Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill
Public Bill Committee, 5 September 2023.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Before we begin, I have a couple of preliminary announcements. Hansard colleagues would be grateful if Members could email their speaking notes to hansardnotes@parliament.uk. Please switch electronic devices to silent. Tea and coffee are not allowed during sittings.
We will first consider the programme motion on the amendment paper. We will then consider a motion to enable the reporting of written evidence for publication, and a motion to allow us to deliberate in private about our questions before the oral evidence session. In view of the time available, I hope we can take those matters formally, without debate.
I call the Minister to move the programme motion standing in her name, which was discussed yesterday by the Programming Sub-Committee.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Copies of written evidence that the Committee receives will be made available in the Committee Room and circulated to Members by email. We will now go into private session to discuss lines of questioning.
Examination of Witnesses
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
We are now sitting in public again and the proceedings are being broadcast. Before we hear from the witnesses, do any Members wish to make a declaration of interest in connection with the Bill?
Jacob Young (Conservative, Redcar)
I have been to Israel on a trip paid for by the Conservative Friends of Israel, and I have a personal friendship with James Gurd, who will give evidence.
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
I declare my membership of Unison. I understand that an individual from Unison will give evidence at this session.
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
As per my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, I recently visited the occupied territories. The visit was paid for by Amnesty, who will join us later this week.
Paul Holmes (Conservative, Eastleigh)
I have been on a Conservative Friends of Israel trip, and James Gurd is a personal friend of mine.
Nicola Richards (Conservative, West Bromwich East)
I have also been on a Conservative Friends of Israel trip, James Gurd is a friend of mine, and I used to work at the Jewish Leadership Council.
Steve McCabe (Labour, Birmingham, Selly Oak)
I am the parliamentary chair of Labour Friends of Israel. It is a non-pecuniary position, but I have also been to Israel with Labour Friends of Israel.
Greg Smith (Conservative, Buckingham)
As per my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, I have been on a trip to Israel funded by Conservative Friends of Israel, and James Gurd is personally known to me.
Mark Jenkinson (Conservative, Workington)
As per my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, I have been on a trip to Israel funded by Conservative Friends of Israel, and James Gurd is personally known to me.
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
I have been to Israel on a visit funded by Labour Friends of Israel, but that was many years ago.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
I suppose, for the sake of completeness, that I should say I too have been on a trip to Israel with Labour Friends of Israel. However, as with Wayne David, that was many years ago.
Brendan Clarke-Smith (Conservative, Bassetlaw)
I have also been on a trip funded by Conservative Friends of Israel, and I am also a friend of James Gurd.
Kim Leadbeater (Labour, Batley and Spen)
I have been on a trip funded by Caabu, who are not giving evidence this morning, but I believe they are later on.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Are there any more? I do not think there are any more Members!
We will first hear oral evidence from Jo Donnelly, who is the head of pensions at the Local Government Association, and Jon Richards, who is vice-chair of the Local Government Pension Scheme Advisory Board. Before calling the first Member to ask a question, I remind all Members that questions should be limited to matters within the scope of the Bill, and we must stick to the timings in the programme order the Committee has agreed. For this panel, we have until 9.55 am. To begin with, could the witnesses please introduce themselves for the record?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
I would like to call the first Member to ask a question—Minister.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Thank you, Chair. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I would like to thank our witnesses for their time and expertise.
There have been instances where local government pension schemes have come under pressure from civil society groups to divest from a particular country or territory. Is that something you are aware of? What kind of pressure have you faced? Do you think that the Bill will allow pension schemes to focus on delivering value for their members, rather than being distracted by political campaigns?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q But do you agree that it is not for pension funds to run your own foreign policy?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Absolutely. Jo, do you want to come in on those questions?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Great. Some may argue that the existing legislation is confusing and not comprehensive enough, as it does not deal with divestments—it deals with investment procurement decisions. In your opinion, does the Bill do enough to improve on existing legislation and prevent divestment campaigns?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q But you are happy that, given clear guidance on the harmony between the Procurement Bill and this Bill, this is very operable.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Absolutely, yes.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Clearly, this Bill is not—
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Before the Minister proceeds, could I just remind her that we have a fairly tight timetable? Perhaps she could take that into account in future questioning.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Indeed. I just have one final question on the regulator. We have the Pensions Regulator in the Bill as the appropriate body for enforcing the ban, and they are clearly accustomed to similar roles. Do you think that that is the right regulator?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Thank you, Chair.
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Thank you to our witnesses for their time. In opening, you were very clear, Jon Richards, about what your job is and what your job is not, and I think the Committee will have taken some comfort from that. Do you feel you need extra tools or controls do that jobQ ?
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Q You mentioned legal challenges. Could you say what your anxieties are there?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Q Before I bring in Chris Stephens, can I ask something? Of the various options for dealing with that problem that you mentioned, which do you think is likely to be the most effective?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Thank you. Chris Stephens.
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
Q Let me confirm my membership of Unison; that has been declared. I should also declare that I am a member of the Scottish local government pension scheme from my time working for Glasgow City Council.
