A parliamentary debate on calls for a public inquiry “into pro-Israel influence on politics and democracy” risks peddling antisemitic conspiracy theories and Parliament itself “legitimising dog whistles”, Jewish communal organisations and senior politicians have cautioned.
The debate is scheduled because a petition, which also claimed there was an “urgent need to scrutinise how pro-Israel organisations, networks, and lobbying efforts may shape government decisions, party policy, and public debate”, gained over 100,000 signatures, meaning that Parliament’s Petitions Committee was required to consider allowing a debate on the topic in Parliament.
The committee’s chairman, Liberal Democrat MP Jamie Stone, had previously defended the decision not to reject the petition, citing similar debates about Russian and Chinese influence on British politics.
Prior to reaching the required 100,000 signatures, the petition had been amplified by far-left and Islamist news sites, and it is now set to be debated by MPs on June 22.
Given the sharp rise in antisemitism and wave of attacks on the Jewish community, communal groups and senior politicians have criticised of the decision to hold the debate and urged the government to reject the premise of it, as well as on the MPs participating in the debate to do so responsibly.
The Jewish Leadership Council’s director of public affairs Russell Langer told the JC: “This petition is based on an antisemitic conspiracy theory and has been amplified by those seeking to cause further division. We therefore wrote to the committee earlier this year to request this petition was taken down.
"Since then, we have had the Golders Green attack and a Downing Street summit to discuss how to tackle antisemitism across society. This only makes it more absurd that this petition is getting the respectability of a parliamentary debate.
He continued: “If those speaking in this debate, including from the front benches, are sincere in their efforts to fight antisemitism, they will be clear in linking the rhetoric in this petition to the increased threat to the Jewish community.”
Danny Stone MBE, chief executive of the Antisemitism Policy Trust, also cautioned parliamentarians against engaging with antisemitic tropes.
“The petitions committee has allowed this debate to proceed. It will now be the responsibility of every decent parliamentarian to go in and ensure that the particular historical resonance surrounding the charge of undue influence when it comes to Jews, is not engaged by any of their colleagues within the context of this debate”, he said.
“They might also point out that there are lobbies for many countries, Israel being one of them. It is unexceptional in that regard. Too often Israel is singled out as uniquely powerful or evil – an antisemitic framing. No doubt Parliament and the government in its response will wish to set the standard in showing how Israel can and should be treated – like any other member of the UN.”
The petition itself was described as the latest step in a “sinister coordinated campaign by far-left and Islamist groups to demonise British Jews and make them feel unwelcome and unsafe in their own country”, by Lord Walney, the government’s former independent adviser on political violence and disruption.
He continued: “Ironically, the tactics they are using are typical of those deployed by the likes of Iran and Russia to undermine our country and its democratic institutions.”
The government has rejected the petition’s call for an inquiry but said that it “takes the issue of foreign influence from any country and lobbying in UK politics very seriously and is already taking action to address this”.
However, one Labour frontbencher who spoke to the JC blasted the Petitions Committee’s decision to grant the debate.
"This petition comes close to endorsing conspiratorial antisemitic tropes about Israeli influence on British politics and the state. Unlike with other countries such as China and Russia, Israel's not trying to undermine British democracy.
"It's a sorry reflection on the standard of debate that, despite a crisis of antisemitic attacks of recent times, the Petitions Committee gave it the time of day."
Dame Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, also questioned the propriety of the debate.
“At a time of record antisemitism and increasingly divisive sectarian politics, Parliament should not be legitimising dog whistles”, she told the JC.
“Whilst it is legitimate to scrutinise and debate the actions of the Israeli government, this is peddling antisemitic conspiracy theories.
"Further, we know there will be some who will cloak their prejudice and bigotry in the language of public concern.
“Only the Conservatives have the resolve to confront the scourge of antisemitism across Britain.”
Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice also branded the petition “a ludicrous waste of time” and defended the practice of lobbying as “a normal part of democracy and politics”.
"It helps inform and educate, whether one may or may not agree. Of course it must be within the rules to ensure transparency,” he said.
“Personally I am delighted there is pro-Israel lobbying in UK politics to counter the antisemitic, pro-Hamas nonsense perpetrated by the Left, including by numerous Labour MPs.”
To get more Politics news, click here to sign up for our free politics newsletter.