At a Brighton conference, the UK Green Party narrowly voted to define Zionism as a form of racism, setting in motion a chain of institutional complaints and diplomatic consequences that now test whether a political party can hold together competing convictions about identity, justice, and belonging. The decision — passed by a margin of roughly 200 votes among a fraction of the party's membership — has drawn Labour MPs, equality regulators, police, and a foreign government into a dispute that is, at its core, about where the boundaries of legitimate political expression end and discrimination b
Green Party leader rejects exclusion claims after Zionism motion sparks backlash
No one will be made unwelcome because of their faith or where they worship
Mark
So the Green Party voted to say Zionism is racism. That's a pretty stark statement. What exactly did the motion say?
Mimi
It defined Zionism as an ideology supporting an ethnonationalist Jewish state, and it backed a single democratic Palestinian state across all of historic Palestine. The motion also described what it called the material consequences—displacement, dispossession, destruction of Palestinians.
Luke
Right, but I want to be clear on the numbers. 1,022 to 813. That's a real vote, real people. But Chowns said less than 1 percent of the party's 200,000 members actually voted. So we're talking about maybe 1,800 people deciding this for the whole party.
Mimi
That's a fair point. And it matters because it shows the division—four of the five elected MPs opposed it. The leader didn't even vote.
Mark
Why didn't Polanski vote?
Mimi
The source doesn't say. But he's Jewish, and he came out afterward saying he won't accept anyone being excluded because of their faith or community.
Luke
Which is a reassurance, but it's also a response to a real problem. Labour MPs filed complaints saying the motion raises serious questions about whether Jewish members can participate freely. They're not making that up.
Mark
What did the Labour MPs actually report?
Mimi
They went to the Equality and Human Rights Commission and to Sussex Police. They said the motion and what happened at the conference—including amendments to protect Jewish members being voted down—raised questions about whether Jewish members could be exposed to complaints or disciplinary action because of their religious connections.
Luke
And that's the crux of it, isn't it? The motion itself is one thing. But the fact that protections for Jewish members were voted down—that's what made the Labour MPs move.
Mark
How did the party respond?
Mimi
Polanski said no one will be made unwelcome because of their faith or background. The party said it's committed to its Code of Conduct and the Equality Act.
Luke
Those are statements of intent. The question is enforcement. And that's why the watchdog and police are involved now.
Mark
What happens next?
Luke
The Equality and Human Rights Commission said it would consider the complaints carefully but hasn't launched an investigation yet. Sussex Police was contacted for comment but hasn't said anything publicly. So we're in a waiting period.
Il Polso
- A narrow conference vote to label Zionism a form of racism immediately ignited one of the most serious institutional crises in the Green Party's recent history.
- Over a dozen Labour MPs coordinated complaints to both the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Sussex Police, raising the stakes from political controversy to potential criminal and regulatory scrutiny.
- Jewish members face a concrete dilemma: amendments that would have protected those attending Zionist synagogues from internal disciplinary action were voted down at the same conference.
- Leader Zack Polanski — himself Jewish and absent from the vote — issued a lengthy public pledge that no member would be made unwelcome because of faith or worship, attempting to draw a firewall between the motion's ideology and the party's conduct.
- The fracture runs deep: four of five Green MPs opposed the motion, Israel has banned Polanski from entering the country, and the European Green Party has demanded urgent clarification from its British affiliate.
- The Equality and Human Rights Commission is reviewing complaints but has not yet launched a formal investigation, leaving the party's assurances of inclusion unverified and its future direction unresolved.
At a Brighton conference, the UK Green Party narrowly voted to define Zionism as a form of racism, setting in motion a chain of institutional complaints and diplomatic consequences that now test whether a political party can hold together competing convictions about identity, justice, and belonging. The decision — passed by a margin of roughly 200 votes among a fraction of the party's membership — has drawn Labour MPs, equality regulators, police, and a foreign government into a dispute that is, at its core, about where the boundaries of legitimate political expression end and discrimination begins. For a party whose Jewish leader pledged inclusion for all, the vote has surfaced a painful tension between principled solidarity with Palestinians and the safety of Jewish members within the party's own walls.
The Green Party's annual conference in Brighton closed with a vote that would define the days that followed. By a margin of 1,022 to 813, members adopted a motion declaring Zionism — framed as an ethnonationalist ideology — a form of racism, and endorsed the idea of a single democratic Palestinian state across historic Palestine. The backlash was swift and institutional.
More than a dozen Labour MPs, coordinated by former Home Office minister Mike Tapp, filed complaints with the Equality and Human Rights Commission and referred the party to Sussex Police over whether the motion and conference conduct constituted criminal antisemitic offences. Their central concern was practical: could Jewish members participate freely in a party where their connections to Zionist synagogues might expose them to internal disciplinary action? Amendments designed to protect such members had been voted down.
