Students drop claim of Israeli genocide in Gaza
An accusation that Israel has committed genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza has been dropped by students at the University of Manchester following a backlash.
The 2,000-word motion, which expresses solidarity with Palestinians amid the Israel-Hamas war, was withdrawn earlier this week.
It was lodged with the university's student union (UMSU) by a student from the university's Friends of Palestine group several months ago.
The motion accuses Israel 'in its entirety' of being 'an apartheid settler-colonial state committing ongoing genocide against Palestinians' and recognises that 'as an occupied nation, the people of Palestine have the right to armed resistance under international law.'
It also urged full support for the BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) movement against Israel.
In addition, the motion argues that a two-state solution has become 'impossible' due to the 'continued expansion of Israeli settlements in occupied Palestine' and advocates for a 'single, free, multi-faith Palestinian state'.
Manchester University's Friends of Israel Society was outraged by the motion and wrote to the UMSU, setting out why the proposal and the procedure for considering it were unlawful. It said the statement contained ' false and one-sided allegations '.
In March, a debate took place, and Jewish students put forward nine amendments to the motion, but these were rejected.
These included one that would have recognised Hamas as a terrorist organisation and another calling on Hamas to release the remaining hostages it still holds captive. A third urged the student union to refrain from 'glorifying' violence against Israeli civilians.
Jewish students held a silent protest outside the building where the meeting took place, holding pictures of Ariel and Kfir Bibas, who were held hostage in Gaza by Hamas.
Commenting on the motion being withdrawn, Jonathan Turner, chief executive of UK Lawyers for Israel (UKFLI), who worked with the Friends of Israel Society on getting the motion dropped, said: 'We are very pleased with this outcome, which clearly results from drawing attention to the student union's legal obligations.
'Student unions must conduct political debates fairly, must not discriminate against Jewish or Israeli students, and must not engage in political campaigns outside their charitable objects.
'We congratulate Naomi Brookarsh, president of the Israel Society at Manchester University, on her work resisting this attempt to misuse the student union to intimidate Jewish students and other students who support Israel.'
A spokesman for Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), who also wrote to the union and university to express concerns, told The Telegraph: 'Manchester University Students' Union disregarded the concerns of Jewish students and regulations for charities when it tried to advance this reckless and divisive motion.
'Whether or not it is meant as such here, the phrase 'armed resistance' is commonly used in this context as a euphemism for terrorism and the destruction of the Jewish state.
'At a minimum, this motion aspired to deprive the Jewish people of their right to self-determination.
'These motions do nothing to change things in the Middle East but contribute to the ostracisation of Jewish students on campus.
'This motion never should have been even drafted, let alone put forward. Jewish students have the same right to feel safe on their campus as any other group.
'We wrote to the students' union and are pleased to see that the motion has been withdrawn, even if there was no remorse in the withdrawal statement.
'We will continue to tackle extremism and antisemitism on university campuses wherever we find it.'
In a statement, the UMSU apologised for the length of time it took to consider the motion and said: 'We will be reviewing our democratic processes as a result.'
It added: 'We stand in full solidarity with the Palestinian resistance to ongoing genocide in Gaza.
'The double standards held over colonised people compared to those doing the colonising are absurd.
'Those in support of Palestinian liberation are required to constantly qualify their support of basic human rights, whilst Israel continues its extermination, starvation and 'conquest' of Palestinians undeterred.'
It went on to criticise charity law, which it said prevented students' unions from taking 'principled positions and resourcing campaigns on the most pressing issues of our day'.
In a statement issued previously, the University of Manchester said it considered 'aspects of this motion to be wholly unacceptable'.
It added that it had raised 'serious concerns with the students' union regarding its wording, particularly where it risks undermining the principles of equality, safety, and wellbeing.'
