’t face penalties for “illegal practice” if it arose from “inadvertence or from accidental miscalculation” and “did not arise from any want of good faith”.
He mentioned: “Without relief, they face the risk of criminal prosecution, a fine, a three-year disqualification from elective office, and, if Mr Goodwin were elected, potential invalidation of the result.”
The court docket in London was instructed that the imprint was included within the signed-off model of the leaflet, which was despatched to printing firm Hardings Print Solutions.
Mr Richardson continued that an “internal error” at Hardings led to a “change of font” on the last stage of manufacturing, which brought about the imprint to be “trimmed off or omitted”.
The barrister mentioned the error was noticed on February 6, with no additional leaflets being distributed and Hardings having “publicly admitted full responsibility for the production error”.
He mentioned: “This error was neither requested nor authorised by the claimants or anyone on their behalf.”
He continued: “The omission was wholly inadvertent and arose from a third-party production error that was neither foreseen nor preventable.”
Mr Goodwin and Mr Rawlinson additionally knowledgeable the Crown Prosecution Service and the performing returning officer of the error, the barrister mentioned.
Lawyers on behalf of the performing returning officer attended the listening to in London however made no representations, and no different social gathering was represented.
At the tip of the listening to, Mr Justice Soole mentioned {that a} three-hour listening to to determine whether or not Mr Goodwin and Mr Rawlinson ought to be sanctioned will likely be held on Wednesday, and that the opposite candidates within the by-election ought to be given “formal notice” of the matter.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/2173635/reform-by-election-candidate-matt-goodwin