Jewish doctors have warned of a “level of active resistance” within the NHS against measures to tackle Jew-hate after the British Medical Association (BMA) voted to pause implementation of the Lord Mann review on antisemitism in the health service.
The Mann report recommended banning staff from displaying political symbols on NHS uniforms and proposed that antisemitism cases be handled by trusts rather than medical regulators.
The government and NHS England accepted all 36 recommendations from Mann’s report.
But just weeks after publication, the BMA’s annual conference in Brighton voted to pause the implementation of the report’s recommendation following a separate vote a day earlier to scrap the IHRA definition of antisemitism.
Doctors backed a motion stating the report “may have significant implications for freedom of expression, professional autonomy and employment rights within the NHS.”
The “emergency motion”, proposed by UCLH anaesthetist Imran Sharieff and supported by BMA members, stated: “This conference reaffirms its total opposition to antisemitism, Islamophobia and all forms of racism, discrimination and harassment”.
It then added concern that “implementation of the review may have significant implications for freedom of expression, professional autonomy and employment rights within the NHS.”
It resolved to “call for an immediate pause in the implementation of the Lord Mann Review”, and “oppose the implementation of recommendations that would restrict lawful expression beyond existing legal and professional standards”.
The motion also said the BMA would “support members whose lawful expression is adversely affected by policies introduced pursuant to the review's recommendations”.
While the BMA has no executive power over the NHS, it may choose to write to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to set out its official position.
The vote has sparked concern among some Jewish doctors.
Dr Fiona Sim, chair of the UK Jewish Medical Association, suggested the vote indicated there would be “a layer of active resistance to implementation from some within the medical profession” of the Mann review’s measures.
Sim warned that the impact could be a “coordinated and energetic effort from those who oppose the Mann report, and others encouraged to jump on the free speech bandwagon, to make implementation of the Mann recommendations harder for many NHS institutions.”
The JC understands that the Jewish Medical Association has written to the BMA to express concern about the motions passed at the AGM.
The BMA’s earlier vote to scrap the IHRA definition drew widespread condemnation.
The American Jewish Medical Association said IHRA “provides clear, internationally recognised, and widely adopted guidance on what constitutes anti-Jewish hatred.”
It added: “The AJMA calls on the NHS and UK Government to reject the BMA's motion and continue utilising the IHRA definition as it works to counter antisemitism. We stand with Jewish members of the medical community in the UK and will continue to work together to counter antisemitism in healthcare settings.”
The Holocaust Educational Trust called the BMA vote on the IHRA definition “outrageous”.
A spokesperson said: “Instead of lecturing Jews on what constitutes antisemitism, the BMA should focus on restoring trust and ensuring the NHS is once again a safe and welcoming place for Jewish staff and patients alike.”
The Israeli embassy in London also slammed the vote, with a spokesperson accusing the BMA of “neglect[ing] its duties” and claiming the union “has been hijacked by the politics of division.”
To get more news, click here to sign up for our free daily newsletter.