The Liberal Democrats have commissioned a review into how the party treats members and candidates who hold religious beliefs, appointing former Lords leader Richard Newby to chair the inquiry. The review was announced quietly to members via email from leader Ed Davey and president Josh Babarinde days before the party's Brighton conference — not through any public channel. Its creation is a direct response to the discrimination case brought by David Campanale, a former BBC journalist who was selected as the party's Sutton and Cheam candidate in 2021 and removed in August 2023. Campanale's case is the forcing function. He is seeking £788,740.75 in damages after the party admitted direct and indirect discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief, and failures in its complaints handling. His schedule of loss includes compensation for injury to feelings, aggravated damages, past and future earnings, the loss of an MP's pension, counselling costs, and the loss of political capital. He described a January 2022 meeting where roughly 30 people questioned his Christianity and asked whether he was enjoying his "martyrdom just like Jesus did." The Newby review will examine candidate approval, selection and deselection processes for faith inclusivity, adequacy of candidate support, operation of complaints and disciplinary processes, and training for local party officers. Former deputy leader Simon Hughes said the review "is explicitly not about any past or present legal case" and that he would pursue a separate investigation once Campanale's case resolved. Former leader Tim Farron and Hughes had both called for an independent inquiry and apology following the Guardian's initial reporting. Internal critics are not reassured. One Lib Dem source described the review as offering "no remorse, no apologies to members misled so badly nor contrition towards the victims," calling it "a ploy to impress a court judge" given the review is scheduled to publish right before damages are considered. Another questioned why key individuals refused to act when they received complaints around Campanale's deselection. Questions have also emerged about whether Newby will have access to complaints material and whether the review extends to other protected beliefs beyond religious faith. The scope question matters because it intersects with an active fault line. Some members want the review to examine treatment of people with gender-critical beliefs — a politically charged category within the party. At conference on Monday, members rejected official guidance by the Equality and Human Rights Commission on implementing the Supreme Court ruling on transgender people, calling it "discriminatory and unworkable." The conference fringe included discussions about Christian nationalism and the political use of religion. The structural pattern here is institutional: a party that admitted discrimination has not apologised, has not publicly announced its response, and has designed a review whose timing and remit look calibrated to legal strategy rather than genuine accountability. The party says it is "home to people of all faiths and none" but has declined further comment. Whether the Newby review produces honest findings or serves as litigation furniture depends entirely on access to internal records and willingness to name specific failures — neither of which has been guaranteed.
