It may have been a day of peace in the Middle East but there were divisions, tension and heated exchanges in the council chamber at Hove Town Hall last night (Monday 13 October).
A row erupted when members of Brighton and Hove City Council discussed the possibility of financial links such as pension fund investments in Israeli firms.
A seven-hour meeting was adjourned three times and delayed by about 30 minutes in total after clashes between councillors and heckling from the public gallery at the town hall.
Members were accused of anti-semitism as the council debated a motion proposed by Green councillor Ollie Sykes.
The disruption followed an earlier wrangle as a Jewish widow called on civic leaders to show support with their actions rather than just voice it.
During the meeting, from the gallery, members of the public shouted: “Shame on you! This is hatred against Jews … Lies … It’s not genocide!”
The febrile atmosphere reached its height during one the final debates of a long night as the Greens called for a report into whether the council had any financial links with Israeli companies linked to the war in Gaza.
The public gallery erupted in booing as Councillor Sykes said: “We have to do this because what’s happened in Gaza is genocide.”
Conservative councillor Ivan Lyons, who is Jewish, called out: “This is anti-semitism!”
The mayor of Brighton and Hove, Amanda Grimshaw, who was chairing the meeting of the full council, asked Councillor Lyons to stop calling out.
Councillor Grimshaw asked the public gallery to quieten down to allow the debate to continue – as she had done earlier in the evening when the Labour council leader Bella Sankey was speaking.
Conservative councillor Anne Meadows addressed the mayor, saying that the speech was “anti-semitic abuse” to cheers from the public gallery.
Councillor Lyons called out: “This should not be tolerated in the chamber.”
The mayor adjourned the meeting.
When the meeting resumed, Councillor Lyons challenged the motion as “posturing drivel to give an undemocratic, racist hate mob something to cheer about”.
The numbers were against him as the council passed the motion by 36 votes to 5 – with only the Tories voting against. There was then further disruption from the gallery.
There were shouts of “dead Jews on the streets of Brighton will be on your hands” and “you wonder why that happened in Manchester” and “how can you betray us?”
The outcry led to another adjournment.
Tensions were already high after a pro-Palestine protest outside Hove Town Hall before the meeting, with a highly visible security presence in and outside the town hall.
There was shouting as Councillor Sankey condemned the attacks on the Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation synagogue, in Manchester, on Yom Kippur, and the arson attack on the Peacehaven Mosque three days later.
A deputation from members of the Jewish community asked for the council’s support, with Susan Sheftz describing the Labour government’s decision to recognise Palestine as a “betrayal”.
Mrs Sheftz said: “At a time when Jews and Israel are fighting for survival, this decision has been felt as a blow – and, yes, by many, as anti-semitic.
“Every year, you stand with us at Holocaust memorials. You say: ‘Never again is now.’ And you mean it. But this is the ‘now’. Jews again face an existential threat – and too often we feel we do not have your support.”
The mayor asked Mrs Sheftz to stick to the words printed in the agenda – and this was met with vocal criticism from the gallery.
Later, the Sussex Jewish Representative Council criticised the Greens’ “performative action” and the council’s vote to ask for a report into its pension fund’s possible Israeli investments.
The Jewish group said: “At a time when community tensions are so high in our city, including the recent torching of a mosque here, this council should be doing everything in its power to listen to all its minority communities and focus on bringing them together rather than supporting unnecessary actions that only serve to divide.
“After two long years, we welcomed a new day in the Middle East with the opportunity of peace for all.”
Pension funds have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that they get good returns on their investments. Israel does not really rely on uk council pension funds to survive, or more accurately Israeli business do not. The whole thing, much like the useless posturing of the struggling co-op supermarket is nothing more than gesture politics.
Personally I would rather the councillors got on with the business of running the city, leaving the international politics to the grown ups in Westminster.
Totally Agree.
Even if the actions of the council could influence the outcomes of conflicts in the middle east, it is not their place to do so. When will local councillors get the fact that a couple of thousand votes in local elections does not mandate them to try ti intervene in global issues such as this. They have been elected to focus upon and deal with local issues and not waste valuable council time on matters over which they have no control or influence.
I agree with you on this Atticus, Ward Councillors and councils have no influence on international politics, nor should they attempt to.
Conservative voters will and should be ashamed by the actions and words of Cllr Lyons. I watched this on the webcam and his denial of genocide and stamping his feet like a schoolboy, should be a reason for voters in his ward to choose better next election. Shocking!
