Why are we even having to argue this? An email exchange about Gaza protesters between myself and a ‘progressive’ Labour councillor.
What follows is an email conversation between myself and Cllr Kristian Bright, a Labour district councillor, following a council meeting of Thanet District Council in Margate.
23 Feb 2024
Dear Cllr Bright,
I contacted my Central Harbour councillors about the need for a ceasefire in Gaza, and I am in the camp that does believe a motion from TDC [Thanet District Council] is worth doing, although I am well aware of the arguments to the contrary.
Something that struck me when watching a recording of the council meeting were your comments about ‘coercive compassion’.
You were concerned that councillors should feel safe to abstain or vote against the motion, and I wondered what led to you making that comment, especially as Reece Pugh also mentioned ‘intimidation’.
Were any TDC councillors subjected to threats or intimidated to vote a certain way? If so, what were the nature of the threats, and were the police involved?
Best wishes,
Carly Jeffrey, Ramsgate resident
26 Feb 2024
Dear Carly,
Thank you for your email.
You will have seen from my speech that I was sceptical about whether or not a district council should be debating foreign affairs – particularly when there are real things we can be doing for our residents in the middles of the Tories’ cost of living crisis and in one of the most deprived areas of England.
However – it was good to have been able to voice my horror at the violence and my hopes for a viable, long-lasting peace and I’m proud to have stood with the vast majority of councillors and to have supported the motion in its final form.
My point about being and feeling safe was absolutely valid.
There were about fifty or so pro-Palestinian protesters outside the TDC officers on Thursday last night who – as is their right – were loudly calling for Palestinian freedom etc. To be clear, I have absolutely no issue with this and as a Labour Party member and councillor, find this government’s attempts at cracking down on protest abhorrent.
However – I do take issue with the childish and aggressive behaviour of protestors within the chamber itself. At our previous full-council meeting, to decide the budget for 2024/25 protesters loudly disrupted proceedings, asking why we were not discussing this issue. If they knew the council’s procedure – they would have known that nothing, other than the budget, was to be discussed in that meeting. Democracy operates within such frameworks and if we abandon them for one issue, there’d be no reason to keep them at all.
Since last year’s local elections, Thanet’s councillors are no longer predominantly wealthy, retired, white men but are a mix of all ages, races and sexualiities. Much of the good work of a councillor is done in private, supporting individual residents with challenging issues such as housing or education. Many of Thanet’s councillors are not accustomed to public speaking and being in the spotlight of a council chamber. Having someone loudly shouting abuse at you is intimidating and I know one councillor, who had previously almost been killed by a stress-related heart injury was very shaken and worried about their health.
Ultimately, I have a good degree of self-confidence (and a spot of short, angry man syndrome) that means that I personally didn’t feel threatened or intimidated. I also knew that I would be calling for peace – which is ultimately what the protestors outside were asking of us. I’m not sure how safe I would’ve felt if I had disagreed with the motion though and it should be a source of shame to those protestors who wanted councillors to speak out against the violence, that their behaviour meant that they were removed from the building before they had the chance to see their objectives realised.
The right to protest is vital to democracy. The right of elected representatives of the people to have reasoned and productive debate without being verbally abused is equally vital. I would hope that future demonstrations at TDC are conducted with more kindness shown to all those who give up so much time to represent their communities.
Best regards
Kristian Bright
26 Feb 2024
Dear Cllr Bright
Thank you for your reply.
I will take it that no reports of intimidation have been made and no threats to safety have been directed at councillors regarding the ceasefire vote, as none were mentioned in your reply.
There are differing opinions and levels of tolerance regarding how boisterous protests ought to be. Braverman, Woodcock and others claim flags, ‘hate marches’ and certain slogans should be abolished but it’s arguable they would in truth prefer any voices for Palestine to be obliterated entirely.
Others look down on shouting and disruption.
I am thoroughly grateful for the disruptive protests of the suffragette movement who endured vilification, arrest, police violence and more to force the issue of women’s suffrage; I would be disenfranchised without them. Personally I categorise shouting, challenges, criticism, holding elected persons accountable and disruption under ‘peaceful protest’ even if it causes annoyance.
If you think about the extent to which people are disenfranchised at the moment, with a government that ignores what the public wants, MPs who refuse to meet with constituents and send out generic responses, and an opposition party that is also out of alignment with public opinion on key issues, then you can hardly be surprised at impassioned expressions of anger at what’s going on. Democratic deficits make people angrier and not being heard makes people louder.
