Blogs

A national tragedy requires a national response. At such a time, it is the responsibility of the Prime Minister to speak to Britain, for Britain. It is a task that only the Prime Minister can fulfil and its symbolism has a profound effect on those directly and indirectly associated with the tragedy. Today, the Prime Minister delivered, for the families, survivors, and the city of Liverpool.

Hillsborough will always be synonymous with one of the biggest losses of British life in any one day since the end of the Second World War. In the 23 years that have passed, two very different stories have emerged about that day, and three key elements have haunted those associated with it. The failure of the authorities to help protect people. The attempt to blame the fans. And the doubt cast on the original Coroner's Inquest.

The real version of events was told today and I am confident it will become known simply as ‘the truth’. It is a version of events that depicts the carnage at Hillsborough through the eyes of the survivors and the families of the victims. It makes clear that whilst the police froze and did nothing, the fans reacted and saved many more lives.

The second version, which has now been proven to be false, was told through the eyes of a warped media. The Sun newspaper despicably produced a headline that suggested Liverpool fans had stolen money from the dead, had urinated on the "brave cops" who were trying to save lives and had been drunk and ticketless. As the Prime Minister said, "This was clearly wrong."

Today's report has shocked the nation. 96 deaths, of which 41 could and should have survived if those responsible for our safety had done their jobs. 164 police officer statements amended, 116 negative comments removed from witness statements, and a 23 year campaign for truth and justice.

It proved, once and for all, that it was the fans who were the real heroes on the day and that the police, press and politicians, conspired to instigate a cover up that would smear a city and its people, whilst allowing the guilty to evade responsibility for their deadly mistakes. Liverpool has been exonerated. The guilt for the deaths lies squarely at the door of South Yorkshire Police, who made catastrophic mistakes and unashamedly sought to deflect the blame onto the fans.

The Hillsborough families cannot accept the Coroner’s verdict of "accidental death" and some have never even picked up the death certificates for their loved ones. It has been proved that some victims were alive well past the 3.15pm cut off and that if the authorities had acted quicker, more people would have survived.  After today’s publication, the families will be appealing for the Attorney General to make an application to the High Court for the inquests to be reopened and a new cause of death to be determined.

Hillsborough was a tragedy that transcends party politics and unites parliament and the country. So whilst the overwhelming majority of Merseyside fundamentally disagrees with the Prime Minister’s politics and the direction he is taking the country, today we are eternally grateful.

His apology will not be met with celebrations on Merseyside. Instead, there will simply be dignified remembrance from a city that will no longer be a lone voice in a sea of ignorance and scepticism. Whilst for some, the true horror of 15 April 1989 has been eclipsed by the passage of time. For others, today’s news will see the conclusion of half our 23 year cause. Now that the truth has been ascertained, it is time for justice to be delivered.

Share this page with your friends on Facebook

We learned an awful lot in the last seventeen days. 

We learned that Britain could party with the best of them. We learned that Britain can compete with the best of them and we learned what it takes to be a British sporting champion. 

In the age of instant celebrity, nothing in sport is achieved without unbelievable hardwork and dedication. Hopefully a new generation will be inspired to achieve something and not to just be ‘someone’. It's why we love and respect all who compete and why those who succeed become instant heroes and heroines. 

Britain’s finest, or Team GB as they are more commonly known, have sparked an almighty debate in political circles over what funding should be allocated to what sports over the course of the next decade. The very idea that we are having such a debate, backed up by the mood of the nation grateful that we delivered, is testimony to the achievements of our athletes. 

A few weeks ago, David Cameron was expected to announce plans to abolish the department for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport. Why would we need it? The Games won’t happen again in our lifetime? He would be a brave man to take sport’s place at the Cabinet table away after these Olympic Games. 

Very few Government departments are praised for delivery. They are more often than not ridiculed for failure. Yet the DCMS, under the stewardship of the likes of Dame Tessa Jowell, Andy Burnham and Ben Bradshaw, laid the foundations for one of Britain’s greatest fortnights in living memory. 

