THE Labour Party’s chasm-like internal division over the issue of anti-Semitism has centred in recent days over inquiries into the words and activities of the well-known Scottish Labour activist and GMB trade union shop steward Pete Gregson.
The National has reported Gregson’s claim that he is anti-Zionist and not anti-Semitic, but yesterday his story gained UK-wide prominence when the pressure group Labour Against the Witch-hunt (LAW) took up his case, issuing a statement condemning the investigation of Pete Gregson by the Labour Party’s Compliance Unit.
The National revealed that the GMB trade union were also investigating Gregson – the only GMB shop steward in NHS Lothian – for alleged anti-Semitism. He has now been suspended from his role.
The statement by LAW called for the immediate restoration of his full membership rights and added: “The principle ‘guilty until proved innocent’ threatens the rights of all members, chills discussion, damages democracy and invites malicious complaints against political opponents.
“We prefer the principle of working-class solidarity: ‘An injury to one is an injury to all.’
“Except in the most extreme circumstances, disciplinary sanctions should not be applied until due process has been concluded.
“Where low level sectionalist, nationalistic, xenophobic or racist ideas, including anti-Semitic ideas, are found in the workers’ movement, they are best countered by open discussion, patient education, inculcation of elementary class consciousness and by encouraging participation in joint struggles.
“The slogan ‘zero tolerance’ is ill-conceived and counterproductive.”
Gregson said last night he was “delighted” at the support from LAW which, like him, rejects the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) “unnecessarily complex, imprecise and self-contradictory definition of anti-Semitism, which conflates it with anti-Zionism”.
LAW stated: “The IHRA definition, which has been adopted by both the Labour Party and the GMB, will no doubt be the basis of investigations into the allegations made against Peter.
“We prefer the Oxford English dictionary definition, that anti-Semitism is ‘hostility to or prejudice against Jews’.
“Peter is clearly not anti-Semitic: he does not harbour hostility, prejudice, hatred or ill-intent towards Jewish people as Jews. He is a campaigner for Palestinian rights, against the racist ideology of Zionism and the apartheid system and practices of Israel.”
Gregson organised a petition, which has now attracted more than 700 signatories, declaring that “the existence of Israel is a racist endeavour”.
Jon Lansman, the chair of Momentum, said in an e-mail to Momentum member Gregson that “declaring Israel to be a racist endeavour and challenging the NEC to expel him alongside others who signed a petition he launched may not be anti-Semitic ... but is a deliberately provocative act which is most certainly prejudicial to the interests of the party and I therefore urge the general secretary to take the appropriate action against you.”
LAW added: “The Israeli state is inherently racist. Under its July 2018 Nation-State Law, Israel is defined as “the nation-state of the Jewish people” and Palestinian citizens are explicitly declared not to have any national rights. In the West Bank and Gaza – territories occupied since 1967 – while Jewish settlers enjoy full democratic rights as Israeli citizens, Palestinians live under military rule with no democratic rights, because they are not Jewish.
“The witch-hunt against Corbyn and the Labour left is part of the huge, unprecedented campaign over recent years to equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.”
The Labour Party and the GMB previously told The National their investigations were in line with their rules and procedures.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel