Embattled Labor MP Emma Husar has hit back at allegations of sexual harassment and bullying, claiming that they arose only after she dismissed staffer Jeremy Anderson for poor performance, and that they had been encouraged by members of the party’s right faction that had opposed Ms Husar from her preselection.

Detailing her side of the story for the first time since the allegations went public, Ms Husar said in a statement that the internal Labor investigation into the claims made against her was now so compromised by damaging leaks that she had no choice but to reveal details of the allegations and her defence to them.

According to documents obtained by Fairfax Media and conversations with a spokeswoman, Ms Husar contends that the original allegations came to light after Mr Anderson’s dismissal and they later snowballed as part of a political “stitch-up” being pursued by a former NSW Labor minister, and other former staff and branch members.

Mr Anderson said he “categorically denied” the allegations, labelling them “false and defamatory”.

Fairfax Media understands that Ms Husar has retained the high-profile Sydney defamation silk Sandy Dawson, while her lawyer has sent letters threatening defamation action to Jeremy Anderson, BuzzFeed and News Corp Australia.

In a written statement provided to Fairfax Media, Ms Husar said: “I support the right of anyone to have their complaints heard. This is why I’ve cooperated fully with the process and maintained the confidentiality through my silence. It is clear this process is now hopelessly compromised.

“The coverage of this has been nothing short of devastating professionally and reputationally. I’m not sure I will ever recover. But I am determined to clear my name."

Ms Husar said the vast majority of the allegations were vague and without names or dates.

“I reject them absolutely,” she said.

She believed Mr Anderson performed poorly as a policy and media advisor from the time he began in her office in June last year and, as a result, his probationary period was extended.

Ms Husar felt he adopted a “poor attitude” in the workplace and was difficult to manage.

On October 3 last year an incident occurred at Ms Husar’s electorate office in which his former partner appeared and became disruptive. The office went into lock-down and police were called. Mr Anderson left the office and went on sick leave.

He was dismissed on December 18. In early January, Mr Anderson made an unfair dismissal complaint to Fair Work Australia, but according to Ms Husar’s spokeswoman the complaint only addressed the circumstances of his workplace management and eventual dismissal.

After Ms Husar responded on January 18 – pointing out the claim was lodged too late and the employment period was too short so Fair Work had no jurisdiction to hear it – the complaint was withdrawn.

The western Sydney MP said the Fair Work complaint “included NONE of the allegations of bullying and sexual harassment” that have subsequently been aired.

Ms Husar was made aware of the second set of complaints made against her by Mr Anderson as well as other staff when she attended a meeting in April at NSW Labor’s Sussex Street headquarters.

It is then that Ms Husar came to believe that the allegations against her were being used by local branch members within Ms Husar’s own right faction who had never accepted her nomination and her support from Opposition Leader Bill Shorten.

One senior Labor figure said people opposed to her being the local MP had banded together with former staff members to air the allegations against her.

"At the time that she was originally picked as a candidate, prior to her election, there were those who were very strongly opposed to her selection in the first place," the senior figure said.

In her response to the complaints against her, Ms Husar claimed people have “run a political campaign against me”, including “unsuccessful attempts” to have someone challenge her preselection.

Ms Husar agreed to cooperate with the investigation as to whether she had breached paragraph seven of the ALP code of conduct, which states that: “Members, officials and staff of the Party must not engage in sexual harassment or bullying of each other.”

On May 16 John Whelan, the lawyer conducting the investigation for the ALP, sent Ms Husar a document that included 44 allegations.

After a meeting on July 26, Ms Husar’s lawyer wrote to Mr Whelan noting that over half of the allegations had nothing to do with the relevant paragraph in the code, and that many of the allegations were vague, anonymous and non-specific.

In the letter Ms Husar’s lawyer argued that the complaints numbered 21 to 44 should simply be disregarded.

“The absence of the ‘who, what, when and where’ of each allegation and the fact that the complaints are presented anonymously (prior to the recent media coverage of the issue) indicates that these complaints, in our view, are not genuine. Rather, we are instructed that they speak of the sub-factional stitch-up … which has played out in recent media reports.”

A spokeswoman for the NSW Labor Party hit back at Ms Husar’s critique of the process, labelling it “plainly wrong” and asserting that any breaches of confidentiality have not come from the independent inquiry.

“It has been carried out in accordance with standard operating procedures for investigations where many complainants ask to be de-identified for fear of recrimination,” the spokeswoman said, defending the inquiry as a fair and professional process.

“The ALP’s code of conduct is broad and allows consideration of many matters. The party’s independent assessor, Mr John Whelan should be allowed to provide his advice to the ALP without himself being smeared.”

Claims and counter-claims

Fairfax Media has obtained a document outlining all 44 allegations against Ms Husar and a second one listing her refutations. Beneath are some of her refutations of key claims already made public.

Sexual harassment

Claim: In the most startling claim made public so far, it is alleged that in a meeting attended by Mr Anderson, Ms Husar, fellow MP Jason Clare and Mr Clare's three-year-old son, Ms Husar deliberately spread her legs to Mr Clare while wearing no underwear.

Response: Ms Husar denies the allegation outright, but adds that during the meeting in question she sat on the floor to play with Mr Clare’s son while Mr Anderson sat on a couch. “If I had behaved in the way that he has alleged (which I did not) he would not have been able to see in any case," she said.

“These matters were never raised in the unfair dismissal application made by Mr Anderson after his employment was terminated.”

Ms Husar denies two other allegations that she leant over Mr Anderson as he worked on a computer and rested her breast on him.

“Misuse of funds/entitlements”

Claim: The 17th allegation in the document states simply, “Mr Anderson alleges that there was money intended for other uses diverted into your personal bank account.”

Response: Ms Husar writes, “I deny this accusation, which I note has no specifics.” She goes on to detail how she managed her electoral allowance, concluding, “With any specific details, it's not possible to respond to this allegation. At no time did I make personal use of money intended for other purposes."

The document also details how Ms Husar employs one staff member on a casual basis in her electoral office and in a separate capacity as her babysitter. “There is no use of public funds to subsidise her work for me in that personal capacity," she writes.

“Alleged behaviours of concern expressed by former staff”

Claim: “Several employees have reported that you asked them to zip up your dress on several occasions, making them feel uncomfortable.”

Response: “This has occurred on occasion when I haven’t been able to do a zip up myself. I have on occasion had to ask staff if they minded assisting. None of the staff have raised an issue with this in the past.”

“Inappropriate management behaviour”

Claim: “It is alleged by Mr Anderson that you bring your dog into the office and ask staff members, including Mr Anderson to take the dog for a walk to relieve itself.”

Response: “Only after consultation with the staff and only with their agreement did I bring Thomas (my son’s autism assistance dog) to attend the office ... A [sic] their own initiative, staff have purchased their own supply of dog-treats so Thomas favours them and sits at their desk … If I am detained at meetings, in the electorate or elsewhere it is necessary to take the dog to relieve itself. There is no set schedule for this.”

Swearing and insulting comments towards staff

Claim: Mr Anderson contends that Ms Husar would angrily swear at employees, yell at them and openly call them “useless”. In one incident, he claims she referred to an absent staff member as a “lazy bitch”.

Response: Ms Husar admits she often swears but says the language has never been directed “at” staff - insisting it is an outlet in “highly stressful and frustrating situations” and she is trying to improve. Ms Husar denied yelling at staff but said she struggled with the task of establishing her office and training staff with little guidance and support from the Labor Party and relevant government department.

Correction: An earlier version of this article misquoted Ms Husar's response to the claim she misused funds. This error has been fixed.