BBC covers JVL’s complaint about Labour’s treatment of left wing Jews
JVL Introduction
We are pleased to publish the BBC’s report on its own website about our letter to the Labour Party, copied to the EHRC, that left wing Jewish Party members critical of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, have been disproportionately targeted by the Party with allegations of antisemitism. The BBC has reported in a reasonable and balanced way and includes a link to a piece on JVL’s website. In noting than many have been disciplined for association with groups that were proscribed (“…for downplaying the toxic antisemitism issue.”), it does not note that in most cases proscription was decided months or even years after the association which led to many being “auto-excluded”. The Labour Party responded to the BBC by saying that “its reformed complaints process operated “impartially, fairly and rationally”. This has not, however, been our experience.
LL
This article was originally published by BBC News Website on Sat 16 Sep 2023. Read the original here.
Jewish group steps up pressure on Keir Starmer
Campaign group Jewish Voice for Labour (JVL) has stepped up pressure on Sir Keir Starmer over its claim that their members have been unfairly discriminated against by the party.
The group, which was supportive of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and is critical of Israel, has long argued that its members have faced disproportionate disciplinary action under Sir Keir’s leadership.
But its lawyers are now claiming that the party is breaching the 2010 Equality Act.
In July last year, former shadow chancellor John McDonnell wrote to the party’s most senior official, General Secretary David Evans, claiming the “disrespectful” treatment of JVL members amounted to discrimination.
Mr McDonnell told the BBC he had received only a standard reply, and that there had been a failure to engage on the issues.
Legal challenge
Now, the legal firm, Bindmans, has sent a letter to Mr Evans on behalf of JVL – ratcheting up pressure on the party.
It suggests legal action can not be ruled out if its concerns are not addressed.
The letter claims that the party has “unlawfully” discriminated against members of the group.
JVL alleges that those who disagree with the current leadership about Israel or Palestine are suffering “a harsh disciplinary regime” – and claims its members are far more likely to be investigated for disciplinary breaches, and are far more likely to face expulsion than party members as a whole.
It says 11 out of the 12 members of its executive committee have been investigated by the party.
And it argues that the party has misconstrued criticism of Israel as antisemitism.
This, the letter suggests, is against Labour’s own code of conduct, which states that “contentious views in this area will not be treated as antisemitism, unless accompanied by specific antisemitic content”.
A Labour source suggested that some JVL members had faced disciplinary action not because of their activities with the group, but because they had associated with other groups which the party had, in the jargon, “proscribed” – or banned.
Two years ago, Labour’s ruling body declared membership of three groups – Labour Against the Witchhunt, Labour in Exile Network, and Resist – were incompatible with party membership.
The groups had been had been criticised by party officials for downplaying the toxic antisemitism issue.
A fourth group was also banned, but for different reasons.
Complaints
The legal letter also suggests that that the party failed to investigate most complaints made by JVL members, while pursuing complaints made against them.
JVL is much smaller than the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM), which has had links to the party for a century.
It, unlike JVL, was not supportive of the Corbyn leadership.
The JLM complained to the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) about the handling of antisemitism complaints during the Corbyn era.
The EHRC subsequently found that the party had acted unlawfully.
By then, a new leader, Sir Keir Starmer, was in charge, and he accepted its findings in full.
On its website, JVL listed “15 reasons why the EHRC can and should be challenged”.
Factionalism
John McDonnell has suggested a way of defusing the dispute would be for the party to re-engage the services of Martin Forde KC.
He produced a report last year examining the culture of the party, in which he found that factionalism was “endemic”, and that the issue of antisemitism was weaponised by both right and left.
As there appeared to be disproportionate action against JVL, Mr McDonnell said, Mr Forde could cast an independent eye over the process.
This could potentially avoid the prospect of further legal action, he added.
The BBC has approached the Labour Party for comment, but it has not responded.
However, when Mr McDonnell approached Labour officials last year. alleging discrimination against JVL members. the party said it would always look at ways to improve its culture and practice.
But, the party added, its reformed complaints process operated “impartially, fairly and rationally”.
It may be welcome that the BBC has acknowledged the existence of JVL and this complaint, but the report, in true BBC style ends on a ‘bothsideism’ note. It is significant that the report does not allude to the Party’s introduction of retrospective justice, regarding alleged support for proscribed groups before they were proscribed. A more interesting report may have questioned how a former DPP is willing to countenance retrospective punishment in the organisation he currently ‘leads.’
The BBC is claiming that the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM) has been a much larger organisation than JVL.
My understanding from Asa Winstanley and others is that the JLM had been a largely dormant organisation until penetrated by the lobby for the purposes of being used in the pro-Israel moral panics of recent years.
I would welcome a clarification from JVL and other interested parties.
Many thanks, GL
Is the BBC right in saying that JVL is much smaller than the JLM? If so, this is a fairly new development as the JLM was quite moribund before Corbyn became leader. An unwelcome by-product.
Personally, I do not find the BBC’s report to be either “reasonable” or “balanced”. Its so-called balance – the dubious impartiality for which the BBC praises itself – is just the familiar equal-side-ism that I have come to expect from them. As for being reasonable, the piece repeats many of the distortions that have been used previously, e g. “the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM), which has had links to the party for a century”. Maybe that is literally true but it casually glosses over the fact of JLM’s long dormant state, until its remarkable resurrection in 2015 as an anti-Corbyn vehicle.
https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/jewish-labour-movement-was-refounded-fight-corbyn
And then there’s ‘JVL is much smaller than the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM), which has had links to the party for a century.’ which as any fule kno is not exactly true. Nor does it identify JLM as avowedly Zionist. Nor does ‘The EHRC subsequently found that the party had acted unlawfully’ whilst factually correct, reflect the substance of the accusation nor the recent withdrawal of the Livingstoine/Bromley / EHRC case which throws doubt on the accusation.
I bet the BBC love this. Any criticism of the LP will be seized on, regardless of the issue. I’m glad they have, but feel a tad suspicious of their own motives.
Have we become so desperate for a few crumbs from the mainstream media that JVL can view this as a “reasonable and balanced” report? I won’t repeat the arguments already made by all those writing before me – thank you all – but especially Chris Wallis and Jonathan Goldingfor articulating my thoughts precisely.
It is of critical importance that we don’t allow Israel to advance its apartheid policies. They have crippled and destroyed the Labour Party.
Labour’s own code of conduct, states that “contentious views in this area (criticism of Israel) will not be treated as antisemitism, unless accompanied by specific antisemitic content”. The Labour Party has expelled many good members without meeting this requirement. In the cases of Naomi Wimborne Idrissi, Ken Loach, Chris Williamson, Ken Livingstone and Marc Wadsworth, their was no “specific anti-Semitic content” in their so called offences.