Party leader Zack Polanski, who is Jewish and had not voted on the motion, waited a day before responding publicly. When he did, he drew a firm line: no member would be excluded because of faith, background, or where they worship, and antisemitism and criticism of Israel must always be treated as entirely distinct. The party's spokesperson reaffirmed its Code of Conduct and Equality Act obligations.
But the vote had already revealed a structural fault line. Polanski had grown the membership substantially since becoming leader, and the conference result showed the expanded grassroots pulling in a different direction from the party's five elected MPs, four of whom opposed the motion. Green MP Ellie Chowns described herself as deeply saddened, though she stopped short of calling the motion antisemitic, framing it as opposition to Israeli government actions rather than to Jewish identity. She also noted that fewer than one percent of the party's 200,000-plus members had actually cast a vote.
The consequences extended beyond Britain. Israel's foreign ministry announced it was banning Polanski from entering the country. The European Green Party moved to distance itself from the motion and demanded clarity on how the party would protect Jewish people and the principle of self-determination. The Equality and Human Rights Commission — which had previously found Labour wanting in its handling of antisemitism — said it would consider each complaint carefully, without yet opening a formal investigation. The question of whether the party's assurances can satisfy regulators, police, and its own divided membership remains open.
The Green Party's conference in Brighton ended with a decision that would consume the party's leadership for days to come. Members voted 1,022 to 813 to adopt a motion declaring Zionism—defined as an ideology supporting an ethnonationalist Jewish state—a form of racism. The same motion backed the establishment of a single democratic Palestinian state across all of historic Palestine. Within hours, the backlash began.
More than a dozen Labour MPs filed complaints with the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the watchdog that regulates equality law in Great Britain. Nine of those MPs also referred the party to Sussex Police, asking whether the motion and related conduct at the conference constituted criminal antisemitic offences. The move was coordinated by former Home Office minister Mike Tapp. In their letter to the equality commission, the Labour MPs raised a specific concern: they questioned whether Jewish members could participate freely in the party, or whether their religious and communal connections—particularly attendance at Zionist synagogues—might expose them to complaints or disciplinary action. Amendments designed to protect Jewish members attending such synagogues had been voted down at the conference.
Party leader Zack Polanski, who is Jewish himself, had not participated in the vote on Sunday. Four of the party's five elected MPs opposed the motion. On Tuesday, after declining interviews the day before, Polanski released a lengthy statement attempting to reset the terms of the conversation. He said he would not accept the exclusion of anyone "because of the religious or communal body they are part of." He pledged that "no-one will be made unwelcome because of their background, their faith, or where they worship." He also drew a distinction he said was essential: "antisemitism and criticism of the Israeli state are, and must always be, completely distinct."
The motion itself had described what it called the material consequences of Zionism: "the historic and ongoing dehumanisation, displacement, dispossession, disenfranchisement and destruction of Palestinians." A Green Party spokesperson responded to the complaints by reaffirming the party's commitment to its Code of Conduct and its obligations under the Equality Act, saying the party remained "a safe place for all members."
The controversy exposed fractures within the party. Polanski had significantly enlarged the membership base since taking over as leader, and the vote revealed a gap between the party's expanded grassroots and its parliamentary representatives. Green MP Ellie Chowns told BBC Radio 4 she was "deeply saddened" the motion had become official policy, though she disagreed it was antisemitic, framing it instead as "principled opposition to the actions of the Israeli government." She noted that fewer than 1 percent of the party's more than 200,000 members had actually participated in the vote, and suggested the party's policymaking processes needed review.
The international dimension added another layer. Israel's foreign ministry announced it was banning Polanski from entering the country. The European Green Party, the umbrella organization of which the British Greens are a member, released a statement saying it wanted to "unequivocally distance" itself from the motion and would "immediately demand clarity" from the party's leadership on how it would protect Jewish people and self-determination.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission told the BBC it would "consider each complaint carefully" but had not launched an investigation at that stage. The commission, which had previously found failings in how Labour handled antisemitism allegations, reminded all political parties of their responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010 to avoid discrimination. What happens next depends on how thoroughly those complaints are examined, and whether the party's assurances about inclusion can withstand scrutiny from regulators and police.
Citazioni salienti
Antisemitism and criticism of the Israeli state are, and must always be, completely distinct— Zack Polanski, Green Party leader
Taken together, these developments raise serious questions about whether Jewish members can participate freely and equally in the party— Labour MPs in letter to the Equality and Human Rights Commission
Vuoi la storia completa?
Leggi l'originale su BBC ↗