Barnet’s sole Green councillor demolishes her Zionist critics

Barnet’s sole Green councillor demolishes her Zionist critics

 14 Oct 2026

Barnet Green Party

 

Dear Sarah Sackman MP, Dan Tomlinson MP and David Pinto-Duschinsky MP,

Thank you for your letter of 9 October concerning my support for the Green Party’s adoption of the Zionism is Racism motion.

I welcome the opportunity to respond. However, I am concerned that your letter contains several misleading assertions about the policy, and I would encourage you to consider the full text of the motion and its accompanying briefing paper.

You state that most British Jews understand Zionism as the right of Jewish people to self-determination, and that it is not for a political party to define an identity differently from those who hold it. However, the motion is explicitly concerned with Zionism as a political ideology and its historical and material consequences for Palestinians. It does not purport to define Jewish identity; indeed, it specifically distinguishes the two.

Political ideologies, particularly those underpinning the structures and policies of states, must remain open to democratic scrutiny. The question is not simply how an ideology is understood by those who identify with it, but how it operates in practice and what consequences it has for others.

For Palestinians, those consequences include generations of displacement, dispossession, occupation and denial of fundamental rights. It is entirely legitimate for a political party to examine those consequences and challenge the structures it believes sustain them.

I believe strongly in the right to self-determination, but that right should not be dependent on the removal of another people’s rights.

Furthermore, I believe Jewish people should be safe wherever they live. I understand that many people feel deep ties to Israel as a place of refuge because of the Jewish historical experience. I also of course acknowledge the deep Jewish connection to the Holy Land, as I do for Islam and Christianity alike. I do not however believe anyone’s safety can ultimately depend upon segregation and domination over others. I support equal rights, security and freedom from racism and xenophobia wherever people live and for all peoples.

That is why I support the motion’s vision of a single democratic state with equal rights for all who live there and the right of return for Palestinian refugees and their descendants.

This is a vision of a democratic, secular society, encompassing Jews, Muslims, Christians and others, based on equal rights rather than ethnonational or religious privilege, with freedom to practise different religions and cultures side by side and safely. It reflects the belief that no state should be founded or maintained through the subjugation or displacement of other people, and a commitment to human rights, reparations and justice.

It is important to point out that the Green Party adopting this position has no direct effect on existing constitutional arrangements. Like many of our policies, it articulates a political vision rather than imposing a settlement. It is a vision in which Britain critically acknowledges and addresses its historical and ongoing complicity in Palestinian dispossession and oppression since 1948, and supports the realisation of Palestinians’ inalienable rights. This policy being passed now does not come from nowhere. There is increasing rejection of any kind of fair settlement on a two-state basis coming from the dominant political class inside Israel. Indeed the Knesset overwhelmingly passed a formal resolution in 2024 by 68 to 9, stating firm opposition to any Palestinian statehood and this is being explicitly re-stated during the current election debates.

A single democratic state is proposed by grassroots coalitions in Israel/Palestine, academic networks, civil rights advocacy groups, and selective political organisations. It should be seen as a viable option on the table and the international community has every right to endorse it.

Perhaps most harmfully, your letter conflates the political objective of a single democratic state with the motion’s separate recognition of the Palestinian people’s right to resist occupation, domination and subjugation. The motion explicitly qualifies that recognition by reference to international law. The motion’s briefing discusses armed resistance in the context of current struggles against colonial domination. This raises serious questions of international law, including the continuing obligation to protect civilians. Such questions deserve accurate discussion, rather than being reduced to the claim that the Green Party advocates armed struggle to destroy Israel. That is not what the motion says. We are a party of peace not war.

Your letter also asserts that Jewish and non-Jewish self-determination are now regarded by the Green Party as racist. Again, that is not what the motion states. It explicitly rejects equating Jewish identity with Zionist ideology and recognises that no single political ideology should be attributed to an entire people.

There are growing numbers of Jewish people, both within and outside the party, who identify as anti-Zionist and have long campaigned for Palestinian liberation and against occupation. Jewish members were among the motion’s co-proposers, including an 89-year-old Holocaust survivor.

I have personally witnessed dear Jewish friends and colleagues in Barnet and beyond being viciously attacked as ‘self-hating Jews’ and cast out for challenging Zionist ideology. This was evidenced starkly at the demonstration against the Great Israeli Real Estate event in Edgware a few months ago. This kind of rhetoric is vile and antisemitic and directly contributes to a lack of safety for all Jewish people. I believe it is our duty to robustly challenge any conflation of Judaism and the actions of the state of Israel.

Not all Jewish people are Zionist and not all Zionists are Jewish.

I would therefore welcome your response to an important question: how do you ensure that Palestinian and non-Zionist and anti-Zionist Jewish residents are represented and their political beliefs respected and protected?

It goes without saying that I unequivocally oppose all forms of racism and xenophobia, including antisemitism. I treat threats and attacks against all residents and their institutions seriously. Every resident has a right to safety, dignity and freedom from discrimination. Nothing in this motion contradicts that.

I am concerned that your letter devotes considerable attention to the political controversy and media frenzy surrounding the motion, while failing to address the urgent circumstances that have driven demands for fundamental change.

The ongoing genocide and displacement of Palestinians, continuing occupation and expansion of illegal settlements demand more than expressions of concern. We need immediate meaningful action to prevent further atrocities, end UK complicity and uphold international law.

The Green Party has already called for sanctions, boycotts and an end to arms transfers. What this motion adds is an explicit political analysis of the structures sustaining Palestinian oppression. It asks not only whether governments are taking action, but whether those actions address the underlying causes of injustice, or are simply a sticking plaster. That distinction matters if we are serious about achieving lasting change rather than continually responding to the consequences of the same political system.

Finally, you ask how I reconcile my support for the motion with my duty to represent our community. My answer is straightforward: that duty is not at odds with my right to critique a political ideology.

I represent every resident of Woodhouse, regardless of religion, ethnicity, background or political beliefs. I do not ask residents whether they agree with me politically before offering assistance, nor do I make assumptions about their beliefs based on their identity or community.

I will continue to support all residents fairly, including those who disagree with me. My commitment to local issues, including housing, adult social care, disability rights, protecting nature, cleaner streets, challenging overdevelopment and community safety, is unwavering.

As elected representatives, we all hold political positions with which some residents disagree. That does not make us incapable of representing them. What matters is how we exercise our responsibilities, whether we behave respectfully and treat people fairly and whether we uphold the rights and dignity of everyone we serve. I would hope you apply that same principle to your own constituents, including those whose political views differ from yours.

I would also welcome a response on what further action you intend to pursue as Barnet’s MPs to prevent further atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank, end the occupation, stop UK arms transfers and secure accountability for violations of international law.

These are urgent questions on which your constituents deserve clarity.

Yours sincerely,

Cllr Charli Thompson
Green Party Councillor for Woodhouse Ward