If the success of the last fortnight is to be repeated in Rio, then the DCMS will have to stay. But that is the political argument. For now, let us bask in the glory of our sporting success. 

Seb Coe was right when he said, “There is a truth to sport. A purity, a drama, an intensity. A spirit that makes it irresistible to take part in and irresistible to watch.”   

For those of us who watched from the sidelines and have never had the chance to call ourselves an Olympian, the Games were filled with envy and regret. It could have been me, us or you. Why did we never carry on playing? We were filled with humility and nervousness. The best man, woman or team won. But only just. Above all, we were filled with pride. From the remote slums of India to the horn of Africa.  From the Australian Gold Coast to the rocky Mountains of Colorado. From the rainforest of Brazil to the Olympic Stadium in Stratford, athletes lived their dreams, fulfilled their dreams and together they made history in our back yard. 

The memories of the last fortnight will stay with us forever.  Where were you when Steve Cram called home the most dramatic 100 metre final in history? The chances are we will never forget the now infamous commentary that described the inimitable Usain Bolt as he crossed the line to the acclaim, “The Champion becomes a legend!” 

Where were you when Britain’s trio of athletes rocked the East End of London one Saturday night with three gold medals in 47 minutes? Ennis, Rutherford and Farah began the Games with the hopes of a nation resting on their shoulders. They ended them immortals. 

Where were you when Hoy took Gold for the sixth time, when Grainger buried her demons in the rowing or when Taewkendo suddenly became the nation’s favourite sport, just for one night! 

This is the unique power of sport. It has the power to transform lives, to tackle crime and poor educational attainment and as it has proven, it has the power to unite a nation. 

The Games of the 30th Olympiad were special. Not because of the stadia like Beijing, but because of the British people that filled those venues. I said before the Games that the effect it will have on each of us, is yet unknown. If initial indications are to be believed, then there are already certainties. When it came to living up to our promise, Britain delivered. When it came to beating the best, our Athletes delivered. And when it came to delivering our legacy, Britain undoubtedly, inspired a generation. 

When the sober eye of history looks back on London 2012, those of us that are still around to recall it will only ever have to ask one question; could Britain have asked for any more?

All recessions are bad. Businesses go bust; men and women lose their jobs, families are torn apart because of the stresses and strains that financial constraints brings, crime rises, public services are cut and people lose faith in their Leaders and in each other.

I won’t pretend that recession under Labour is somehow not like this. To do so would not only be naive but it would be misleading. 

This November will see President Obama take on Governor Mitt Romney for the right to be President of the United States. It is hard to believe that four years ago, the world watched in awe as America showed their ability to take ten steps forward and elect the first black man to the leader of the free World. 

During that campaign we were mesmerised, as we always are during televised American Presidential campaigns, by the “promise of America” and “the American Dream!” We were all inspired to believe in a new politics, albeit on the other side of the Atlantic, but one that was tangible and could one day be replicated in this place. We were all part, in spirit at least, of the “Yes We Can” brigade. And on the day of my 45th birthday on November 4th 2008, we all felt part of history. 

Little did we know that just as Obama was capturing the imagination of the world, Britain’s banks were careering over a financial precipice of their own creation. Sheer gread resulting in a worldwide crisis that still reverberates today. It was a time when it looked like Capitalism would eat itself. A time when U-turns from those who at one stage were pressing for greater deregulation of the financial markets (Osborne/Cameron et al) made a mockery of mature politics. And a time when those innocent of any part in the downfall of the banking sector (the general public) where forced to bail out those really responsible: THE GREEDY BANKERS!

Four years feels like a long time. The days of the New Hampshire primary and the euphoria over Hillary Clinton and Obama’s election challenge are now but moments in history. Since that election, Britain has suffered the worst recession in living memory. Caused, in part, by the failure to regulate the banks, but caused in even larger part by the banks’ mismanagement and market greed.

