Agenda item

            The Strategic Director of City and Neighbourhood Services submitted for the Committees consideration the following report:

 

“1.0      Purpose of Report

 

1.1       To advise Members on how the wording of the recent motion about the definition of antisemitism brought to Strategic Policy and Resources at the November meeting would impact on the Good Relations Strategy and associated policies.

     

2.0       Recommendations

 

2.1       The Committee is asked to;

 

·        Consider the definition and associated examples of ant-Semitism as published by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance on 26th May 2016 and if the definition should be fully incorporated into the Council’s Good Relations Strategy and associated policies bearing in mind the impact as outlined below.

 

2.2       That further to the recommendation of the Shared City Partnership on 5th November 2018, Committee agrees that the draft Good Relations Strategy be published for public consultation in January 2018.

 

3.0       Main report

 

            Key Issues

 

3.1       At the last meeting of the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee, the following motion, which had been proposed at the Council meeting on 1st November 2018 by Councillor Craig and seconded by Councillor Boyle had, in accordance with Standing Order 13(f), be referred to the Committee for consideration.

 

3.2       “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred towards Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed towards Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

 

3.3       Furthermore, the Council agrees that this definition and associated examples of anti-Semitism, published by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance on 26th May 2016, are fully incorporated into this Council’s Good Relations strategy and associated policies.

 

3.4       The Committee agreed that a report be submitted to a future meeting on how the wording of the motion would impact on the Good Relations Strategy and associated policies.

 

3.5       It was pointed out that the Good Relations Strategy was scheduled to be considered later in the meeting under the minutes of the meeting of the Good Relations Partnership and accordingly, given the decision in relation to the motion, it was agreed that that part of the minutes be deferred until a future meeting.

 

3.6       A copy of the definition and the associated examples as published by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and referred to in the above notice of motion are attached at Appendix 1 for member’s information.  Members may be aware that the definition and associated examples have been subject to some debate.

 

            Impact on Good Relations Strategy

 

3.7       The draft Good Relations Strategy has been agreed by the Shared City Partnership at its meeting on 5th November 2018 and is attached at Appendix 2. Pending SP and R Committee and Council approval anticipated in January, the draft strategy will go out to public consultation, via the Council’s Citizen Space portal.

 

3.8       The Strategy outlines a vision for the promotion of a shared Belfast. It is not intended to be an action plan rather a framework to support the delivery of Good Relations in Belfast. Throughout this document, we have used the term Good Relations to describe good community and race relations between people of different community, religious, racial or political backgrounds.

 

3.9       The Strategy looks at issues of separation, sectarianism and racism in a holistic manner. No one community has been singled out within the document, as the aim is to promote good relations between all our citizens on different levels. We have not included definitions of any distinct prejudices but tackling discrimination and racism is implicit within the document as a whole.

 

3.10      To include one definition would mean that Council would have to agree definitions for each distinct element regarding prejudice towards those from a different community, religious, racial , political or background. This could prove extremely challenging and it would be difficult to ensure we had included every facet and manifestation of prejudice.

 

3.11      Members may wish to note that part of the outworking of the Strategy will be the District Council Good Relations Action Plan which is part funded by The Executive Office. The current plan is based on the priorities laid down in the Together: Building a United Community which are : Children and Young People, Safe Community, Shared Community and Cultural Expression.

 

3.12      Under these priorities, we run a number of programmes which meet particular outcomes which address diversity and difference. It is important to note that this work includes engagement with the Jewish community.

 

3.13      Examples include two annual events, organised as part of the DiverseCity programme, that open up opportunities for people from Belfast to visit the Jewish Synagogue enabling them to understand aspects relating to the history, heritage and cultural practice of the community in Belfast.  In addition, the Council, through the Good Relations Unit, is partnering with The Executive Office to run a regional event in the City Hall to mark Holocaust Memorial Day on 24th January 2019.  In the run up to this event, several engagement initiatives, involving a survivor of the Holocaust, were organised for communities and schools in October.

 

3.14      Therefore, while there may be no particular issues in Council agreeing the definition as presented, it would not be recommended that a definition particular to one section of the community be specifically incorporated into the Draft Good Relations Strategy and/or associated policies.  Tackling all aspects of discrimination and racism is at the core of these strategies and policies and this would include such attitudes and behaviours in relation to the Jewish community and others.

 

3.15      On a related matter, Members should note that any delay on the draft Good Relations Strategy will affect the ability of the Strategy to be launched as planned in early Summer and will mean the consultation sessions will have to take place during Purdah. This will limit the ability of members to demonstrate cross party support for an important Council Strategy, which is a core value within the Belfast agenda, and Local Development Plan.

 

3.16      Financial & Resource Implications

 

            There are no direct resource implications in terms of staff time or additional costs associated with this request

 

3.17      Equality or Good Relations Implications/Rural Needs Assessment

 

            All Council Strategies and policies are screened to look at the impact of such a policy or Strategy on groups listed under Section 75 which includes different religious, political or racial backgrounds. If a policy is deemed to have a potentially negative impact, then the Council must explore mitigating actions to alleviate the negative impact. There are no rural needs implications.”

 

Moved by Councillor Garret,

Seconded by Councillor Beattie,

 

      That the Committee agrees that the definition should not be fully incorporated into the Council’s Good Relations Strategy and associated policies and that the draft Strategy be published for consultation in January, 2019.

 

Amendment

 

Moved by Councillor Craig,

Seconded by Councillor Reynolds,

 

      That the definition be not included in the Good Relations Strategy but that the Council adopts the definition of anti-semitism which has been internationally recognised.

 

            On a vote by show of hands, five Members voted for the amendment and seven against and it was declared lost.

 

Further Amendment

 

Moved by Councillor Long,

Seconded by Councillor Craig,

 

      That the Committee agrees that the definition be not incorporated into the Good Relations Strategy and that it be published for consultation, but that a report on the definition be brought back to a future meeting.

 

            On a vote by show of hands six Members voted for the amendment and seven against and it was declared lost.

 

            The original proposal standing in the name of Councillor Garrett and seconded by Councillor Beattie was put to the meeting, when seven Members voted for and six against and it was declared carried.