Divestment activists ‘jumping on bandwagon’, says Hackney’s pensions chair

Protestors renew their calls for divestment on the Town Hall steps. Image: courtesy Hackney Independent Socialists Group / free for use by LDRS partners

Hackney councillors have hit out at critics demanding divestment from Israeli arms companies, accusing them of “jumping on the bandwagon”.

Ahead of last night’s (Thursday 20) pensions committee meeting, protestors gathered on the council steps to renew longstanding calls for the local authority to withdraw its pension fund investments from arms producers and other companies linked to Israel’s military operations in Gaza and the West Bank.

During the meeting, Independent Socialist councillor Penny Wrout challenged members for leaving out any mention of the divestment campaign from the committee’s annual report – despite persistent protests ever since the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war.

“Since October 2023, there have been regular demonstrations at every pension committee, but nowhere [in the report] are these terms used,” she said, adding that the panel would have spent “quite a lot of time thinking about these issues”.

“I’m sure the people of Hackney who have come out to demonstrate will be concerned that residents’ concerns about investments in armaments, used in what many people would see as a genocide, are in no way reflected in that report.”

After requesting the report to be altered to “accurately reflect” this local disquiet, she was rebuffed by Cllr Ian Rathbone, who said it would set a “very dangerous precedent”.

“We need to be careful that we’re not being told effectively by someone outside this committee, who does not have the authority of this committee, to actually start changing minutes we have already agreed and passed,” he said.

Cllr Kam Adams, the committee’s chair, appeared to reject the idea of changing the report to mention locals’ concerns due to their demands not being clear enough.

“People are just jumping on the bandwagon of divestment. Nobody has come up with what we are divesting from,” he said.

“Is it from the Occupied Territories? Is it from Israel?”

Speaking to the Citizen, Cllr Wrout called these interventions “extraordinary”.

“Obviously we want them to divest from companies which are involved in producing weapons for Israel, and have done so from the beginning, so for the chair to turn around and say that in the meeting is just weird,” she said.

“If somebody’s pointing out there’s something wrong, it should be rectified – otherwise you end up playing into a false narrative.

“This is the long-term historical record of what’s happening in Hackney. For it not to mention the local campaign is a serious omission.”

Her comments are supported by the committee’s own documents, which contrain explicit reference to calls to divest from firms linked to the occupied territories and legal advice relating to this decision.

Anonymous activists paint the Town Hall red. Credit: Palestine Action

Groups like the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) and Hackney for Palestine notably set up a months-long encampment outside the Town Hall last year, urging councillors to divest its local government pension scheme (LGPS) and end the borough’s municipal twinning with the city of Haifa.

They and others have specifically demanded the council exclude from its fund any companies listed by the UN’s Human Rights Council database, which operate in Israeli settlements and are linked to the military occupation and its alleged human rights abuses in the West Bank.

Activists in Hackney and across the country have stressed the need to divest from the Haifa-based military firm Elbit Systems, a key supplier of munitions and other technology to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

Organisers for the PSC allege £30m of pension fund money is invested in these companies, but the council estimates the figure is much smaller at £2.02m – roughly 0.2 per cent of the £2bn fund.

While Mayor Caroline Woodley in June signalled her openness to “ethical divestment”, Cllr Adams has said pulling “passive” investments such as these would “expose the Hackney pension fund to significant costs”.

Like other local authorities, officials have highlighted the council’s legal responsibility to ensure the pension fund is profitable enough to sustain the benefit for retired staff.

However, boroughs such as Waltham Forest and Islington have made more explicit commitments to divest their funds from arms producers.

Cllr Adams has also argued these stocks and shares in Hackney’s fund are “indirect”, meaning that even the investment fund manager is unable to control which of these are included in the “passive” fund.

In July, the council refused to hear the PSC’s deputation on the issue over concerns it could undermine “community cohesion”.

The council later received legal advice from Nigel Giffin KC, which concluded that LGPSs were not criminally liable for investing in companies “in violation of international law”.

Giffin added that a local authority such as Hackney was “not well-placed to know” if war crimes, as defined by the International Criminal Court, had taken place in Gaza or the West Bank.

Thursday’s demonstration came the day after anonymous activists from Palestine Action had sprayed the Town Hall’s facade in red paint, in protest against “genocidal investment”.

The Citizen understands the paint was removed on Thursday morning, but reports were received that the Town Hall was once again defaced last night after the meeting concluded.

It is not yet known whether these were the actions of a group, individual or were in any way related to the demonstration.

The Metropolitan Police were approached for comment.

A council spokesperson said: “In Hackney, we share the despair and anger felt by so many about the events unfolding in Israel and Gaza.

“We also recognise the strength of feeling that the actions of public authorities should not contribute to conflict or suffering elsewhere – particularly in regard to pension fund investments.

“However, we do not tolerate vandalism and we will assist the police in bringing criminal proceedings against any perpetrators to ensure safety of elected members, employees and members of the public.”