And despite facing a media relentless in their pursuit of Gordon Brown’s blood, the Labour Party actually steered Britain out of recession 12 months earlier than most economists were predicting. Unemployment levels were falling and we had growth in the economy. This wasn’t by chance, but by making sure we put money in people’s pockets so they could spend. 

Whether or not you voted for Labour or indeed, whether you chose to protest against Gordon Brown and abstain, vote Liberal Democrat or even vote Tory, the sober eye of history makes it absolutely clear that Labour were right all along.

Obama followed Brown’s lead and while it is true to suggest that the path America has taken has been far from smooth, (with recent question marks over the numbers of jobs created), it has been one that has now yielded economic growth, business confidence and additional employment. 

Biullingdon Boys Cameron and Osborne of course knew better. By embarking on an austerity programme that was more of an ideological siege on the size of the state, they ruined any chance of economic growth and instead brought us back into a totally avoidable double dip recession made by them in Nos 10 and 11 Downing Street.

That’s the bit that hurts, doesn’t it? This was totally avoidable. And we warned that this would happen.

You see, Cameron was elected leader of the Conservative Party in December 2005. Between 2006 and September 2008, Cameron and his best mate Boy George Osborne, constantly argued that we needed to spend more and loosen the 'regulatory burden' on the banks. The hypocrisy of the pair is just staggering. 

As soon as Lehman Brothers crashed in America, Cameron was straight up at the dispatch box to tell people that Labour’s investment in teachers, doctors, nurses, fire fighters, police officers, care workers, businesses, roads, railways, schools, universities and every other segment of the public sector, was the reason the world -  not just Britain, but the world – was now in recession. 

So what’s his excuse this time? Cameron blames Labour. We had a solution in 2010 that yielded jobs and growth and we have a solution in 2012 that will yield jobs and growth. Cameron blames the Eurozone. Germany and France avoided recession and in fact, had it not been for the Eurozone and our trade exports, Britain would have been in recession well before April 2012. Cameron blames the “inflated public sector” but promised the private sector would fill the gap entirely, therefore recognising the need for the jobs and the investment.  Cameron blames the future King of England for marrying his bride. Stats would suggest the Royal wedding provided a boost to the economy with added tourists and more shopping and leisure time. Cameron blames the snow, yet we had one of the warmest winters on record. When will Cameron stop blaming everyone else and recognise, this was a recession made in Downing Street and delivered by a couple of posh boys out of touch with the reality of ordinary peoples' lives.

So as Barack Obama prepares for the campaign trail again and as the world prepares to watch yet another rollercoaster US election, the message from the White House is clear; we got it right, it will be tough, but we’re on course and we will get through this. It will be a fresh campaign, with new slogans and more speeches that will find their place in the history books come November. 

Downing Street will look on wondering ‘what if’? What if we had economic growth? What if unemployment was falling, not rising? What if we had the words to inspire a nation? When Cameron stops wondering, he will realise that the reality is he has got this badly, badly wrong. It’s time now that our Prime Minister put people before politics and found a plan B. 

On May 3rd, Liverpool has a chance to send a message to David Cameron and Nick Clegg as we go to the polls to vote in Local and, for the first time ever, Mayoral elections. I think it will be loud and clear that we have already had enough of this hapless Coalition.

When we go to the polls to put our X next to our preferred candidate there are some things we should all bear in mind. The cost of living is rising, fuel and energy bills are soaring and more people are unemployed today than at any time in the last fifteen years. Crime is rising for the first time since 1997, we have the lowest number of police officers on the street in a decade and we are now in the midst of a double-dip recession! 

The cuts to the Educational Maintenance Allowance, mean more children are leaving school earlier than planned and, with University tuition fees trebling, even less of our young people plan to go on to further education. NHS waiting times are going back up, whilst thousands of nurses are being made redundant to pay for the biggest reorganisation of the Health Service since its inception.