Talking about green pensions, Lloyds Banking Group says:
“UK adults believe the biggest benefit of investing in a ‘green’ or ‘sustainable’ pension is the improvement that it would make to the lives of future generations...followed by the fact it could help save the planet”.
Are there any parallels between ethical investments in the environment and ethical investments in international human rights?
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
Q Jon, you mentioned challenges that you have had. Are they coming from members of the scheme or people outwith the scheme? Can you maybe also talk about how members would raise a concern they had about an investment?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Thank you. I have registered two other Members as signalling that they would like to ask questions. Have I missed anybody? No. In which case, I call Steve McCabe.
Steve McCabe (Labour, Birmingham, Selly Oak)
Q It has been suggested that there may be some confusion or a discrepancy between the schedule in the Bill that is designed to exclude pension schemes and clause 12, which deals specifically with the local government pension scheme. Do you regard that as a discrepancy, and what implications do you think it might have?
Steve McCabe (Labour, Birmingham, Selly Oak)
Q Is it a legitimate course of action to treat pension schemes differently?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
I think this will be the last question.
Kim Leadbeater (Labour, Batley and Spen)
Q Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the witnesses for joining us this morning. You have said that you are there to deliver on behalf of the members of your schemes. Many of my constituents will have pension funds and some may well have a view on how those funds are invested, which is surely right. How will this legislation affect the ability of fund managers to respond to those concerns of members?
Kim Leadbeater (Labour, Batley and Spen)
Q You do not think this legislation will have a negative impact on that process?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
I am afraid we have reached the end of the time allotted to the Committee to ask questions. On behalf of the Committee, I thank the witnesses, who have been very clear and helpful in drawing our attention to some of the dilemmas and difficulties faced. I am sure when we come to deliberate on amendments and alterations to the Bill we will take very seriously the advice that has been given.
Examination of witnesses
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
We will now hear oral evidence from Russell Langer, head of policy and research at the Jewish Leadership Council, and Daniel Sugarman, director of public affairs for the Board of Deputies of British Jews. For this session, we have until 10.25 am. Would the witnesses please introduce themselves for the record?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Thank you. I will now bring in the first Member with a question.
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Q Thank you, Chair, and good morning to you both. Your organisations support the legislation. I have read your submissions, and it is quite clear that you are supportive of the various aspects of it. But can you tell us, hand on heart: if you had a blank sheet of paper before you, would this be the approach that your organisations would be in favour of?
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Q But let us say that there had been formal consultation with you before the publication of the draft legislation. Are there any specific points that you would have asked to be included in the legislation and which you do not find before you now?
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Q Could I ask just one further question? I think that both organisations are in favour of a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. One thing in this legislation that is different from any other legislation that I have seen from this Government or any other British Government is that it equates the state of Israel with the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It has been suggested that that coupling, that equality of treatment, for the first time by a British Government, calls into question their commitment to a two-state solution. What is your view on that?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Thank you. Minister?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Can you set out why you think that this legislation is necessary and also touch on the links between BDS campaigns and antisemitism?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q I have one more question. Clause 4 prohibits a statement of intent to boycott. Do you agree that that is a necessary addition to the Bill? One further question on enforcement: do you think that the enforcement regime is necessary?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Q Before I bring in another Member, I think that this question has been partly answered but I would like to see whether we can get a clearer answer. Is there a distinction to be made, in terms of the provisions of the Bill, between on the one hand questioning the right of the state of Israel to exist and on the other hand being free to criticise the actions of the Israeli Government at any given moment in time?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Thanks. That is very helpful. Chris Stephens.
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
Q That was going to be my first question, so I will ask my second question instead. There is obviously a debate about this Bill, including within the Jewish community, and we have some representatives of the Jewish community who will put to us their view of the Bill, namely that it restricts freedom of expression rather than directly addressing the issue of antisemitism. I presume that both of you disagree with that. So, would you tell us why you disagree with other Jewish representatives who will give evidence to this Committee?
Kim Leadbeater (Labour, Batley and Spen)
Q Thank you for joining us this morning. Like all my colleagues, I abhor antisemitism, and I agree that if further measures are needed to eradicate it from public life, of course we will support them. However, is there not a risk that because this Bill very publicly singles out the state of Israel as a special case, it may provoke greater antisemitism, which is the very thing that none of us want to see?
Kim Leadbeater (Labour, Batley and Spen)
Q And you do not have any concerns that this Bill could have a negative impact on communities within the UK?
Steve McCabe (Labour, Birmingham, Selly Oak)
Q Good morning. When I first heard about the Government’s intentions to legislate in this area, I understood it to be legislation to prevent public bodies from boycotting the state of Israel, which I welcomed. I just wonder whether you think that the Government have made life easier or more difficult for themselves by extending the range and scope of the Bill, or whether it would have been better to have concentrated on preventing the boycott of the state of Israel.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Are there any further lines of questioning? We have time available if anybody wishes to pursue anything. In that case, although we did not take up a lot of your time, I think it gave members of the Committee an opportunity to air some of the points of principle as they presented, and to look at alternative points of view on. That has been really helpful, and, of course, you bring a perspective to this that is very focused on one specific community, but that is as it should be. We are very grateful for the light you have been able to shine on some of those difficult issues, which I know people are trying to cope with by being even-handed but also by operating on good, solid principles. Thank you very much indeed.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Given that we are a little ahead of time, and one of the witnesses for the next session is not currently available, we will pause the proceedings.
