The former chair of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) has warned that House of Commons procedures are being “abused” to facilitate a debate based on an age-old antisemitic conspiracy theory.
Lord Pickles told the JC that a parliamentary motion scheduled for June 22 calling for a public inquiry into “pro-Israel influence on politics and democracy” falls squarely within the IHRA definition of antisemitism and risks legitimising a centuries-old anti-Jewish trope at a time of record levels of antisemitism in Britain.
He has suggested that the House of Commons should examine its procedures after the debate was granted when a petition surpassed the 100,000-signature threshold required for the petitions committee to consider it for debate.
The petition claims there is an “urgent need to scrutinise how pro-Israel organisations, networks, and lobbying efforts may shape government decisions, party policy, and public debate”.
But Pickles, who previously served as the UK’s special envoy for post-Holocaust issues and as communities secretary in David Cameron’s cabinet and currently chairs the Lords’ group of Conservative Friends of Israel, said the petition’s very premise was antisemitic.
“The motion unambiguously falls within IHRA’s definition of antisemitism,” he told the JC.
“At a time of rising Jew hatred on our streets, the House of Commons procedures are being abused to debate an antisemitic trope as old as the hills. I believe it brings deep shame to the Mother of Parliaments.”
The government formally adopted the IHRA definition and all 11 of its examples in December 2016. While there have previously been calls to enshrine the framework in law, it is currently a non-legally binding educational tool.
Pickles’ intervention follows Jewish communal organisations citing concern that the debate could lend parliamentary legitimacy to antisemitic narratives.
Russell Langer, director of public affairs at the Jewish Leadership Council, 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.
“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, urged parliamentarians to avoid engaging with antisemitic tropes during the debate and said it was “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”.
“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,” Stone added.
The petitions 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.
To get more Politics news, click here to sign up for our free politics newsletter.