EHRC submissions – the JLM’s second ‘election’ dossier

JVL is in the process of assessing the allegations contained in the Jewish Labour Movement’s (the JLM) submission to the EHRC investigation of the Labour Party, which made the headlines shortly before the General Election. We intend to make a second JVL submission assessing the charges made by the JLM.

Much of the document refers to incidents the details of which are not fully specified, based on witness testimonies that are redacted. This limits our ability to independently verify these claims.

We invite readers to read through the Jewish Labour Movement’s submission. If you are able to identify any factual misrepresentations, or shed light on the nature of the incidents referred to, we would encourage you to submit this information to us at  [email protected] and where applicable to the EHRC at [email protected].

We are attaching a crude Word version which is searchable. You can download it here. It is not an accurate copy of the original but should help locate particular named individuals, for example. The formatting of the original is often lost, and the footnotes in particular, heavily redacted as they are, are not accurately read or placed in the Word copy.

It is therefore important to check any comment you wish to make against the text in the original PDF.

 

 

Comments (8)

  • RH says:

    Good luck. I’m not sure where you begin with this string of unevidenced accusation, inaccuracy, contradiction and distortion!

  • Gerry Glyde says:

    Well, it contains a lot of words, but very little by way of verifiable fact. Given that they cite the Royall Report that found some incidents that did not show that there was an endemic problem. There was clearly a political divide amongst the students and the pro Israel lobby pushed the concept of the LC not being a ‘safe space’ for Jews. It was the first time I had encountered the slogan which is no more or less that we people don’t wish to hear views with which they disagree. In the UK we have freedom of speech subject to law. Some of the lobby seemingly want to impose their rules on what is or is not acceptable, rather than being subject to law.
    The lobby have willfully misinterpreted the guidance of Macpherson

  • Philip Ward says:

    This is one of those situations where it is much easier and less time-consuming to make allegations than to refute them. it’s easy enough to say “i heard so and so say such and such a thing at a meeting”. Very often, this is likely to be plain lies, but how to prove that? In other situations, context would need to be established and/or arguments made that the alleged statement is valid and not antisemitic or disreputable. A full dossier countering the JLM’s “report” could end up ten times bigger than theirs.

    One of the things this whole campaign by the JLM and its allies is doing is clogging up the LP apparatus. It’s possible that this is one prong of their whole strategy, another being costing the LP and some of its members a lot of money, pain and anguish. Pity the party apparatus seems to be willing participants in this process.

  • different frank says:

    Surely the JLM should be re named, as one does not have to be Jewish, or in the Labour party to join.
    Maybe Right wing Tory Movement.
    RTM.

  • Pam Laurance says:

    And since you cannot be a member of the JLM unless you tell them you are a Zionist that would seem to indicate a certain bias….
    .

  • Pam Laurance says:

    I started reading the 78 pages but only managed about 10 sorry…

    A few comments –

    The JLM says – The Labour Party is no longer a safe space for Jewish people
    A sweeping and inaccurate statement – I feel perfectly safe in Brent Central CLP and am known to be Jewish. The same goes for other Jews in my CLP. And elsewhere.

    The JLM says – …the Party’s machinery finds more ways of ignoring, denying, relativising and accepting the antisemitism that has consumed it. –
    I think it would be more accurate to say that it is combatting the tide of allegations, only a small proportion of which are justified, that has consumed it.

    The JLM says – it has no institutional relationship with Israel, and publicly criticises Israeli government policy –
    HOWEVER on their website they say that one of their values is “To promote the centrality of Israel in Jewish life and its development on the basis of freedom, social justice and equality for all its citizens.”. Most Jews do feel some sort of connection or relationship to Israel but an awful lot of us do not see it as “central” to our lives. And arguing against the “centrality” position makes you a Jew to be ignored or disparaged, in their eyes. (Plus there is an issue around the ambiguity of the definition of being “an Israeli Citizen”,)

    The JLM says, 7.2 onwards, One respondent lists 22 examples of antisemitic abuse…. –
    The examples are awful – but this is a number of separate incidents –What steps were taken to stop the abuse? – If help was refused that would be very bad. But we are told little about any steps taken

  • Nicola Grove says:

    I’ve had a brief look. I think you are all to be commended for taking this on, it’s a huge piece of work, but it is clearly necessary to address the veracity of these claims at this very difficult time for Labour and all its members and supporters.

  • John Bernard says:

    There is an awful lot of material here and all credit to JVL for tackling what on cursory examination appears to be mix of evidence of clearly anti-semitic content, and frankly just misrepresentation and political wish fulfilment of the “if we throw enough mud, something is bound to stick” variety. One would hope that the EHRC will bear in mind that Zionism is principally a political doctrine and not an ethnic identity or a religion and whilst JLM may claim not to have any formal link
    with Israel, it is disingenuous of it to pretend as a member of the World Zionist Movement that it is an objective commentator without a political axe to grind.

Comments are now closed.