Examination of Witnesses
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
We will now hear evidence from Councillor Bob Deering, the executive member for resources and performance at Hertfordshire County Council, and Councillor James Jamieson, the immediate past chair of the Local Government Association, who joins us via Zoom. We have until 10.55 am for this session. Can the witnesses kindly introduce themselves, so that we have it on the record?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Just before we get into the questions, I think Bob Blackman would like to make a declaration of interest.
Bob Blackman (Conservative, Harrow East)
Thank you, Chair; apologies for being late at the beginning. I want to put on record that I am a vice-president of the Local Government Association; obviously, we have witnesses here from the LGA. I am also the secretary to the all-party parliamentary group on British Jews, and I chair the all-party Britain-Israel parliamentary group. I am an officer of Conservative Friends of Israel, and I have been on trips to Israel sponsored by the Conservative Friends of Israel. I have also been on trips to the west bank and on others sponsored by other groups.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Thank you.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Can you tell us about previous attempts by councils to pass motions to boycott Israel? Do you agree that this legislation will help local councils to remain focused on their core functions, rather than being distracted by BDS campaigns, and give them clarity that they should avoid BDS campaigns?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Q Councillor Jamieson, is there anything you wanted to add to that, or are you happy with it?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q There are exceptions in the Bill that permit investment decisions, such as labour market misconduct or environmental misconduct. Do you think that those are appropriate and are the right balance to strike?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
One final, holistic question: are you supportive of the Bill and whyQ ?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Just a point of clarification: the Bill only prevents decisions being made on the basis of moral or political disapproval of states as opposed to banning fossil fuels or environmental matters. It does not cover that.
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Q I would like to start by putting on record the thanks of Members of the Opposition Front Bench to Councillor Jamieson for his leadership of the Local Government Association. It is safe to say that it is a broad family of all parties and none, so that leadership in a single person is an exceptionally tricky job and I think you did a very good job of it. As I say, we are grateful for your leadership and your candour with us when we have asked you questions in the past. Thanks again for your and Councillor Deering’s presence.
We speak a lot in this Parliament about transferring power from here to local communities, namely our local councils. The Bill very much transfers power from our local councils to this place. How do colleagues in the local government family feel about that?
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Q Clause 4 will restrict your ability not only to act, but to talk about whether you would have been inclined to act. That is quite a significant fetter on your free speech. How do you and your colleagues feel about being told by central Government what you can and cannot say?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Six members of the Committee have indicated that they want to ask a question, so I will initially confine them to one question each. I am sure that members of the Committee have enough intellectual flexibility to be able to get everything they want to find out into a single question.
Bob Blackman (Conservative, Harrow East)
Q James, in your former role as chairman of the LGA, were you aware of circumstances that were discussed and debated by local authorities, or decisions that were made, that would be in contravention of the Bill when it becomes an Act?
Bob Blackman (Conservative, Harrow East)
Q Can I just follow up on that point? There was an issue about Leicester. I wonder whether that was something that the LGA considered.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
I think that counts as a second question.
Bob Blackman (Conservative, Harrow East)
Well, it is a clarification.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
I did say that I was not going to allow second questions, but can somebody give a quick answer?
Bob Blackman (Conservative, Harrow East)
Okay.
Steve McCabe (Labour, Birmingham, Selly Oak)
Q As I understand it, any financial penalties for a local authority that falls foul of this legislation will fall on the council, which means that they will fall on the council tax payer. Do you think that that is fair? Is that likely to deter highly motivated individuals or groups?
Luke Evans (Conservative, Bosworth)
Councillors Deering and Jamieson, this question is to both of you. Councillor Deering, you said the point around pensions should not be political. In your experience as councillors, how much of an increase have you seen in talk about, for example, previous slavery, the environmental side, Israel and Palestine, China and Russia? How much more of this debate is happening at a local council level, as opposed to 10 years ago? Was this debate happening then? Is it becoming more prevalentQ ?
Kim Leadbeater (Labour, Batley and Spen)
Q I will pick up on a point that has kind of been covered already. Do you have anything further to add on the issue of freedom of speech, or any further concerns that this Bill will undermine local democracy by restricting what councils and councillors can say and do? You are very fortunate in your area if you have not been impacted by some of the more contentious issues that the Bill covers, but I have some concerns around freedom of speech for local representatives and undermining local government autonomy. Is there anything else you want to add?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
The regulator might consider itself to be an exception to that rule.
Brendan Clarke-Smith (Conservative, Bassetlaw)
Q Some have suggested that it is rather pointless to implement a ban if you have a toothless enforcement regime. Do you agree that it therefore needs to be sufficiently robust if we are to introduce this regime?
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
Q Do you both accept the principle of a political party stating in its manifesto prior to a council election how it would use procurement and investment policies to incentivise ethical business conduct that is human rights compliant? How would you answer those who have responded to this Committee and their criticism of the Bill that it will
“make it almost impossible for public bodies to use their procurement and investment policies to incentivise ethical business conduct that is human rights compliant”?
