Panel rejects ex-Reform MP’s claim that post starting racist slur was a typo

Sophie Wingate, Press Association Deputy Political Editor

A former Reform UK MP posted the letter “N” on social media and started a racial slur online, a parliamentary investigation has found, rejecting his claim that it was accidental.

The Standards Committee cleared James McMurdock of breaching parliamentary rules because it could not prove he posted with the specific intention of starting a so-called N-Tower, even after commissioner Daniel Greenberg concluded he participated in a racial insult and damaged the reputation of the House of Commons.

In releasing its verdict on Mr McMurdock, it also emerged that the committee found that veterans minister Calvin Bailey had breached a rule prohibiting MPs from seeking to influence the standards watchdog in the investigation.

Mr Bailey apologised for a “serious error” after writing to Mr Greenberg urging him to reject any attempt by Mr McMurdock to deny the claims.

Mr McMurdock was investigated after posting the letter “N” under an X post that was critical of a black Sky News reporter in summer 2025.

His claims that one of his children posted it, or it was a pocket post, was rejected by the committee.

“We cannot accept — on the balance of probabilities — either of these explanations,” it said in a report published on Tuesday.

“We therefore find, on the balance of probabilities, that Mr McMurdock posted the letter himself and in doing so started a racial slur online, whether intentionally or not.”

Mr Greenberg concluded that Mr McMurdock breached the MPs’ code of conduct, writing: “The initiation of an N-Tower by a Member of Parliament is action that ‘would cause significant damage to the reputation and integrity of the House of Commons as a whole, or of its members generally’.

“The N-word is one of the most offensive terms in the English language. The use of an N-Tower is designed to encourage the use of a racist term in a manner intended to avoid moderation. To initiate an N-Tower on a public forum gives the impression that Members of Parliament are content to incite racist abuse.”

The committee concluded Mr McMurdock did not break rule 11, defined as “actions causing significant damage to the reputation” to the House of Commons or its MPs.

Recommending no further action, the panel wrote: “That is a very high bar.

“Even if we had been able to conclude that Mr McMurdock had posted the letter ‘N’ with the intention of initiating the creation of a racial slur, we do not consider that that bar would have been met.

“The conduct would have undoubtedly been abhorrent, but the damage would have been done to Mr McMurdock’s own reputation, and not to that of MPs in general.”

Mr McMurdock was elected as a Reform UK MP in South Basildon and East Thurrock in 2024, but resigned the party whip in July 2025 over questions related to Covid loans.

In a separate report released on Tuesday, the committee found that Mr Bailey breached a rule prohibiting MPs from lobbying the standards commissioner “in a manner calculated or intended to influence” a probe.

Mr Bailey had written to Mr Greenberg about his investigation into Mr McMurdock’s conduct in September 2025, saying: “I urge you to reject any attempt by Mr McMurdock to deny that he purposefully intended to initiate, and participate in, racist and intimidatory behaviour against a journalist.”

He described Mr McMurdock’s actions as part of an “established pattern within the online far right which he is associated with”.

Leyton and Wanstead MP Mr Bailey was subsequently informed he was himself under investigation for potentially breaking a rule banning MPs from seeking to influence the watchdog’s consideration of whether another MP has breached the code of conduct.

Mr Bailey, who was not a minister at the time, apologised in a reply to Mr Greenberg and asked for his original letter to be withdrawn.

“Please accept my full apology for this serious error on my part, for which I am deeply sorry,” he wrote in October 2025.

“While I accept that it will now have to be published as part of this investigation process, I would like to formally withdraw my letter of 24 September. It was never my intention to interfere with or influence your investigation or judgment on this matter.”

Mr Bailey said his objective had been to highlight the impact of Mr McMurdock’s actions on ethnic minority MPs, rather than influence the outcome of the case.

The commissioner concluded that Mr Bailey’s intervention could only be interpreted as an attempt to influence his decision and referred the matter to the committee.

The committee ruled that Mr Bailey had committed a breach that was “minor and inadvertent”, and recommended no further action, according to a report published on Tuesday.