When the people of Liverpool go to the polls you have a real choice. You can send a message to the Government that you accept their erroneous rationale for the squeeze, or you can send a message that you want an alternative. Some might believe that alternative to be a Party other than the Labour Party, but hopefully they will see that there is only one true alternative to this ConDem Government.

When I meet people in the streets or when we knock on doors across Liverpool I am constantly amazed (and frustrated) that some people still say to me that political parties are “all the same.” Believe me, WE ARE NOT. In fact, I believe, that for the first time in a long while the differences between the Labour Party and the Conservatives/Lib Dems have never been so great.

Today, on Cameron and Clegg’s watch, unemployment is escalating. Youth unemployment is at one million and unemployment amongst women is the highest it has been in over two decades. Walton is ranked fifth in the country for unemployment, with over 5,000 (14%) of our local residents on benefits rather than working. This will continue to rise without policies to change the economic direction.

Across the North West, there are 325,000 people out of work today. Think of the devastation that causes to families, the pain and the heart ache that comes with economic uncertainty in your own home. How are ordinary people going to afford £50 or £60 to fill up the petrol tank so that we can get to work? What about running the kids round? People are worrying about whether to heat, or eat such is the cost of gas and electricity. And for many, they wonder how they are going to afford this month’s rent when their hours at work have been cut and Tax Credits have been callously slashed to give the richest people a tax cut.

For the vast majority on Jobs Seekers Allowance they would jump at the chance of being in paid work. It is this majority that require assistance to help them to find employment, but the Government would have us believe that everybody on benefit would rather live this daily trauma, than get off their backsides and work. This shows just how out of touch the Government really is.

In fact, Cameron, Osborne and their Lib Dem friends need to think again. They do not have a regeneration plan that is strategic enough to create a climate that is conducive to jobs and growth in areas like ours. In other words; they need a Plan B, because Plan A has been disastrous.

Labour’s Real Jobs Guarantee would put a tax on the people that really did cause the recession, the bankers. By taxing bankers’ bonuses, we can raise enough money to put 100,000 people back in to work and take them off of the benefits bill.

Liverpool Labour is committed to providing local services that work for you and your family. In Liverpool the Council has invested in apprenticeships and has helped to create 691 posts. We have put together an ambitious programme to build new schools which the Tories and Lib Dems scrapped when coming into office. We are working with Liverpool Community Colleges to offer a Liverpool EMA and to ensure that there are the facilities and courses available to cater for all our young people’s talents. And we will work hard to save vital local services, such as libraries and swimming pools, from the deepest and most unfair cuts in the Country.

I believe that politics is about priorities. You can choose to put profit before people or you can choose to create climates that encourage each and every person from each and every area to fulfill their potential.  The Labour Party’s values of solidarity, determination and hard work, are the values that will help to keep our communities strong during these tough times. The Tories have proven that they are out of touch on the issues that matter to people most. The Lib Dems have simply become a human shield for their Tory masters. So when you go to the polls on May 3^rd, bear this in mind and vote for a party that cares about you and your family. Vote Labour.

Steve's orginal letter to Alan Davies which was leaked to The Times...

Reaction to Alan Davies' piece in The Times:

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/blogs/mirror-football-blog/Alan-Davies-latest-word-on-Hillsborough-is-self-serving-insulting-condescending-and-contemptible-article891477.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/9206432/Alan-Davies-hits-back-over-Hillsborough-comments.html

Steve's reply:

In a week which saw the true spirit of Merseyside with an emotional and impeccably observed one minutes silence from both Everton and Liverpool FC fans at Wembley, it was perhaps the most inappropriate time for a comedian to dig his heels in over a subject he may believe he understands, but which he shows very little evidence of so doing.

The original podcast which made reference to the Hillsborough Disaster by Alan Davies on his Tuesday Club, and the furore that followed, has caused both parties great distress. Representatives from the victim support groups unanimously condemned the insensitivity of the ill-informed comments about Liverpool FC being “forced” to play a football fixture of the anniversary of Britain’s worst ever sporting disaster.