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
I can say it again.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Q Councillor Jamieson, is there anything you want to add to that?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
We have a couple of minutes left in this session, if anybody has a question that they have not had the opportunity to ask. I call the Minister.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q There has been quite a lot of talk as to whether councillors can express their own views. The Bill applies only to public bodies, so a councillor can express their own view; it is simply that, if a councillor is talking on behalf of the local authority, they are covered by the Bill. In the light of that, are you comfortable with the Bill?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Before I bring in the witnesses to answer that question, Bob Blackman has a very quick point.
Bob Blackman (Conservative, Harrow East)
It was a very quick point to Councillor Jamieson: could you clarify exactly what changes might be made to the Bill to clarify the regulations that you spoke about earlier?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Thank you. Over to our witnesses.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Councillor Deering, is there anything that you briefly want to add?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
I am afraid that that brings us to the end of the time allotted for the Committee to ask questions. I thank both the witnesses, on behalf of the Committee, for steering an important path between freedom of speech and the responsibilities that pension funds have to pension fund holders past, present and future. It has been a really useful and informative session and I would like to thank you both very much for your contributions.
Examination of witness
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
We will now hear oral evidence from Hannah Weisfeld, director of Yachad. For this session we have until 11.10. Could the witness introduce herself, for the record?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q I understand that Yachad does not support the BDS movement. Can you explain why?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q So do you think it is appropriate for councils to support the BDS movement, with all the implications of them getting distracted from their core function—clearly, foreign policy is a reserve function for the UK Government—and also the consequences in terms of bringing dissension to local communities?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q But this Bill does not apply to private individuals or private companies; it applies only to public authorities. The motivation behind the Bill is to have one reserved foreign policy that is run by His Majesty’s Government, rather than local authorities which are tasked with providing local public services getting distracted away from their core functions.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Could I just say that that is a statement, rather than a question?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
I am sorry; I was just about to say, do you agree?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
This is a very short session and three people have signified that they want to ask questions. I will bring in Wayne David. Again, I ask Members to be concise in their questions and our witness to be equally concise in her answers.
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Q Hannah, we have heard from the JLC and the Board of Deputies of British Jews that they are broadly supportive of the legislation as it stands. You have expressed your concern and reservations about it. Could you objectively give us an indication of what the feeling is among other Jewish organisations in Britain, and also among progressive voices inside Israel itself?
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
Q Hannah, I think you were present when I put this question earlier. You mentioned the Union of Jewish Students. As I understand it, your organisation and the Union of Jewish Students are on record as saying that this Bill restricts freedom of expression rather than directly addressing the issue of antisemitism, and you are both on record as saying that it does not address the very epidemic—that is, the evil of rising antisemitism—that it claims it wants to tackle. Could you expand on that further, please?
Kim Leadbeater (Labour, Batley and Spen)
Q You have talked a little bit about your concern about community relations in the UK as a result of this Bill; I think that that has been heard. What impact will the Bill have on your organisation’s work in Israel and Palestine?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
I am afraid that that brings us to the end of the allotted time for the Committee to ask questions. On behalf of the Committee, may I thank the witness for taking a position that does not necessarily conform to some of the other views that we have heard but that makes it absolutely clear what you stand for? We are very grateful for that.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
We will now hear oral evidence from James Gurd, executive director of Conservative Friends of Israel. We have until 11.25 am for this session. Could the witness please introduce himself for the record?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Can you set out why you think this Bill is needed?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q You have addressed the impact that BDS campaigns can have on community cohesion and, clearly, in driving antisemitism. Do you therefore think it important that we specify in the Bill that Israel can only be exempted from this Bill through primary as opposed to secondary legislation?
Nicola Richards (Conservative, West Bromwich East)
Q We have heard concerns from others giving evidence today about people who wish to disagree politically with things that happen in Israel. People should have the right to freedom of speech on those matters. In your evidence, however, you make it clear that the aims of BDS are to cut off economic and cultural ties. Do you believe that the nature of BDS is totally different from making a political argument against a Government and policies and activities that happen in another state? Is it that difference that makes it so damaging to the Jewish community, in your view?
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Q I think everyone would agree that foreign policy is a reserved matter in the United Kingdom, but there is a danger of assuming that the United Kingdom is still a unitary state, which it is not. We can talk about foreign policy on the one hand, but on the other hand we talk about procurement policy, much of which is devolved, whether that is to the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Senedd or the Northern Ireland Assembly. There have been frictions, for example over Brexit, about where exactly the line is drawn in terms of a devolution settlement.
Do you see it as a difficulty that there is a lack of clarity in the legislation, because the assumption is that Britain is Britain? Well, Britain is not Britain; Britain is a number of nations. There is a concern, certainly among the Welsh Senedd, that that factor has not been taken into account with regard to the legislation.
