Labour issues head-scratching statement on Zionism row at Warwick District Council - and no one will admit to writing it

The district has been run by a coalition of Green Party and Labour councillors since May 2023 but a new Green policy declaring that ‘Zionism is racism’, voted on by a tiny minority of members at their party conference, threatens to pull it apart.

Prime minister Andy Burnham declared the Green motion “antisemitic” with Labour’s national chair Bridget Phillipson MP going on to state that Greens who work with Labour on councils would be asked “to make clear that they reject this position and to call on their national leadership to reconsider”, requesting a response “as a matter of urgency”.

“Where they are unable to provide that assurance, Labour will bring any such local arrangement to an end,” warned Ms Phillipson.

Warwick District’s Green Party released an open letter from council leader Councillor Ian Davison (Leamington Brunswick) and a statement on behalf of the group ahead of last week’s cabinet meeting.

The letter revealed a “general consensus” that Green councillors “do not agree with the motion as it stands” but stopped short of rejecting it outright, adding that "Green Party leaders cannot overrule a conference decision”.

The statement on behalf of the district’s Green group went further, insisting it “rejects the national Labour party’s attempt to undermine Green Party democracy”, going on to “refuse to condemn a democratically decided policy because of political intimidation”.

Labour’s group leader Councillor Jess Melrose (Leamington Clarendon) forwarded a response that she said had come from her party’s West Midlands regional office.

Not only did it spell Cllr Davison’s name incorrectly, calling him ‘Davidson’, but it welcomed the district leader’s “rejection” of the motion.

“We are clear that this policy is wrong and antisemitic and has no place in British politics or in Warwick,” it read.

“This is not an issue of party politics. It is about doing what is right and upholding the values that anyone holding public office should share."

The Local Democracy Reporting Service approached Cllr Melrose for comment on the significant difference between the Green position and Labour’s interpretation of it.

She said she “appreciated” why the question was asked but said it was a question for the regional office.

“That statement was provided by the regional party, I have gone back on a few things like needing to correct his (Cllr Davison’s) name,” she added.

Put to her that it could be seen as a way of Labour rowing back from a difficult position, she invited us to put that question to the regional team.

Cllr Melrose insisted that it would be “business as usual” until Labour’s National Executive Committee – a 39-strong group of party members including Mr Burnham, elected officials from MPs to councillors, plus trade union representatives – decides whether her local group is allowed to continue to share power.

“They’re going through a process,” she said.

“I am unable to see the whole process, I wish I could. I think we all wish to see the process. Until I can see the end of it, the full picture, right now I am just concentrating on the residents.”

However, things took another twist on Monday (October 26) when the regional office told the Local Democracy Reporting Service that it had not issued the statement sent by Cllr Melrose, inviting us to ask her where it emanated from.

Put to them that the incorrect spelling of Cllr Davison’s name was unlikely to have come from Cllr Melrose, his colleague of more than three years, the representative reiterated their stance. Cllr Melrose was unavailable for further comment.

In the interview conducted ahead of last week’s cabinet meeting, Cllr Melrose was asked whether she would commit to publishing the ‘full picture’ once the matter was resolved.

“Whatever I can publish, I am happy to put that in the public domain but at the moment I know as much as anyone else,” she said.

Asked for her views on the sorry saga, Cllr Melrose replied: “I do have an opinion but at the moment, as we are going through a process, I am not allowed to disclose my opinion.

“As much as I would love to tell you, it has to go to the National Executive Committee and they will make the decision.

“We are business as usual, we are focused on the residents and the local plan. When the process concludes, whatever the outcome, we will take it from there. That’s how we have managed for the past three-and-a-half years.

“We have had many political differences, some public, so for me it is about focusing on the reasons why we decided to work together in the first place.

“People still want their bins emptied. I am the portfolio holder for housing, I still get emails about repairs. It is colder now, some people are getting mould coming back or they are trying to move. Those things are the focus.”

Neither Cllr Melrose nor the West Midlands regional representative were able to provide a timescale for the committee’s decision, one which will dictate the future of the coalition.

Asked whether the unspecified wait was fair on residents, Cllr Melrose said: “That’s why I want a resolution as quickly as possible.

“If the can was kicked down the road for months that would not be fair, if it is resolved in a week or two, that would be my preference but I don’t know the timeline.

“If I had the answer I would be happy to tell residents but I won’t go on instinct when I can’t give them a true picture of the facts.”