Our own government has issued a letter saying there is no evidence of genocide after the finest legal minds poured over the facts. It is pure malicious politicking to fuel such a libel. Many more civilians died in the war on Islamic State in Mosul in a much shorter period. High ranking former Supreme Commander of Allied forces in NATO extolled the efforts of the IDF in war of enormous complexity upon his return from a fact finding
Mission in Gaza. A civilian to death ratio estimated at 1.5:1 when most other urban wars are 9:1. Airlifting Palestinian children in need of emergency medical intervention, facilitating vaccines and the largest humanitarian aid flows in modern history since the Berlin airlift is NOT genocide. I am surprised that the civilian death toll (smaller than Mosul) wasn’t far higher given the extent of the Jihadist armies war crimes against the own people A never mind the sadistic barbarism and real
Genocide against Israelis (using civilian areas as military launchpads and storehouses, denying them shelter in their underground city, high jacking aid, shooting people trying to get to safe Zones and 20% of their 1000s of rockets fired towards Israeli civilians falling short and killing their own). The bombing of Kurdish targets by Turkey last year might be genocide. The war in Myanmar is genocide. The war on the Houthis led by Saudi Arabia claimed nearly 400 thousand civilian lives and despite a ceasefire low level operations continue – yet that was not genocide. The propagation of the genocide libel is a well funded carefully orchestrated tactic not simply to defame Israel but cause division on Western soil. The West is the ultimate target – despots desperate to displace Western liberal freedoms.
Our own government published a letter after the greatest legal minds in the country poured over the facts – there is NO evidence of genocide. How can it be genocide when the country accused airlifts children in need of emergency intervention, facilities vaccines and the largest humanitarian aid flows in modern warfare history? Former high ranking NATO officials including the supreme commander of its Allied forces Sir Tom McNicol applauded the IDF upon return from a fact finding mission. The civilian death toll is miraculously low considering jihadist armies war crimes against its own people (never mind the crime against humanity perpetrated against Israel). The defamation is pure ideological politicking. Many more civilians per capita are killed in many other wars and people aren’t screaming genocide. In fact, most don’t even know they’re happening. The ultimate purpose of this disinformation is to divide the West. The Kremlin and its Jihadist allies have been fuelling disinformation for decades. Many books on the subject.
The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention, an independent organisation made up of international genocide scholars, legal experts, and researchers, many of whom have advised UN bodies and the ICC, has formally declared that Israel’s actions in Gaza meet the criteria for genocide under the Genocide Convention.
Your claims are also inaccurate:
1) Claiming “no evidence of genocide” as absolute fact is overstated. In reality, the International Court of Justice has ruled that genocidal acts are plausible and ordered Israel to take preventive measures.
2) The assertion that the “civilian death toll is miraculously low” is false; UN data and independent agencies report tens of thousands of civilian deaths, including large numbers of children.
3) References to “Kremlin and Jihadist disinformation” are broad conspiratorial framing. No credible evidence links Gaza war criticism directly to Russian disinformation networks at that scale.
Facts matter Steph, especially when discussing allegations as grave as genocide. It is important to get them right.
All the same arguments against investment decisions by LA’s were rolled out when apartheid South Africa was the target – ‘gesture politics’, ‘it’s not large sums’ etc etc but the point is it shows intent and condemnation of a government’s actions.
Disinvesting in a country judged by the UN and other international organisation to be committing genocide cannot, and should not, be characterised as racist or anti-Jewish.
Only Jew haters of the left promote the apartheid lie, come to Israel and find out for yourself instead of blindly repeating radicalises tik tok. It is well known why you spin it. Sankey and her team should resign for antisemitism, there is no hiding from it. Shame on Labour, the Greens and the Mayor. When blood runs in the streets of Brighton, as it did in Manchester, it will be on your hands.
Divestment scrutiny ≠ hostility toward Jews, Harley.
I heard on Nicky Cambells show on Radio 5 that it is not genocide as the UN said only 4 of the 5 criteria have been met.
The other day in Brighton, people read names out of all the children of Gaza who have been slaughtered and couldn’t get through the list, despite 17 hours of reading.
What a pointless endeavour.
The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention, an independent organisation made up of international genocide scholars, legal experts, and researchers, many of whom have advised UN bodies and the ICC, has formally declared that Israel’s actions in Gaza meet the criteria for genocide under the Genocide Convention.
I watched the Jewish residents deputation read by Sue Sheftz and couldn’t understand why she was interrupted by the Mayor and told to keep to the deputation summary as published. Sue Sheftz was one of four deputations presented at this meeting. Looking at the summaries of the other three (published in advance on the council website), its clear that the residents reading them used the 5 minutes allotted as they wished and presumably in accordance with the full versions they’d originally submitted.
Why was Sue Sheftz singled out? At the point of the Mayor’s interruption you can hear a bewildered Mrs Sheftz appeal to the Mayor that she is simply reading the deputation she’d submitted. Indeed, if Mrs Sheftz had read the summary as published she would have spoken for just over one minute.
If I’m right, this is a very serious error by Mayor Amanda Grimshaw. As it stands, the optics are awful – a council censoring a Jewish resident’s heartfelt speech! In fact its dreadful (and actionable).
Nope. It was a procedural reminder, consistent with the standing orders that deputations must follow their published text, Mrs Sheftz went off-script. The interruption’s optics were however unfortunate given the emotional sensitivity of the subject, but claiming that the council “censored” a Jewish resident is not accurate, Julia.
Let’s stick to facts, especially when they are verifiable in the transcripts.