I will give a specific example of a concern from Northern Ireland, where public service pension schemes are devolved to the Northern Ireland Assembly. For this legislation to be introduced in Northern Ireland requires a legislative consent motion. The trouble is that there is not a Northern Ireland Assembly sitting to give it. I therefore presume that this legislation would not apply to Northern Ireland. Is that your understanding? Do you think that the issue of devolution and the nations of the United Kingdom is not fully taken into account in the Bill?
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Can I ask a brief supplementary?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
Before you do, is there anybody else? [Interruption.] I will bring in Chris Stephens and come back to you if there is time.
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
I will yield to Mr David to pursue his supplementary.
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Q I am someone who has been on record many, many times as being totally opposed to BDS, but I also respect the devolution settlements. Irrespective of the issue, is it not right for the devolved institutions to exercise the powers that they have without an overbearing influence from central Government?
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
Q James, you said in answer to one of my colleagues’ questions that you believe the Bill would help to solidify international support for a two-state solution, which was a curious statement. The international community broadly supports a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine and opposes the continued occupation of Gaza, the west bank and East Jerusalem. What rights and methods should I and public bodies pursue to press for that change?
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
I am going to close the session in two minutes, so it would be good to have a concise answer, please.
George Howarth (Labour, Knowsley)
With excellent timing, that brings us to the end of this session.
Examination of Witnesses
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the second sitting of evidence on the Bill. We will hear from six panels of witnesses this afternoon. Gentlemen are more than welcome to remove their jackets; it is quite warm in here.
First we will hear from Dr Bryn Harris, chief legal counsel at the Free Speech Union, and Dr Alan Mendoza, the executive director of the Henry Jackson Society. Presumably Dr Bryn Harris will be brought in when he arrives, but meanwhile, Dr Mendoza, if you are happy for us to do so, we will start by directing our questioning to you. We have until 2.30 pm for this panel. Could you please introduce yourself for the record?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q54 The Government’s assessment is that the Bill does not breach anyone’s rights under article 10 of the European convention on human rights, as the ban that it introduces applies only to the public functions of public authorities. For example, councillors, when they are not representing the council, can express their own views and can support boycotts and divestments. Do you agree with that position?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Statements of intent to boycott, even when not implemented, can undermine community cohesion, so do you think it makes sense to prohibit statements of intent to boycott, as we do under clause 4?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Dr Harris, I do not know if you heard the questions and want to add anything.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
The first question was about the Government’s assessment that the Bill does not breach article 10 of the ECHR because it applies only to public authorities while they are carrying out public functions, and private individuals can express views, and choose to boycott and divest. The second question was on clause 4, and on whether stating an intent to boycott has similar impacts on community cohesion to boycotting.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q I have a few follow-up questions and a couple of points for clarification. I want to clarify that the Bill would apply to hybrid institutions when they are working in a public function but not in a private function.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q You said that clause 4 would affect freedom of speech. Again, I want to clarify that clause 4 applies to the council only when it is talking in a council capacity, and not to the individual councillors when they talk in a private capacity.
Just a few quick follow-up questions. The Bill contains the power to exempt certain countries as time goes on so that foreign policy can be adaptive. Do you agree with that? Secondly, briefly, do you think that the BDS movement has been successful in pressurising Israel?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
The first question was about the Bill containing the power to exempt certain countries as time goes on, so it can be adaptive to foreign policy.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q I am conscious of time. Dr Mendoza, do you want to come in on those final questions and then I can hand over?
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
Just a reminder that this panel is due to conclude at 2.30 pm and I have three more Members who have indicated that they wish to contribute. If anyone wishes to contribute, please waggle your fingers at me. Do you want to add anything further, Dr Harris?
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
I have just one question, about clause 7, which governs the information notices—the mechanism by which the Government can compel information from public bodies to find out if they have made, or are about to make, a decision that would contravene clause 1. In clause 7(8), those notices override any obligation of confidence, so if it is a conversation between someone and their lawyer, the Government can compel that information. That seems to me to be a very strong power. What is your opinion?
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Even though it says “any obligation” on the face of the Bill?
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Q What I would say is that you would know, as a local authority councillor, that local authorities routinely take legal advice about their actions, certainly if they thought they might be an edge case in such legislation. On a fair reading—I would be delighted if I were wrong—this would permit the extraction of such information, which we would normally consider privileged, by dint of a Government information notice, and I wondered if you felt that was proportionate.
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
I have a question for you, Dr Mendoza, and then a separate question for Dr Harris. The Henry Jackson Society, the organisation that you represent, is described as beingQ
“focused primarily on supporting global democracy in the face of threats from China and Russia”.
Does your organisation in any way support divestment in China, particularly regarding the treatment of Uyghur Muslims?
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
Q I welcome your comments. I think we will be having a debate about what the Bill actually says in relation to that.
Dr Harris, you mentioned the anti-apartheid movement. Obviously, Glasgow has a history around that: Glasgow District Council renamed a street, gave Nelson Mandela the freedom of the city and, like many other local authorities, boycotted South African goods and services. If this Bill had been in operation then, it would have prohibited Glasgow District Council from taking such actions, wouldn’t it?
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
Thank you.
