THE Labour Party’s ruling body has voted to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s full definition of anti-Semitism, including all 11 examples of anti-Semitic behaviour.
Jeremy Corbyn will be hoping the decision brings an end to the row that has engulfed the party in recent months.
Previously, party chiefs had expressed support for the definition but baulked at four of the 11 examples given by the IHRA. Those included accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour, requiring Israel to demonstrate behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation, and drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
There was a fear this would stop anyone in Labour being able to legitimately criticise the actions of the Israeli government and their treatment of the Palestinians.
Yesterday, after taking the decision to adopt the definition in full, the NEC issued a short statement emphasising freedom of expression on Israel and rights of Palestinians.
A party spokesperson said: “The NEC has today adopted all of the IHRA examples of anti-Semitism, in addition to the IHRA definition which Labour adopted in 2016, alongside a statement which ensures this will not in any way undermine freedom of expression on Israel or the rights of Palestinians.”
The agenda for the NEC, which has about 40 members, had only timetabled half an hour for the discussion. However, it overran by many hours.
Two hours in, the meeting broke for tea, amid “big disagreements”.
Scottish Labour welcomed the decision following a discussion at the Scottish Parliamentary Labour Party. Reports suggested all but four of Labour’s MSPs had voted to adopt the full IHRA definition of anti-Semitism and its examples. There were also claims that Richard Leonard had not voted at all.
It’s understood Leonard didn’t vote because he backed a third option, not being voted on. The veteran left-winger backed supporting the IHRA definition in full and all of the examples – with extra clarification on free speech.
“Richard Leonard has been clear that there is no place for anti-Semitism in the Labour Party, and now hopes all members of the party can work together to rebuild trust and faith between the party and the Jewish community.”
Before the NEC meeting in London, two rival demonstrations gathered outside.
About 100 Corbyn loyalists voiced concern about adopting the definition, while a smaller counter-protest of campaigners, some waving the flag of Israel, warned the party not to shy away from its anti-Semitism problem.
Several senior figures in the party have called for the adoption of the definition in recent weeks.
But the announcement has proved controversial.
Labour Friends of Israel director Jennifer Gerber said: “A ‘freedom of expression on Israel’ clause is unnecessary and totally undermines the other examples the party has supposedly just adopted.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here