No you are not right this time. Recently, the council has chosen to only publish summaries. Sue Sheftz was singled out and required to read her summary and not the deputation she’d submitted. None of the other deputation readers were made to do this. They read their deputations (and not the published summary). Julia is right to point out the Mayor’s error and question why the Jewish resident was singled out.
https://democracy.brighton-hove.gov.uk/documents/s210705/Item%2037%20Deputations.pdf
I don’t believe I am incorrect here, but I’m happy to be corrected:
Mrs Sheftz begins by thanking councillors, then continues into material that extends beyond the published summary — expanding several points (especially about recognition of Palestine and local antisemitism).
The others are almost verbatim with their summaries: Dirk Mitchell, Harry Walsh-Black, and Lynn Weddle in comparison.
Lets go through them: for reasons best known to the Monitoring Officer the first deputation (on Biodiversity vs Microplastics Pollution) though titled “Summary” was published almost in-full. The reader spoke for the allotted 5 minutes (just over 600 words). The second was Sue Sheftz. I understand that the Monitoring Officer suggested it be cut by half to 300 words but she declined the suggestion and simply read out her deputation (also 5 minutes and just over 600 words). The reading of the third, much shorter, deputation on devolution lasted for 3 minutes. The last deputation on green spaces was read as per the published summary but utilised the allotted 5 minutes. Yes, those last 2 were read as per the summaries (that was the choice of the residents concerned) and the first chose to read a full 600 words/5 mins.
The point here is that unless a deputation sent in to the council is defamatory or vexatious or same/similar to another presented in the past 6 months it must be accepted. While it might be a new feature of the procedure to ‘suggest’ shortened versions, the rules are clear that a deputation speech may be up to 5 minutes. Sue Sheftz declined the suggested cut presumably because she needed to elaborate her points and simply read the 5 minute version she had submitted.
It seems the council’s new system is in a muddle. Up until recently it published the deputation (not a summary) and it certainly didn’t try to interfere by suggesting cuts. Sue Sheftz wanted the same privilege accorded to the other deputation readers i.e. to read the words she had submitted.
Why do you think she was denied that Benjamin?
I would gently push back and say the transcript from the video feed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fTWTkyAJG4&t=2s (Starts at 1:26:00) and the deputations link you kindly provided contradict that claim:
What was published:
“The government’s recognition of a Palestinian state has been a profound shock… at a time when Jews and Israel are fighting for survival… and yes, by many, as antisemitic.”
What was spoken:
“The government’s sudden recognition of a Palestinian state has come as a deep shock – a shock because it was made in the middle of a war, while hostages remain in tunnels, while rockets still fall on Israeli towns. For Jews locally, nationally and worldwide it has felt like a betrayal – a failure to understand that this is not politics-as-usual but an existential conflict for our people.”
I think we can see that it is a clear expansion on the published text so, objectively, the record supports my position: she went off-script, whilst the others stayed on, and the Mayor’s interjection was a procedural cue, not selective censorship. I agree with you that the first one was more akin to a full reading rather than a summary, but that was still read verbatim.
Does that make sense?
Benjamin – If there is a standing order that says deputations must follow their published text BHCC then all four of the speeches (not just Sue Sheftz) would have needed to be interrupted by the Mayor. I’m told this is how it used to be, but for Mondays Full Council only summary versions were published.
So, my questions stands – why did the Mayor take exception to Mrs Sheftz? I’m not claiming censorship, I’m pointing at the optics which invite such an interpretation. As the standards and corporate complaints on this are submitted (I know of several in progress already) it will be for the council to explain why it singled out Mrs Sheftz and instructed her to abandon the 5 minute version she’d submitted.
I disagree with your first point. Dirk Mitchell was verbatim, Harry Walsh-Black had some minor semantical changes, which is to be expected when delivering a speech, and Lynn Weddle appeared to shuffle the order around of her points, but stayed the same content. As I mentioned above with Adrian, Sue added additional context, and was calmly reminded to follow what was published without additions, which took less than thirty seconds, and she successfully delivered a heartfelt speech.
So, in answer to your question Julia, no exception was made to Sue, but to repeat myself, I agree that these are not good optics. If there is a written version that was abandoned, that’s a separate issue, and I’d been keen to read more about that specifically to have an informed opinion, but in terms of what the Mayor’s chairing was here, I don’t see a fault.
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/brighton-council-cut-october-7-hamas-terror-references-from-jewish-community-speech-yblo5gzk
Benjamin – if you would, please read this. Note the transcript of the part of the Sue Sheftz deputation which the council cut (without her permission) for its published ‘summary’. Then consider if its mere procedure for the council to single out the Jewish residents deputation and take out the part that it didn’t like.
Your argument is that the rules dictate all 4 deputations were obliged to read the published versions. Not unreasonably, you assume that Sue Sheftz had agreed to the councils redacted ‘summary’. But she hadn’t.
Unless you can show me that its standard procedure for the council to cut out the parts of a 5 minute deputation that it doesn’t like and, without agreement, publish its preferred version, I’m going to have to go out on a limb here and call this CENSORSHIP.
As for the limp council excuse citing “community cohesion”, in the light of the rally outside the town hall entrance (attended by 3 councillors including one who spoke) and the ‘community cohesion’ shredding Motion that followed, its an excuse for censorship that hits new heights for irony in the chamber. This council is a disgrace.
Legitimate criticism of Israel is not anti Semitic.
What do you mean by “Israel”?