Kim Leadbeater (Labour, Batley and Spen)
Clause 4 prevents public bodies, and anybody representing them, from saying that they would support a boycott if it was legal to do so. Do you agree that, on the face of it, that feels like a limit on freedom of speech? Is it compatible with free speech for it to be legal to say that you are against something—in this case, any kind of boycott—but illegal to say that you are in favour of itQ ?
Kim Leadbeater (Labour, Batley and Spen)
Q Can I follow up on the point about community cohesion? Do you think that the Bill will have a positive or negative impact on community cohesion?
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
Order. I am afraid that brings us to the end of the time allotted for the Committee to ask questions—I apologise. I thank our witnesses on behalf of the Committee.
Examination of Witness
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
Welcome. We will now hear from Rahima Mahmut, the UK director of the World Uyghur Congress. We have until 2.45 pm for this session. Would the witness introduce herself for the record?
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
Thank you very much. I call the Minister.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Thank you for being here and sharing your thoughts and experiences, which I imagine are very painful. One of the purposes of the Bill is to say that we should have one foreign policy. It does not prevent our central Government from having sanctions regimes, for instance. Do you agree that foreign policy should be reserved for the UK Government, rather than local authorities making up independent foreign policies?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q I am very sorry to hear what has happened to your sister and brother, and I appreciate your passion. The upcoming procurement legislation will further strengthen our approach to exclude suppliers where there is clear evidence of the involvement of forced labour and other modern slavery practices, such as in Xinjiang. Given that, and given that this Bill will sit in harmony with the Procurement Bill, so there will be the ability to exclude suppliers on modern slavery and labour misconduct grounds, are you more comfortable with the situation with this Bill?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
There will be the ability to exclude on modern slavery and labour misconduct grounds under the Procurement Bill and in this Bill, but perhaps, in the interest of time, I should allow colleagues to come in.
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
We have a great deal of sympathy with what you have expressed to us this afternoon. One problem that many people have with the Bill is that although it was billed as a Bill to prevent BDS against Israel, it is not country-specific. It applies to all countries, including Myanmar and China, and will have a direct impact on the solidarity that is capable of being shown to the Uyghur minority. It is ironic, really, that although one of the impressive things we have seen over the last couple of years is the solidarity from the Jewish community in Britain with the Uyghur minority, we have this Bill that some would suggest actually prevents local authorities from expressing that collective, community, material solidarity with people who are oppressed in China. Do you think that is a fair characterisation of your concernsQ ?
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
That was very clear, thank you.
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
I am afraid that this will probably have to be the last question to the witness. I call Chris Stephens.
Chris Stephens (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South West)
Q Thank you for your testimony today, Rahima. I have Uyghur constituents, and I have heard a lot about what is going on from them.
I have just got a simple question for you. George Peretz KC observed that the Bill would prohibit public bodies and local authorities from imposing their own bans on, for example, products and services imported from China, based on boycotting unethical production chains that use Uyghur forced labour. Is your opinion the same as that of George Peretz KC? Is there anything else you would like to add before we close?
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
That brings us to the end of the time allotted for the Committee to ask questions on this. I would like to thank our witness very warmly on behalf of the Committee.
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
We will now hear from Stephen Cragg KC. We have until 3 pm for this session. Would the witness introduce himself?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q The Government’s assessment is that the Bill does not breach anyone’s rights under article 10 of the ECHR. The ban applies only to the public functions of bodies defined as public authorities, so it would not affect individuals or private companies. It would not affect a councillor acting in an individual capacity—only a councillor who was speaking on behalf of his council as a local authority. Given this, do you agree with that assessment, and that the Bill is compatible with the ECHR?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Thank you. The Bill provides powers for enforcement authorities to issue compliance notices and investigate and fine public bodies where there is a breach of the ban. These powers are based on existing powers for regulators of public bodies. Do you think the powers given to enforcement authorities are reasonable and proportionate?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q On the legally privileged point, the Government’s view is that the information power does not extend to legally privileged information, on the back of the fact that that is a fundamental common law right and would need specific words to override.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Just to summarise, you would want clarification on that point and on councillors acting in their own capacity.
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
Thank you, Minister.
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
Thank you for joining us this afternoon, Stephen. Can you clarify how the Bill will impact the UK’s long-standing position on illegal settlements? Will the Bill stop public bodies from adopting a stance of not buying and trading goods from illegal settlements, bearing in mind that those settlements are illegal under international lawQ ?
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
Q Is that a concern that you have? Richard Hermer KC has raised concerns that UK courts would potentially have to rule on the legality of Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories.
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Q You mentioned the use of regulations for setting the fining regime. That is a common theme of this Bill. It also allows the Secretary of State to vary the schedule that sets out the important exceptions to the Bill and to vary enforcement authorities. That is a theme of the Bill. Do you think that those things and that degree of reserved power for the Secretary of State should be on the face of the Bill, or are they proportionate and necessary for the effectiveness of the Bill?
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Q Secondly, to finish the points you made in a fulsome way on clause 7, for my own clarity. You are saying that you would have greater confidence in the provisions in clause 7 if it was on the face of the Bill that privileged information between clients and their legal representation was exempted from that information-gathering power?
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
Thank you very much. If there are no further questions from Members, I thank the witness and we will move on to the next panel.
