Free speech is something we take for granted in this country, yet there are those who will trample over this precious right if it suits their political ends.
Nothing proves this more starkly than the treatment of Paul Embery.
A firefighter by profession, he’s been a trade unionist all his working life, becoming a full-time official of the Fire Brigades Union and elected to its executive council.
He also passionately believes that Britain should be an independent nation, and campaigned for the result of the 2016 referendum to leave the European Union to be honoured.
His stance affronted the executive of the FBU, dominated by Remainers, who engineered his dismissal and barred him from holding office for two years.
This effectively rigged the next elections for the FBU national executive because it meant that he could not stand against the incumbent General Secretary, Matt Wrack.
When I highlighted the outrage, Mr Wrack complained: “The Mirror should have had no role in judging this internal case.”
Which proves nothing apart from the fact that Mr Wrack does not understand the role of journalists in exposing injustices.
Mr Embery’s supposed crime was to address a “Leave Means Leave” rally in March 2019, for which he was first suspended and then sacked.
Now an Employment Tribunal has ruled that he was unfairly dismissed, the adjudication shredding the reputation of the FBU leadership.
It heard how on the afternoon before the rally Mr Embery was warned off speaking by the FBU president, Ian Murray, an ally of Mr Wrack.
Mr Embery went ahead, in his capacity as national organiser of Trade Unions Against the EU.
Mr Wrack responded with a public statement calling him “a disgrace to the traditions of the labour movement”.
The key allegation was that Mr Embery had criticised the FBU at the rally.
So what if he had? As the tribunal heard, other members had criticised the FBU over other issues in the past without being disciplined, and Mr Wrack himself had previously said the union supports “the right to discuss and disagree”.
In any event, the tribunal ruled that there was no criticism of the union – Mr Embery had simply called for the result of the EU referendum to be respected.
“When one looks at the transcript of what the claimant said at the meeting he does not criticise the FBU's policy,” the tribunal ruling reads. “What he does do is advocate that following the referendum one should move on and if necessary have a 'No Deal' Brexit. For that the claimant was effectively dismissed. Where is the gross misconduct? How could any fair-minded member come to a reasonable belief on the facts that the claimant had committed any form of misconduct?”
The tribunal called the union investigation into Mr Embery a “witch-hunt”, saying there was “an agenda” to have him removed and dismissed claims that he had broken union rules as “a nonsense”.
Following one of my previous stories about this case Mr Wrack wrote to my editor to complain that I was wrong in saying that the FBU had sacked Mr Embery: "As an elected official, Mr Embery is not an employee of the FBU and is therefore unable to be 'sacked'. He is employed by the London Fire Brigade, not the FBU."
The tribunal made mince meat of that argument too, pointing out that although technically employed by the London Fire Brigade, Mr Embery was on full-time secondment to the union and worked for it just like any other employee.
Mr Wrack also tried to put emotional pressure on me to stop writing further articles on this case, saying: "The Mirror is seen as a friend of the labour movement".
It is true that the Mirror supports the trade union movement, and I have been a union member all my professional life. Was Mr Wrack really suggesting that this should mean that we turn a blind eye when union bosses are guilty of gross injustice? And where would that leave Mr Embery? As a union member, wasn't he entitled to the Mirror's support?
Mr Embery believes what happened to him is evidence of a wider problem.
“There’s an atmosphere at the moment, not just in politics and trade unionism, but in society where there’s an attempt to stifle any views that don’t accord with the mainstream,” he said after the hearing.
“Where once we’d say ‘I disagree with you’, now people say ‘You mustn’t say that’ or ‘That’s offensive’, as if saying you’re offended clinches the debate. It’s absolutely suffocating. We need to tackle people who think there should be only one view on any particular issue and anyone who takes a different view must be hounded, have their reputation trashed and their livelihood destroyed. This is not what a free society is about.”
And he kindly told me: “Your column drew attention to this injustice two years ago when much of the media wasn't interested.
“You helped to bring the matter to a wider audience - which included many of my fellow firefighters - and I am deeply grateful for that. I am glad that we got justice in the end.”
He is not, however, jumping for joy, regretting the harm this scandal has caused the union to which he has dedicated so much of his life. The financial cost he estimates at six-figures, with the union convening a special conference to decide on his case and then hiring a QC for the tribunal, while Mr Embery represented himself. And beside the financial cost, there's what he calls the PR disaster.
“This has done a huge amount of reputational damage to the union. I'm genuinely saddened by that. As disappointed as I was at what happened to me, I'm still an ordinary member, still a firefighter, I think it's a fantastic union, it's done so many great things for firefighters over the years, so I take no pleasure in saying the whole thing has backfired because it's still my union.
“I think there's a major disconnect between the leadership who are running it in an authoritarian and arrogant way and the ordinary members who think you should be able to speak your mind and not be punished for it.
“I can probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of people who've said to me or written to me to say the FBU were right to do what they did, whereas I've literally had thousands of messages - in no small part thanks to you - saying what 'happened to you was a disgrace and I voted Remain'. That's heartening, it shows that people are prepared to put their own view to one side to defend the right of other people to express theirs.”
An FBU spokesperson said they were disappointed with the tribunal ruling, adding: “We are assessing our options for next steps.”
They could begin by publicly apologising to Mr Embery.
investigate@mirror.co.uk
