Tuesday, 26 May 2020


Much has been said about the writing of Mary Wakefield, but there is one particular article which could hold the key to the truth in this matter. On 10 August 2019, she wrote an article for The Spectator entitled: ’Like so many parents, I’m a panic junkie'. An article which revealed her Achilles heel i.e. her ability and addiction to dramatize and magnify something completely out of all proportion, especially when it related to the health of her child.

“My fear is that we’re somehow addicted to the panic” 

Therefore, a more likely series of events (on that memorable day when Cummings rushed from Downing Street and headed up to Durham) is that Cummings, who had full prior knowledge and experience of his spouse’s ability to go completely off the Richter Scale, allowed her to whip him up into such a frenzy that he became completely devoid of any ability to think logically and therefore hauled all three of them up the 260 mile road to his parents.

"Me, I'm a sucker for a rare disease"

Cummings at the time had the political authority, power and influence to do so many things in relation to this pandemic, including the ability to procure millions of pounds worth of resources at little or no notice for whatever was needed. 

Yet when it came to his own personal predicament, he simply could not see any further than the end of his nose, or his wife's nose in this case, and asks us to believe that he had absolutely no other option than to drive to Durham.

Cummings does admit to making mistakes in relation to this pandemic and we have seen what appears to be a series of blunders from the Government in relation to testing, PPE, etc, but his inability to think logically under pressure should now be of grave concern to the general public as we all go forward in our collective bid to fight this virus.

Monday, 25 November 2019


This is simply not going to happen, as it relies on a Labour Party majority Government, which is also not going to happen. The Tories are around 10-14% ahead in the polls, and although the polls predicted a similar outcome in 2017, the mystery surrounding Labour’s surprise gains back then may not be so inexplicable.

I am the whistle-blower who helped expose the construction industry blacklisting, which is best summed up in this Guardian article from 2009.

My campaign to expose blacklisting still continues and in 2016 I received a standing ovation from the GMB trade union congress at Bournemouth. This included Jeremy Corbyn who had been invited as the surprise special guest. 

A Facebook journalist called Ben Jenkins picked up on this and published an article with the video on his Facebook page, Nye Bevan News.

Assuming I was someone who shared his political beliefs (which I am not), Ben invited me to become an administrator on the page. I was intrigued and therefore agreed. 

Facebook Page Admins such as those for Nye Bevan News are given specific privileged access and are able to manage page settings, edit posts, create and delete posts, delete comments and much more. This provided a valuable insight into how such far left political views were being disseminated on Facebook at the time.

The small group of people behind this page had devised a quite clever system to spread their beliefs to millions on Facebook without the need for any funding. 

They had learned that there were a growing number (around 60 to 80) of similarly named Facebook pages and groups (E.g. Jeremy Corbyn Fans, Jeremy Corbyn For PM, etc) who all shared their very same far left political views. 

Ben and his team had therefore joined all these pages and groups (in both their own names and fake accounts) to share their Nye Bevan News articles. Sympathetic members of these groups would then share the posts with their friends and other groups, and so on.

One particular privilege of being a page admin on a Facebook page is that you get to see the 'Insights' of a page. These are the particular statistics relating to each post (or news article in this case). 

It soon became clear that I was not interested in contributing to this page and my admin privileges were removed, but what I did learn in the run up to the 2017 General Election was that this small group of Facebook journalists were reaching around 3.5 million people with their far left articles attacking the Tories and promoting Jeremy Corbyn.

3.5 Million - I could see the actual number of people they were reaching on Facebook back in 2017 with my very own eyes. 

And this was only one Facebook page. The other Facebook pages and groups were putting out their own very similar articles and adopting the very same sharing techniques.

Now that was in the grand old days when organic reach was free and all our posts went to all our friends. But the times have a changed and we are all now waking up to the fact that most of our friends or people in the Facebook groups we are members of rarely see our posts. 

The free Facebook post sharing ship has sailed, as Facebook now sells the information highway to those who will pay the most.

So whatever free help Labour received behind the scenes on Facebook in 2017 is not going to be able to help them this coming December. That is unless all these groups get some serious funding for the sponsored adverts now required to get your message out there.