Examination of Witnesses
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
We will now hear from Francis Hoar, of Field Court Chambers, Professor Andrew Tettenborn of the University of Swansea and Professor Adam Tomkins of Glasgow University, who joins us via Zoom. We have until 3.45 pm for this session. Can the witnesses please introduce themselves, for the record, starting with Mr Hoar?
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
I call the Minister to ask the first question.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q One of the motivations for the Bill was to have one reserved foreign policy. Given that, do you agree that it is vital that this ban applies to the devolved Administrations and devolved public bodies? Adam, since you are sitting in Scotland, may I go to you first?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Andrew or Francis, do you want to come in?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Do you agree that in order to ensure that the ban operates effectively, it needs to cover a wide range of public institutions, including universities?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Yes, absolutely.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Francis or Adam, do you want to come in on that point?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q So you are happy with how the Bill is drafted to apply only to public institutions, not to private individuals.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Does anyone on the panel have a view as to how the Bill compares with other examples of anti-BDS legislation in other jurisdictions across the world?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Does the rest of the panel want to come in, either on the comparative point or on the point about ECHR article 10?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Do you not think it is needed for community cohesion? These statements can be very inflammatory.
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Q I want to follow that point through, with all three panellists, if possible. You have all indicated support for the Bill in generality, and in particular for what clause 1 tries to achieve. Do you think you have to have clause 4 for the Bill to be effective?
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Yes, I think you have addressed that point, but what about the two professors?
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Q Professor Tomkins, could you address that point?
Alex Norris (Labour/Co-operative, Nottingham North)
Q On multiple occasions on the face of the Bill, the Secretary of State has reserved powers to change provisions in the Bill by regulations. Do you think that approach has been used too liberally? Has it been used appropriately? Are you comfortable with that degree of ability for the Secretary of State to vary things later down the line?
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
Q Thank you to the panel for joining us today. I want to stick to clause 4, because I was really interested in the discussions on it. Some stakeholders have called it a gagging clause. I am really interested to learn what other options the Government could bring forward to achieve the clause’s aims. It is my understanding that if a Scottish Government Minister, for example, wanted to speak out against it, they would be unable to do so. They would have to turn around and say, “I’m not speaking on behalf of the Scottish Government, I’m speaking as an individual,” even if they were stood in the Scottish Parliament.
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
Professor Tomkins, do you want to come in?
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
Q Thank you so much for that, Professor Tomkins. I have a couple more questions. We are under time pressure, so if you could all stick to short contributions, that would be appreciated.
The people of Scotland have a strong history of being at the forefront of political campaigns. As was said earlier, Glasgow proudly stood against South Africa’s apartheid in the 1980s. In 2014, the University of Glasgow became the first university in Europe to divest from the fossil fuel industry. Given that public bodies such as universities would now be prevented from taking such a stance, is the Bill compatible with the free speech protections in the European convention on human rights?
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
The fossil fuel industry.
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
Q Does anybody else want to come in? If not, I will move on to my last question.
Okay. Professor Tomkins, you have spoken about the fact that you were a Member of the Scottish Parliament, and I understand that you are a former adviser to a Secretary of State for Scotland. Constitutional law is your area of expertise, and you have said that you are keen to see this legislation implemented across all four nations of the UK. I am interested in learning a little bit more about what impact the Bill will have on the independence of Scotland’s Parliament and, by extension, our Government in Holyrood.
Luke Evans (Conservative, Bosworth)
Professor Tomkins, you talked about the different comparisons out there. Which country has the best example of this type of legislation and whyQ ?
Luke Evans (Conservative, Bosworth)
Q That is very useful. Thank you.
I have a wider question for the whole panel. This is written in the negative, in the sense that it indicates political or moral disapproval for foreign states. Do the panel have any thoughts about writing it neutrally, so that neither the pro nor the anti side fit in? In other words, a public body should not get involved in these kinds of arguments at all. Is that a position you agree with, Professor Tettenborn?
Luke Evans (Conservative, Bosworth)
Q That is very useful. Mr Hoar, what do you think? The civil servant is supposed to be neutral, for example. We have already discussed the realms of where this body goes and who is actually in charge. All the panellists stated that they were not sure where the role of Ministers went. For the likes of the NHS or the police, is there not an argument for saying that there should be neutrality when it comes to foreign policy that deals with issues such as those in front of us?
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
Yes, but do keep an eye on the clock, because there are two more Members who have indicated that they want to ask a question, and we have only 10 more minutes.
Luke Evans (Conservative, Bosworth)
I have no further questions.
Kim Leadbeater (Labour, Batley and Spen)
Q Almost reluctantly, I return to clause 4. I have been thinking about the practical repercussions of the Bill, and I have to say that my feeling this afternoon is that this is going to be pretty messy. If we are asking elected officials in council chambers up and down the country to say, “Now I am speaking in a personal capacity, and now I am speaking in my capacity as an elected official,” it feels like that would be very messy. Surely, as advocates of freedom of speech—as a number of members of the panel have said—that can only have a worrying effect in shutting down debate and discussion. That can only have an undemocratic outcome.