It is also true that Mr Davies and his family came in for some totally unjustifiable and disgraceful comments - and were even subjected to threats to their lives and safety by some, possibly caught up in the passion of events, but who do not speak for the dignified majority who have campaigned for justice for the 96.

On one issue, Mr Davies is right. The abusers don’t speak for the families of the bereaved, but they don’t need to. The families have been forthright in their condemnation of Mr Davies’ comments.

Indeed, I would claim that unnecessarily forceful comments actually do a disservice as they are quickly seized upon by those that wish to discredit our campaign, and pander to the ‘self pity City’ brigade – and to those that would like to portray ALL Liverpudlians as anything from; moaning scousers, to homicidal maniacs.

This whole calamity however, was fuelled by both the inconsiderate nature of the original comments made during the podcast by Mr Davies and by the dismissive responses to legitimate questions directed at him immediately after his comments were blogged and then tweeted to millions. His only contrition to date is that he now admits that he needed to “change gear and take a more considered tone”. Oh.......... and he dressed as a funny scouse stereotype character to show he hadn’t lost his sense of fun. Brilliant!

Let me make it absolutely clear so nobody can claim that I am excusing the over-the-top responses that he received (which some already have attempted to do), I do not condone the vitriolic content of tweets to Mr Davies and his family when I argue that he got things disastrously wrong. I unequivocally condemn any threats of violence. Mr Davies has the right to free speech and to express his beliefs, however misguided they may be.

However, the families of the victims of Hillsborough have an absolute right to decide what is in the best interests of their loved ones lost in a tragedy that generates feelings which for many, go far beyond the normal grief associated with the loss of someone dear. There exists a palpable sense of injustice 23 years on. Very few individuals have had their grief played out on the national stage like that of the 96 families. They need no lessons on how to mourn their dead.

If Mr Davies decided he did not wish to play a gig on the anniversary of his mother’s death, then I (for one) would respect that, just as he should respect other people’s wishes. Like him, I too have felt the pain of the death of my beloved mum, but neither she, nor Mrs Davies, was blamed for killing herself and 95 other people. Neither were the victims of a cover up and conspiracy that pervaded senior layers of the British establishment. None were the subject of banner front page headlines that claimed that their friends, and bystanders who had tried to save them, picked the pockets of dead people or urinated on Police offices. And we who are left, did not have to fight for over 2 decades to try to ensure that the cause of their deaths was correctly recorded and that those responsible for the negligence that caused their demise were held accountable.

That is why Mr Davies and many, many others, simply just don’t get it.

They may now know the timeline of events due to the superb campaign mounted by families and supporters to fight for the truth and full disclosure, but they do not fully appreciate what it has taken to get to where we are today. They do not understand the fortitude and steadfastness of fighting, what at times have seemed immovable political and legalistical barriers to the truth, but which have been assailed one by one until there is, at long last, hope that the Hillsborough Independent Panel report will soon be published.

We have never claimed there is a hierarchy of pain associated with any tragedy. Every loss of life is most painful to those closest to bereavement; family, friends and relatives. It doesn’t mean that others cannot empathise with such loss, but they cannot either fully expect to feel the same physical pain as those directly affected.

And nobody is claiming that because it was a sporting disaster on an unimaginable scale, that this by itself magnifies that sense of loss. But that collective grief is real. It is manifested in the way in which our City commemorates Hillsborough. And in that respect, it is up to other Clubs, their supporters and especially the grieving relatives of those that perished at Ibrox, Valley Parade, Heysel or Munich, to decide how they best remember their own particular tragedy, in their own particular way.

I wouldn’t dream of commenting, advising or criticising them. To do so would be insensitive and ignorant.

I do not know, nor have I ever met Alan Davies, but it is obvious that he is a very different animal to the persona portrayed on TV that we all recognise, and which some of us previously loved him for. To try to justify comments that you know to be wrong and hurtful, awkwardly contrasts with the carefully cultivated image of a cuddly cockney comedian with curly hair. A lovable fool?