Sunday, 27 October 2019


It is now clear who is conducting the supposed independent inquiry into the trade union involvement in the blacklisting. 

Richard Arthur at Unite's solicitors, Thompsons.

Mr Arthur invited me to a meeting sometime after 11 November 2019. I agreed to attend and asked for details on the scope of the inquiry in order for me to make the necessary preparations.

I set out a number of key areas and asked if these were covered in the scope of the inquiry.

Richard Arthur

"The scope of the investigation is as set out in my email"

"By way of clarification, it extends to any evidence concerning the alleged involvement of any past of present union officers or officials in the operation of blacklists in the construction industry. It also extends to any evidence of any suppression of information relating to such blacklists by union officers, past or present."


Thank you for your response, but I'm none the wiser.

Could you confirm that all the issues raised in my email below therefore fall within the scope of the inquiry?

Richard Arthur

I have explained the scope of the investigation.

I will listen to whatever you want to tell me, and any evidence you present which may be relevant to the scope of the investigation will be compiled and sent to the independent Queen's Counsel.


I'm sorry but you haven't explained the scope of the investigation at all. You have provided the following vague sentence.

"We are instructed by Unite the Union to gather together any evidence that may suggest that there has been involvement by union officers or officials in the operation of blacklists in the construction industry."

I have asked you again to clarify if the points raised in my subsequent email are covered in the scope of the investigation to which you have responded:

"I will listen to whatever you want to tell me, and any evidence you present which may be relevant to the scope of the investigation will be compiled and sent to the independent Queen's Counsel."

So I will ask again. Do the specific points raised in my email below fall within the scope of the investigation? 

The full email conversation can be downloaded here and I await Mr Arthur's response.

Blacklisted workers were promised that this inquiry would be independent of the union, but that does not appear to be the case, with no clear scope provided and the union's own solicitors in the High Court blacklisting litigation filtering what evidence will be presented to the supposedly independent QC. The name of which appears to be a closely guarded secret. 

2018 Subject Access Requests

In March 2018 I made a subject access request to the trade unions and their lawyers involved in the CIVIG High Court blacklisting litigation. Thompsons have not provided one single item of data held.

Friday, 27 September 2019


1. The Consulting Association Blacklist

2. The Sheila Knight Blacklists 
(Jubilee Line Extension, Pfizers, Royal Opera House)

3. The David Craggs Blacklists
(Manchester MRI, Beetham Tower, Media City)

Wednesday, 11 September 2019


Coming soon....

But for now, a Facebook message quote from (Unite Executive Council member, Joint Secretary of The Blacklist Support Group and friend of John McDonnell) Roy Bentham on the trade union complicity in the blacklisting.

"Matheson does need outing Alan"

"We need as much evidence as possible for that inquiry to have legs"

Monday, 9 September 2019


The question as to why Unite's Regional Secretary Ritchie James is threatening me with legal action on behalf of the construction company labour manager David Craggs (who compiled and distributed two new construction blacklists - The David Craggs Blacklists) remains unanswered.

There are over 200 mechanical and electrical workers from Manchester and the North West on these new blacklists, which were compiled by Craggs on major projects such as The Manchester MRI, Beetham Tower and Media City between 2005 and 2010.

Workers on those blacklists inform me that Craggs would brag about his blacklists and threaten certain workers with inclusion on them. 

In the absence of an explanation, blacklisted workers can only presume that Mr Craggs has something over Mr James in respect of the trade union officials who were complicit in the blacklisting.

Were these new blacklists compiled with the help of trade union officials?


More info on these blacklists can be viewed here.



Friday, 2 August 2019


The following information was obtained from my subject access request to Skanska.

The first email is from someone within Skanska to someone within Skanska. Their names are redacted.

Email 1: 15 March 2016

"Following a conversation with one of our agencies this morning I wanted to make you aware of a potential situation that has arisen with them. A candidate called Alan Wainwright was put on the construction blacklist back when it was in operation, he applied to Annapurna back in August for a Resourcing role within Skanska" 

So we have written evidence that I had applied for a Resourcing job with Skanska in August 2015 via one of their preferred agencies, Annapurna.

The second email is from me to Israil Bryan at Skanska, following an order from Regional Employment Judge, Barry Clark for all respondents to my 2016 legal blacklisting claims to disclose information. 