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Q Partly because our two professors are from Wales and Scotland, I want to ask about devolution. Most of would agree, I think, that foreign policy is exclusively a reserved matter, but we are not just talking about foreign policy now; we are talking about procurement responsibilities and public service pension schemes, the responsibility for which is, to a large extent, in different ways, devolved to the devolved Governments. I am mindful of a statement in the House of Commons Library brief that the Bill as it stands will modify
“the executive competence of devolved ministers”,
and because of that the devolved institutions will need to pass a legislative consent motion. That might be politically contentious; therefore, the Act might not automatically apply to the three parts of the United Kingdom we are talking about. Also, in Northern Ireland, public services pension schemes are exclusively in the hands of the Northern Ireland Assembly, which is not currently meeting. How will it agree a legislative competence order? Presumably, unless the Secretary of State takes powers that are not prescribed in the Bill, this legislation will not apply to Northern Ireland. Would you care to comment on that?
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Q The House of Commons Library disagrees with you.
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
I just read it out.
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
We do not have time for another question in the time allotted for this panel. Let me say on behalf of the Committee that we are grateful to our witnesses for their evidence.
Examination of Witness
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
We will now hear from Andrew Whitley, chair of the Balfour Project. We have until 4 pm. Would you introduce yourself for the record, Mr Whitley?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q In your written evidence, you raise concerns that the Bill could prevent ethical procurement or divestment decisions. Do you acknowledge that there are exemptions for the likes of labour-related misconduct and environmental misconduct, and that the Bill relates only to moral or political disapproval of countries and territories, so it would not in any way prevent, for instance, divestment from fossil fuels?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q The Bill will apply to all countries; the only reference to Israel is that if in future you want to exempt countries, that can be done by secondary legislation except in the case of Israel, which requires primary legislation. The reason for that is that we want greater parliamentary scrutiny, because, as we have heard from other witnesses, Israel has been the sole focus of so many BDS campaigns. Given the fact that these campaigns are targeted against Israel, we think that greater level of parliamentary scrutiny is required. In the light of that, do you feel more comfortable?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q So that I understand your position, do you think that BDS is additive in the middle east? Every witness we have heard so far says that BDS does not add anything to the situation regarding peace in the middle east, and that actually its effect is negative because it leads to problems with community cohesion in the UK.
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q The Government’s view is that the settlements are illegal; however, we do not support boycotts and divestments against Israel because we do not think that they contribute towards peace in the middle east. Do you disagree?
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Q Andrew, you will have heard the last question in the last session, which touched on foreign policy. I made a statement that foreign policy is a non-devolved matter, but human rights is an issue that belongs to central Government, local government and devolved Government—it belongs to all citizens in a sense. Is that your view as well, and if it is, would you care to elaborate to say why you have fundamental concerns about this piece of legislation?
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
Q Thank you so much for joining us today, Andrew. You have spoken about the historical influence of Britain, so I am interested to learn a little bit about what impact you think the Bill will have on the UK’s relationship with the occupied territories, and with Palestinians across all four nations here who wish to exercise their freedom of expression so that the Israeli Government can be held to account for their actions?
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
Q The UK Government have a long-standing position on illegal settlements. Would the Bill stop a public body from taking a stance of not buying and trading goods from illegal settlements, bearing in mind these settlements are of course illegal under international law?
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
That is fine; I will also speak more slowly, just in case it is my accent. I was asking if you could clarify how the Bill will impact the UK’s long-standing position on illegal settlements. Would the Bill stop a public body from taking a stance of not buying and trading goods from illegal settlements within the OPT, bearing in mind the settlements are legal under international law?
Anum Qaisar (Scottish National Party, Airdrie and Shotts)
Q Finally, what impact will the Bill have on your organisation’s work out in Israel and the occupied territories?
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
I am mindful of the fact that we have to conclude this part of the session at 4 pm.
Wayne David (Labour, Caerphilly)
Q My question follows on from what you have just said, Andrew. The Government say they are committed to a two-state solution. We as the Opposition, and I think the British Parliament, are strongly in favour of that. However, there is great deal of concern about the conflation of Israel and the occupied territories and the Golan Heights. I believe I am correct in saying that this is the first time that has ever happened in a piece of British legislation. It does, perhaps not legally, but it certainly sends out the message that somehow the Government’s commitment to a two-state solution is not as firm as they say it is. Do you think that is the case?
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
Order. I am afraid that that brings us to the end of the time allotted for the Committee to ask questions. May I thank our witness on behalf of the Committee? We will now move on to the next and final panel.
Examination of Witnesses
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
We have until 4.30 pm for this session. Could the witnesses start by introducing themselves for the record?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q First, can I ask whether you support the BDS movement?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q We have heard an awful lot of evidence today that the BDS movement has not contributed to peace in the middle east, but that it has simply targeted Israel and led to community friction in the UK. Do you agree with those sentiments that have been expressed very broadly today?
Felicity Buchan (Conservative, Kensington)
Q Rozanne, can I bring you in on those points?
Caroline Dinenage (Conservative, Gosport)
Rozanne, I do apologise. We are struggling to hear you. Do you have a microphone available that you could plug in?