The University of Manchester has been approached for further comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
22 minutes ago
- The Sun
Keir Starmer doubles down on Israeli ministers' sanctions despite being slammed by US
SIR Keir Starmer yesterday doubled down on sanctioning Israeli ministers, despite being savagely rapped by the US. Donald Trump 's administration hit out at Britain after the PM broke with tradition and imposed a travel ban and asset freeze on two far-right members of Israel's government, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. 4 4 4 In a scathing attack on the move, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the sanctions 'do not advance American efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring all hostages home and end the war'. Mr Rubio warned Britain 'not to forget who the real enemy is'. The US ambassador to the UK said he 'fully supported' Mr Rubio's slap down and warned the PM against 'impeding constructive dialogue'. Ben-Gvir, who is pushing to annex the West Bank and wants to permanently expel Palestinians from Gaza, said: 'The American administration is a moral compass in the face of the confusion of some Western countries that choose to appease terrorist organizations like Hamas. 'Israel is not afraid — we will continue to fight terrorism. 'History will judge the Chamberlains of our time.' At PMQs Sir Keir defended the sanctions as a bid to 'uphold human rights and defend the prospect of a two-state solution'. The PM said: "Acting alongside our allies, we have sanctioned individuals responsible for inciting appalling settler violence and expansion. "We will continue to support all efforts to secure a ceasefire, the release of all hostages despicably held by Hamas and the humanitarian aid that needs to surge in. Greta Thunberg's Gaza 'Freedom Flotilla' boarded & seized by Israeli forces 4
Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Experts cast doubt on Reeves' plan to make her sums add up by saving billions through ‘technical efficiency gains', slashing admin spending and clamping down on tax
Experts have cast doubt on the Chancellor's plan to make her sums add up by saving billions through 'technical efficiency gains', slashing admin spending and clamping down on tax. The Treasury said it planned to make more use of artificial intelligence, reforming the workforce – including through job cuts – and selling off its London property portfolio. The plans are forecast to save £13.8 billion a year by 2028/29 – including £9 billion a year from the health and social care budget alone. At the same time, a drive to recover more owed taxes is predicted to deliver a £7.5 billion annual gain by 2029/30. And government department administration costs will be culled by 11 per cent by the time of the next election, the Treasury projects – with another huge cut pencilled in for 2026 which will take the savings to 16 per cent, or £2.2 billion. Raoul Ruparel, a former Downing Street adviser to Theresa May, said the latter were 'pretty brutal real-terms cuts across the board'. 'Traditionally, these sorts of cuts are very hard to deliver,' said Mr Ruparel, who is director of the Boston Consulting Group Centre for Growth. The plans for efficiency savings rely heavily on making the National Health Service more productive – that is, doing more with less. They assume annual productivity growth of 2 per cent a year in the NHS, which the Treasury admits would mark a 'substantial increase' on improvements achieved in past years. The productivity plan 'will deliver efficiencies across all healthcare services, primarily through the combined impact of operational and clinical improvements, technology and digital transformation and workforce initiatives', the Treasury said. They will include reducing the use of agency staff and levels of sickness absence. The Government also plans to relocate more civil servants out of London, cutting the number by 12,000 by 2030. But at the same time, its ambition to bring in more unpaid taxes will involve hiring more people – with 5,500 compliance and 2,400 debt management staff expected to be brought in. The closure of 11 central London offices will save £94 million a year by 2032 and the disposal of properties no longer needed will bring in £1 billion, the Government said. Julian Jessop, economics fellow at the Institute of Economic Affairs think-tank, said: 'There is huge scope to boost productivity and make efficiency savings in the public sector. 'It is much less obvious that this Government will be the one to do it.' Also among the expected savings is the claim that the Ministry of Housing will use AI to speed up routine tasks such as checking errors and note taking. 'This will reduce demands on staff time by an estimated 500,000 hours per year,' the Treasury said. Ms Reeves also announced that she will tear up Treasury rules designed to safeguard value for money in order to pour money into infrastructure projects in the Midlands and the North, where Labour is under threat from Reform. Regional mayors have railed for years at the Treasury's so-called 'Green Book' rules which direct investment to areas where it will produce the most economic benefit. Under the new system, the Treasury will limit the use of 'benefit-cost reviews' which have been blamed for halting investment in the North. The new proposals will mean that even projects where the costs outweigh the benefits may not 'automatically constitute poor value for money'.
