With a No Deal Brexit looking increasingly likely, communal bodies and leading figures are wrestling with the probable impact on the community.

In a briefing paper published this week, Marie van der Zyl, the president of the Board of Deputies, warns that all UK legislation “governing the slaughter of animals for food, which contains shechita” will “ need to be adapted to ensure that it is viable post any Brexit; deal or no-deal.”

Shimon Cohen, campaign director for Shechita UK said in response: “We are in regular communication with DEFRA at all levels and have been assured that there is no planned change to government policy.

"Primary Legislation for the agriculture sector sits with the EU. Therefore, the government will need to ensure a UK equivalent is in place whether or not there is a deal.

"At the moment, EU Regulation 1099/2009 is the primary legislation for slaughtering animals for food, working alongside separate Statutory Instruments in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland - Welfare of Animals at Time of Kill (WATOK). The government is working on solutions, in consultation with all interested parties.

"Most of the Kosher meat and poultry consumed in the UK is shechted in the UK. Our Shechita Boards are aware of any possible implications to their supplies and we are sure they will plan accordingly.”

The JC also understands that Theresa Villiers – the new Secretary Of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs - is likely to make a speech soon expressing her support for shechita.

The Board’s briefing paper also warns that kosher food “imported into the UK could well become more expensive in a no deal scenario.” While the vast majority of kosher lamb and poultry is procured in the UK, 30 to 50 per cent of kosher beef is imported from the Continent — mostly from Poland.

In February the Manchester Beth Din confirmed 100 per cent of its fresh beef is British, but the London Board for Shechita (LBS) said that it does import a portion of its beef – with preparations now under way to procure more of its meat domestically.

Mike Freer, the Conservative MP for Finchley and Golders Green, said he believed a no deal scenario “should not impact on kosher food.”

Overall, Mrs van der Zyl says that “there is not a clear-cut ‘Jewish’ case on either side of the argument” of a No Deal Brexit.

One leading communal source criticised the Board’s failure to take a stand against No Deal, insisting: “The role of any government is to look after its people and protect them from unnecessary shocks. It is disappointing that the Board does not see it that way.”

The Board suggests that in any economic downturn, “Members of our community, and some of our key communal institutions and charities are likely to feel the pinch, as will many parts of wider society. This will require us as a community to be more charitable, both to Jewish and wider causes, so as to help each other overcome any shortfalls.”

Independent MP Luciana Berger, who has campaigned vigorously for the UK to remain in the EU, expressed real concern about the impact of a no deal Brexit.

She told the JC: “Every one of the government’s own analyses and select committee reports have concluded we are going to face very significant consequences if we crash out of the EU on Oct 31 with no deal."

But Brexit Party MEP Lance Forman said he had no fear over a No Deal Brexit: “There is absolutely no reason why a no deal brexit should any bad for Jews.

"Brexit will be good for the Jewish comminity as we thrive in liberal democracies and without Brexit democracy is negated.”

The Board’s report also raised fears over “workforce supply” in the aftermath of a no deal Brexit. Ms van der Zyl writes: “Many of the security guards and care workers that the Jewish community employs are EU migrants.

"While those who are already in the UK can apply for settled status, it might be harder to attract new workers, particularly if migration is to be significantly cut.

“The result could be rising labour costs, meaning, for example, that the government’s grant to the Community Security Trust covers less, or that the budgets of Jewish social care organisations are stretched even further.”

The Board’s concerns about the impact on EU citizens rights after Brexit will have been compounded by the PM’s first statement to the House of Commons last month. Mr Johnson said there was no plan for fresh legislation on the issue despite repeatedly highlighting the plight of the 3.2 million EU citizens in his leadership campaign. 

But Mr Freer told the JC there would only be an impact if “communal organisations are reliant on imported low costs labour that will have a problem with the new skills based immigration system being proposed.”

He also insisted the government has tried to secure reciprocal rights for UK/EU citizens but that the EU refuses to agree them outside a main deal.

Elsewhere the Board concludes that UK trade with Israel will remain unharmed and possibly benefit from Brexit.

It states: “Israel was one of the first countries to sign a comprehensive trade  and partnership agreement with the UK, replicating the existing EU agreements, which will take effect after Brexit. This, at least, is sorted.”

It also suggests that assurances have been given from ministers that terrorist organisations such as the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the political wing of Hamas  - which were technically only subject to UK sanctions by virtue of being under a wider EU sanctions - will remain outlawed as a result of new counter terrorism measures. 

The report also warns about the rise of populism, adding: “Where there is political chaos or economic disruption, people often seek a ‘scapegoat’ to blame. Jews and other minorities have often borne the brunt of this.

“We must continue to insist on a society which respects and celebrates different groups, whether Jews, Muslims, European citizens or other minorities.”