Matthew Goodwin, the Reform candidate in Gorton And Denton (Image: Getty)
Matt Goodwin, Reform’s election campaign in the Gorton and Denton by-election, has denied acting inappropriately after it emerged he was accused of making inappropriate comments to a young woman. The GB News presenter was accused of making comments to a junior staff member at the TV channel which she regarded as sexually harassment, the Guardian has reported.
The woman is said to have complained to the network’s HR department in 2025 following comments including one about her appearance. The Guardian reports Mr Goodwin has denied acting inappropriately. A lawyer acting for him confirmed to the Guardian that a grievance had been raised relating to two alleged verbal remarks made months apart, and no disciplinary action was taken.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more Invalid email
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our Privacy Policy
A Labour Party Spokesperson said: “These are extremely concerning allegations – Matthew Goodwin needs to come clean with the public as to what happened here.
“From saying young girls should be given a ‘biological reality check’ to his plan to tax women more if they don’t have children, Goodwin’s attitude towards women frankly stinks.”
Labour is fighting a fierce battle to hold the seat, which it won in 2024, with some polls suggesting it could come third behind Reform and the Greens.
Mr Goodwin is standing for the party in the by-election on February 26, which was triggered when former Labour MP Andrew Gwynne stood down citing health reasons.
He is already fighting a legal battle over claims he broke election rules.
On Friday, lawyers for the candidate and his election agent, Adam Rawlinson, told the High Court that some of Mr Goodwin’s election leaflets failed to include a “statutory imprint”, which constituted “inadvertent illegal practice”.
Under the Representation of the People Act 1983, election material must include the name and address of those the document promotes, the promoter, and the printer.
Failure to do this is classed as an “illegal practice”, which can be punishable by a fine of up to £5,000.
The imprint was missing from a leaflet containing an open letter by a pensioner who had switched her support from Labour to Reform.
Mr Goodwin and Mr Rawlinson are now asking the court to rule that they do not have to face a sanction over the issue, which their barrister described as an “honest administrative error”.
Adam Richardson, for the two, told the court in written submissions that the rule breach was “limited in scope, technical in nature, and had no material impact on the election”.
He continued that the Act allows a judge to order that a person should not face consequences for “illegal practice” if it arose from “inadvertence or from accidental miscalculation” and “did not arise from any want of good faith”.
He said: “Without relief, they face the risk of criminal prosecution, a fine, a three-year disqualification from elective office, and, if Mr Goodwin were elected, potential invalidation of the result.”
The court in London was told that the imprint was included in the signed-off version of the leaflet, which was sent to printing company Hardings Print Solutions.
Mr Richardson continued that an “internal error” at Hardings led to a “change of font” at the final stage of production, which caused the imprint to be “trimmed off or omitted”.
The barrister said the error was spotted on February 6, with no further leaflets being distributed and Hardings having “publicly admitted full responsibility for the production error”.
He said: “This error was neither requested nor authorised by the claimants or anyone on their behalf.”
He continued: “The omission was wholly inadvertent and arose from a third-party production error that was neither foreseen nor preventable.”
Mr Goodwin and Mr Rawlinson also informed the Crown Prosecution Service and the acting returning officer of the error, the barrister said.
Lawyers on behalf of the acting returning officer attended the hearing in London but made no representations, and no other party was represented.
At the end of the hearing, Mr Justice Soole said that a three-hour hearing to decide whether Mr Goodwin and Mr Rawlinson should be sanctioned will be held on Wednesday, and that the other candidates in the by-election should be given “formal notice” of the matter.