(a) Adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of Anti-Semitism and action on Hate Crime
Moved by Councillor Nickie Aiken and seconded by Councillor Adam Hug
This Council expresses alarm at the rise in antisemitism in recent years across the UK and welcomes the Government’s decision to formally adopt the internationally recognised International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) guidelines on antisemitism, which defines antisemitism as:
“a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities”.
The guidelines highlight manifestations of antisemitism as including:
the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
· Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
· Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
· Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
· Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
· Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
· Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
· Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.
· Applying double standards by requiring of it behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
· Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
· Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
· Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).
Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.
Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.
This Council welcomes cross-party support within the Council for combating antisemitism in all its manifestations.
This includes incidents when criticism of Israel has been expressed using antisemitic tropes. This Council is mindful that criticism of Israel can be legitimate, and the Council reaffirms its commitment to act in accordance with its legal obligations under Article 10 (Freedom of expression) Article 14 (Prohibition of discrimination) and Article 17 (Prohibition of abuse of rights) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. However, criticism of Israel is not considered legitimate if it employs the tropes and imagery of antisemitism.
This Council resolves to adopt the definition of antisemitism as set out by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and commits to tackle this form of racism and religious hatred in our City.
Hateful incidents against Jews do not exist in a vacuum however. We are seeing a rise in Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia and misogyny in our community, and we saw a spike in xenophobia following the Brexit vote. This Council condemns all forms of racism, religious hatred, homophobia, transphobia, sexism and any form of hatred towards an individual or group for who they are, and we commit to fighting against them.
Hateful narratives and behaviours promote intolerance and can fragment and divide our community. This Council therefore pledges to better understand the manifestations of Hate Crime and its impact in our City, and will request the Cabinet (or Cabinet Member?) to develop a comprehensive strategy to combat this pernicious crime and support the cohesion of our community. The implementation of this motion and the adoption of a Hate Crime strategy would be taken forward by the Cabinet Member for Public Protection and Licensing with the backing of the Council.
(b) CityWest
Homes
Moved by Councillor Pancho Lewis and seconded by Councillor Matt Noble:
The Council notes residents’ deep concerns about the current performance of CityWest Homes, particularly in relation to repairs, customer service and resident involvement.
The Council believes that Westminster’s approach to housing services should focus on getting the basics right, with a narrower remit around improving standards.
The Council resolves to request the Cabinet to scrap CityWest Homes and bring housing services back ‘in house’ under direct council supervision and accountability.
The Council also resolves to request the Cabinet to increase the number of housing
Officers on the ground in local areas, to restore local estate offices, improve call centre performance and reform resident involvement to give tenants and leaseholders more power and responsibility over how their homes are managed.
Minutes:
11.1 The Majority Party had selected for its second debate the first Notice of Motion (Adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance Definition of Anti-semitism and Action on Hate Crime) as set out on the agenda. The Notice of Motion was moved by Councillor Nickie Aiken and seconded by Councillor Adam Hug.
11.2 Following debate, to which Councillor Ian Adams replied, the Lord Mayor put the Notice of Motion moved by Councillor Aiken and seconded by Councillor Adam Hug to the vote and on a show of hands declared the Notice of Motion CARRIED.
RESOLVED:
That Council expresses alarm at the rise in antisemitism in recent years across the UK and welcomes the Government’s decision to formally adopt the internationally recognised International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) guidelines on antisemitism, which defines antisemitism as:
“a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities”.
The guidelines highlight manifestations of antisemitism as including:
The targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-semitic. Anti-semitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
· Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
· Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
· Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
· Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
· Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
· Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
· Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.
· Applying double standards by requiring of it behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
· Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
· Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
· Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
· Anti-semitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of anti-semitic materials in some countries).
· Criminal acts are anti-semitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.
· Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.
This Council welcomes cross-party support within the Council for combating antisemitism in all its manifestations.
This includes incidents when criticism of Israel has been expressed using anti-semitic tropes. This Council is mindful that criticism of Israel can be legitimate, and the Council reaffirms its commitment to act in accordance with its legal obligations under Article 10 (Freedom of expression) Article 14 (Prohibition of discrimination) and Article 17 (Prohibition of abuse of rights) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. However, criticism of Israel is not considered legitimate if it employs the tropes and imagery of antisemitism.
This Council resolves to adopt the definition of antisemitism as set out by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and commits to tackle this form of racism and religious hatred in our City.
Hateful incidents against Jews do not exist in a vacuum however. We are seeing a rise in Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia and misogyny in our community, and we saw a spike in xenophobia following the Brexit vote. This Council condemns all forms of racism, religious hatred, homophobia, transphobia, sexism and any form of hatred towards an individual or group for who they are, and we commit to fighting against them.
Hateful narratives and behaviours promote intolerance and can fragment and divide our community. This Council therefore pledges to better understand the manifestations of Hate Crime and its impact in our City, and will request the Cabinet or Cabinet Member to develop a comprehensive strategy to combat this pernicious crime and support the cohesion of our community. The implementation of this motion and the adoption of a Hate Crime strategy would be taken forward by the Cabinet Member for Public Protection and Licensing with the backing of the Council.
11.3 The Minority Party had selected for debate the Notice of Motion (CityWest Homes) as set out on the agenda. The Notice of Motion was moved by Councillor Pancho Lewis and seconded by Councillor Matt Noble.
11.4 Following debate, to which Councillor Pancho Lewis replied, the Lord Mayor put the Notice of Motion moved by Councillor Lewis and seconded by Councillor Matt Noble to the vote and on a show of hands declared the Notice of Motion LOST.