Email 2: 1 July 2016 

"Hi Israil, 

The regional employment judge for wales, Mr Barry Clarke has ordered all agency respondents in my claims to now provide me with information regarding the clients that hired them for the roles in question. 

Following this order, Annapurna HR Ltd have provided the following for the role of Recruitment Business Partner, which they now say they were recruiting for Skanska. 

1. The company that hired them: Skanska UK Plc
2. The date they were hired to recruit for this role: 7 July 2015 

3. Annapurna contact: Niall Petchey
4. The person at Skanska who engaged them: Ayton Hyton
5. The date the request was withdrawn: 24 July 2015.

They also state that Skanska UK Plc selected one candidate from their shortlist of four for interview and offered them the job.

As mentioned in our telephone call, my claims have absolutely no bearing toward Skanska, and it is Annapurna HR Ltd who have named Skanska as their client. 

It would be very helpful if you you clarify which of the above is factually correct and which is not. 

Best regards, Alan"  

The third email is Israil Bryan's response to me, which basically states that none of the information disclosed to the employment tribunal by their preferred supplier Annapurna is true.

Email 3: 11 July 2016

"Dear Alan, 

Thank you for your email. We are very happy to answer your email and tell you what we can. I note from your email that you are not making any claim against Skanska, you are just asking for some information, and we are more than happy to provide this. 

I have reviewed the information you have provided and must clarify that Skanska did not recruit for a ‘Recruitment Business Partner‘s’ position at all last year. The nearest vacancy we had, which you may be confused with was for a ‘Resourcing Manager’ as detailed below.

This role was never released to agencies to fill as we decided at the outset to advertise the role directly via job boards (as shown in the screen shots from our in-house recruitment system). 

This vacancy was subsequently cancelled on 23rd July 2015 due to budget constraints, as such no one was hired against this vacancy at all. 

It is worth noting that Aytan Hilton, who you cite in your correspondence was not employed by Skanska at this particular time, though he had previously been employed by Skanska as an interim Manager. 

Finally, I should mention that if you did apply as an applicant for aforementioned Resourcing Manager’s role then I can find no record of it having been received. The only role we have received your details for was the Labour Manager position which we interviewed you for. 

Please let me know if you require any further information or clarification. 

Kind Regards, Israil" 

Following the information received from my subject access request at Email 1 above, we now know that Israil Bryan's resposnse was a total pack of lies, as we now have written evidence from within Skanska confirming that I had applied for the role via Annapurna.

But this was not just Israil's response. She was consulting and fronting for none other than Head Of Employee Relations at Skanska - Peter Raza.

The fourth email shows Israil consulting him a few days before on the wording of her response to me.

Email 4: 5 July 2016

"Hi Pete

Please can you review the email before and confirm you are happy for me to send to Alan Wainwright. 

Regards, Israil"

Israil then details the following to Raza 

"Dear Alan

Thank you for your email.

I have reviewed the information you have provided and unfortunately we did not recruit for a 'Recruitment Business Partner' at all last year.

The closest vacancy we had was for a 'Resourcing Manager' as detailed below. This role was never released to agencies as we advertised directly and on job boards (as shown in the screen shots for our recruitment system). This vacancy was subsequently cancelled on 23rd July 2015 due to budget constraints, as such no one was hired against this vacancy at all.

It is worth noting that Aytan Hilton was not employed by Skanska during this time as he had been an interim whose contract finished earlier in the year. In addition I can confirm that we did not receive your details as an applicant for this role via any source. The only role we have received your details for was for the Labour Manager position which we interviewed you for. 

Please let me know if you require any further information or clarification. Kind Regards, Israil." 

They obviously had a few more goes at this between them before sending their final response five days later at email 3 above.

So why are the construction companies alerting each other to job applications from blacklisted workers? 

Why are they still taking extensive measures like the above at the very top of their organisations?

Why are they accessing secretly recorded conversations of blacklisted workers?

Because they are still blacklisting.  

Israil Bryan has since left Skanska and is now Group Diversity & Inclusion Specialist at Standard Chartered Bank. Inclusion may be a typo and should most probably read "Exclusion".