Times
36 minutes ago
- Times
Equality Act blamed for surge in failed race discrimination cases
Equality laws are causing unsuccessful racial discrimination lawsuits to 'skyrocket', and more claims are made by NHS employees than those from any other organisation, according to a report. Between 2017 and last year the number of employment tribunals that included a claim of discrimination based on the defined characteristic of 'race' in the Equality Act 2010 almost tripled, from 285 to 829, research by the campaign group Don't Divide Us has found. In total, there were 5,523 cases over this period. Despite the rise in workplace discrimination cases, the levels of success have remained more or less unchanged since 2017, the report says. Only 281 claims were upheld in employment courts from 2017 to 2024, 5 per cent of those made. The group said the NHS was involved in more discrimination cases than any other employer, with 488 claims made in the period — of which 19, or 4 per cent, were upheld. Don't Divide Us believes in 'colour-blind anti-racism' and campaigns against 'divisive' political ideas such as critical race theory being imported from America. The findings have been published as part of a wider report on equality laws by the organisation entitled 'The Equality Act Isn't Working: Equalities Legislation and the Breakdown of Informal Civility in the Workplace'. It argues that rather than making society more equal and tackling discrimination, the Equality Act has contributed to a grievance culture in which people resort to legal action to resolve 'petty disputes and imagined slights'. The report says the remit of equality law has come under increasing pressure from lobby groups seeking to 'promote their role in the race-relations sector'. This trend has been exacerbated by the rise of identity politics and the increased politicisation of culture, it adds. Anna Loutfi, one of the report's authors and a barrister specialising in employment, equalities and human rights law, said it was time for the government to review the Equality Act and potentially repeal it. She said: 'The question is: Do we need the law to be based on protected characteristics? The reality of the workplace is that it is not neatly categorisable into people who 'share' protected characteristics and people who don't, though equality law demands that we think that way. 'Equality law is increasingly becoming divorced from reality, as employees rely on protected characteristics to argue poor treatment, rather than relying on the honest facts of their situation. Many litigants may try to rewrite the facts of their case to 'fit' a narrative of discrimination based on race, sex, disability etc. A cross word between two employees of different ethnic backgrounds can be transformed into racial harassment after the fact. 'The inadvertent effect of the Equality Act is to make the workplace environment more toxic, especially when it comes to issues such as race, between people who would have rubbed along fine before becoming aware of their respective 'protected characteristics'. 'Overall, protected characteristics in law are not adding to social cohesion; rather, they are inflating numbers of discrimination cases so society appears more and more discriminatory with every passing year, in spite of ever more diversity and inclusion initiatives — that surely can't be right.' Under the Equality Act, it is against the law to discriminate against someone based on nine protected characteristics. These include age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. • Loutfi pointed to a recent case in April of a black female employee suing her boss for racism because it had been suggested she had been 'smoking something', which, she said, epitomised the way such protected characteristics were being 'weaponised' in the workplace. In the dispute, Gemma Spencer sued her employers for race discrimination when a company director, Mark Kelly, asked her line manager if she had been 'smoking something' after a perceived error. Spencer, an administration worker, told a panel that she had had her hair in braids when Kelly made the remark. After she accused him of racism, Kelly said he in 'no way meant to make some remark about her being a Rastafarian'. His assertion was rejected by the judge, who said the comment was 'unwanted conduct' that 'violated the dignity' of Spencer, who was awarded £35,109 in compensation. Alka Sehgal Cuthbert, director of Don't Divide Us, said: 'The Equality Act has achieved the exact opposite of its stated aim, making the UK a less tolerant and less equal place. It provides the legal scaffolding that supports this surge in workplace discrimination claims, the overwhelming majority of which have been found groundless. 'Instead of bringing greater fairness, equality, and harmony, the [Equality Act] has been a major vector for curtailing the fundamental freedoms for citizens to speak their mind, and to appear before the law as equal.' • Calling female staff 'lads' could be sex harassment, judge says The Equality and Human Rights Commission said: 'We have a statutory duty to monitor and advise on the effectiveness of our equality laws. While progress has been made towards a fairer country, we know challenges to equality remain and our society has not stood still. 'Increases in litigation may indicate an issue with how the legislation is being interpreted, and we consider all evidence carefully when we advise government and parliamentarians on the effectiveness of the Equality Act. However, a post-legislative review of the Equality Act is a decision for the UK government and parliament.' A government spokesperson said: 'The UK has a longstanding history of tackling all forms of discrimination and harassment. 'We are proud of the Equality Act 2010 and the rights and protections it affords individuals of all backgrounds, and will continue to uphold its provisions.'