His decision to simply apologise for the ‘tone’ of his comments rather than, as he should have done, the actuality of the words, or to even accept that he was not the person best placed to comment on such matters (despite his philosophical critique of the reality of the grief and bereavement process’), suggests only a limited degree of remorse for the offence he caused.

To “tough it out”, didn’t show strength, but misguided bravado that “Alan knows best”. I’m sorry Mr Davies, on this one; you are wrong and have only compounded your mistakes.

When the story first broke (which was several days after the podcast was first broadcast), I decided not to tweet on this issue as others had done, but to write to Mr Davies in person. I did so privately. I have now been forced to publish the full content of my letter to him, as he made reference to extracts and named me specifically in the press (in the Murdoch newspaper, The Times), without first informing me of his intentions and without me seeing his response to me in advance.

In my original correspondence I included a copy of Hansard from the Parliamentary debate on October 17^th 2012 and a video link to the debate. I had hoped that this would give him the opportunity to read (or watch) what had been said that evening in the House of Commons, so that he could fully understand the magnitude of the Hillsborough disaster and its aftermath. I truly wonder whether he even took the time for a cursory glance at either.

It is true that in his five-page response to me, he makes reference to certain aspects of the disaster. What he has seemingly failed to understand is that, by just listing things that I had previously highlighted doesn’t mean he has understood their implications.

In my letter I tried to strike a balanced note, which I am not sure he fully appreciated. I was in no way aiming to be patronising to Mr Davies about his understanding of Hillsborough, but hoped that he might read up on it to ensure that he was availed of the full facts. I hoped my intervention might have acted as a would-be olive branch to help dampen heightened feelings on both sides. I even thought that Mr Davies may have wished to meet with representatives of the families given the volume of evidence and the complexity of the myriad of inter-related events.

Perhaps a career in the Foreign Office is beyond me now, as it appears that my attempts at diplomatic conciliation have been thrown back in my face and that Mr Davies is determined to continue his adopted position, based on such spurious claims as: more than 400 people out of 90,000 that had listened to the clip on YouTube clicked on the icon to say they liked it, whilst only 80 disliked it! Eat your hearts out Ipsos Mori!

Because of the ongoing fight for justice and after more than two decades, 140,000 people signed the Hillsborough e-petition to get a Parliamentary debate on the release of all documentation relating to the disaster (in just under three weeks). People of all football clubs; political persuasions and from right across all four corners of the country signed the petition.

As straw polls go, that is a big enough representative sample to determine huge support for the Hillsborough families – and I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of them would support the families right to commemorate the 96 on the 15^th April each year in any way they deemed appropriate.

Incredibly, Mr Davies’ solution to this year’s clash of FA Cup semi final and 23^rd anniversary service...... was to suggest they both be held at Wembley (despite only a few weeks’ notice), where “90,000 Liverpudlians could have gathered together”.

This would have been a logistical nightmare for the FA which Mr Davies (without any authority) was speaking on behalf of, but he forgets to mention this inconvenient fact. Would this suggested solution result in preferential treatment for all those associated with the annual service (on the 20^th anniversary, 35,000 attended the service at Anfield)? He doesn’t say. But all the tickets are sold through agreed allocation policies anyway – and some family members no longer attend football matches. And yet Mr Davies complains about a ‘loss of perspective’!

He doesn’t really provide any other guidance, so it is unknown whether his suggestion would result in there being an hour long service, or a curtailed event? One can only speculate. Would it even be possible to the stage a memorial service during the managed spectacular that Wembley puts on? Would the 96 names be read (this takes several minutes in itself)?

As the Merseyside derby was designated as an early kick-off, would the service be conducted directly before the kick off, or at the end of the game? An early KO would mean that there wouldn’t be a minutes silence at 3:06? (But perhaps the significance of this particular time was lost on him?)

Would the teams be on the pitch, or preparing for one of the most important derby games for years in the changing rooms? Would Everton even agree to such a request? (Let’s face it they have been unbelievably supportive – but would this be a bridge too far?). What would happen if it was Liverpool v Manchester United (or Chelsea after the disrespect they showed on Sunday) in the future? Should the game still be played if it falls on an anniversary?

Either way, why is any of this the concern of Alan Davies? That is a question I have been asking myself all week. The 23^rd anniversary of the disaster was supposed to be a year when we came together and built on the momentum of the last six months. Instead, Mr Davies himself has become the media story. That is desperately disappointing for some, for other, simply unforgiveable.

In any case, this hypothesis was only offered as an afterthought to try to demonstrate the feasibility after the realisation of what he had said and wasn’t suggested during the original podcast or in the immediate period afterwards as a reason to move the date. What Mr Davies said was; 'Liverpool and the 15th - that gets on my tits that s***. What are you talking about "We won’t play on the day"? Why can’t they?'

By his own admission Mr Davies’ podcast is not scripted, nor is it planned. Therefore, these comments are a genuine response to the subject being discussed – a comedic stream of consciousness. This must be how he genuinely feels about Hillsborough, Liverpool FC and the way in which the tragedy is commemorated. That is deeply disturbing.

It wasn’t Liverpool FC (or Everton) that decided to play on Saturday 14^th April, (forcing the other semi-final to be played the next day) it was the FA. Both games could have been played on the same day with staggered Kick offs to allow TV coverage. The Merseyside semi could and should have been played at Old Trafford and the date in question wouldn’t have even been an issue. It would also have been easier for fans to travel to Manchester rather than London thus avoiding the associated additional costs and transport horrors to the Capital.

In his letter to me, which he leaked to The Times, Mr Davies states; ‘rather than write to me as if I’m entirely ignorant of the events of Hillsborough and need educating, perhaps you should write to those people, possibly your own constituents, who want me to contract cancer so my children will never enjoy Christmas, who want to urinate on my mother’s grave, who would take pleasure in seeing my wife sexually assaulted, and suggest that it is they who have truly caused offence’.

As I said in the opening of this piece, I absolutely condemn any threats against Mr Davies and his family and of course will write to any constituents from Liverpool Walton if he provides details of who they are and what they said. I can also guarantee that all of the Liverpool MPs will do likewise. I will also reply to Mr Davies’ letter personally. It will be up to him decide whether or not to respect the privacy of its content.

What is still striking, however, is Mr Davies’ automatic assertion that the people who sent death threats and messages of abuse were seemingly from Liverpool? Liverpool FC has a very wide supporter base and there is no evidence to conclude that every tweet originated from the Merseyside area, but of course if it has a negative connotation associated with it, it is easier to infer that it must be someone from my City. And Mr Davies wonders why we have to keep challenging some people’s misperceptions.

In Parliament I have been leading on a piece of work that is looking specifically at problems of abuse on social media sites, Facebook and Twitter (trolling). I know all too well the issues surrounding messages sent through the anonymity of a computer, which can have a devastating impact on the individuals they target. That is why I have continued to meet with the Police, Home Office Ministers, online verification experts and Facebook’s community standards teams, to see if there is the potential to introduce a Bill that will tighten the law in this area. Not every tweet to Mr Davies was nasty – and not everyone who was nasty was from Liverpool.

However, all of this is academic and really misses the point. Alan Davies, undoubtedly said something stupid and grossly offensive. Yet he either doesn’t comprehend the magnitude of Hillsborough and its aftermath to this very day in the daily lives of those having to correct stupid, offensive, and often throw-away comments by people like him, or he actually believes some of the pseudo psycho-babble of, at best, the amateur bereavement counsellor he unfortunately imagines himself to be. Either way, it is sad that his ego has gotten the better of him on this occasion, when to genuinely apologise would have been the right and proper thing to do.