Last Thursday one councillor came forward to voice what 66% of the country want (something the Labour Party didn’t do) and she was accused of being stupid, incompetent and aligned with dark forces by others in the chamber. That’s what the video of the meeting shows. Reece Pugh’s comments were unfounded, inflammatory and contained misinformation, but yourself and Cllr Crittenden used what little time there was to make withering comments about Cllr Wing instead of challenging him.
Your comments about councillors’ safety only served to bolster Cllr Pugh’s harmful claims that protesters intimidated the Green Party into putting the motion forward.
I also noted that the Labour amendments removed calls for an arms embargo and for Palestinians held in arbitrary detention to be released from the original motion. The public do notice these things.
I see nothing ‘childish’ in the distress and urgency voiced by protesters when so much is at stake. I do see something unsavoury in putting nitpicking and derision above showing support for an embattled councillor who’s trying to do the right thing. Especially when you say you agree with the need for a ceasefire yourself. Why use what limited time there is to imply protesters are sinisterly putting councillors’ safety at risk, and singling out Cllr Wing?
It seems to me you used your platform to punch down.
If you oppose suppression of protests and support an immediate ceasefire, why put your energies into legitimising the demonisation of protesters that is currently being ramped up and used as a tool to suppress?
There was no need to score points against he councillor bringing the motion.
It creates the impression that you stand more with those who wish to create a diversion or make activists into scapegoats than with those who want to end the carnage.
I hope you won’t mock my grammar or find flaws in my writing, and instead hear what I’m trying to say.
Regards,
Carly Jeffrey
28 Feb 2024
Dear Carly,
I was in two minds about whether to respond to your last email as while there are no doubt a lot of things in today’s society on which we’d agree, there is clearly no way you and I are going to see eye-to-eye on this matter. I do think it’s important to give you my response to some of the points you made – as I think it’s important that you at least understand (if not agree with) my point of view.
On protest:
- I reiterate my position that everyone should have the right to protest and am firmly against the current government’s attempts to curb the right to protest.
- Direct threats do not need to be made for behaviour to be intimidating. Many councillors aren’t used to being shouted at by strangers in an intimate setting and I’m afraid that it is intimidating.
- The behaviour of protestors in the chamber last week didn’t actually make sense. They were disrupting a meeting of a progressive majority council who were clearly going to support a motion calling for a ceasefire. There were always going to be those with dissenting views but they, as much as everyone else, have a right to be heard too given they’re elected representatives.
On the motion:
- The original motion was poorly constructed. If a District Council resolves to do something, then it should be absolutely clear what that resolution is.
- My understanding was that the motion wasn’t only Cllr Wing’s work, but that other Green Party Councillors and members had made contributions. They should have checked that it worked as a motion before submitting it to the Council.
- I want to be absolutely clear here – I criticised the original motion, not Councillor Wing and in no way intended to belittle her on account of any difficulties she’s faced in her life. I don’t know Becky very well but I work closely with the Greens in my role as a Broadstairs Town councillor and I’m sure they would tell you that I am not the sort of person to make personal attacks on a person’s challenges.
Finally – I don’t know your personal political beliefs but I stood as a councillor to show the people of Thanet that progressive councillors can do a better job of running the district and towns. At district level, we’ve just written and signed off an incredibly progressive budget that was wholeheartedly supported by our Green colleagues and at Broadstairs, Cllr Garner worked closely with me to construct a budget that makes huge improvements to our public realm and increases the budget for community grants by 66%.
I hope you continue to follow local developments.
Kind regards
Kristian Bright
5 March 2024
Dear Cllr Bright,
The day after you sent your reply, 127 innocent, hungry Palestinians were slaughtered by the Israeli military while trying to access food from an aid truck. Since then, there have been two more deadly instances of Israeli soldiers firing on civilians awaiting food distribution.
Do you think that maybe your requirement for decorum at all times is out of place in current times?
A Canadian doctor in Gaza has warned that every single person there is being harmed by “the overlapping crises of food, water and housing insecurity.” The death toll is now 30,410, with 71,700 wounded – and no hospitals to care for them.
You say “Direct threats do not need to be made for behaviour to be intimidating. Many councillors aren’t used to being shouted at by strangers in an intimate setting and I’m afraid that it is intimidating.”
The description of the council chamber as an ‘intimate setting’ is something of a stretch, but the real problem with what you’re doing (along with many Labour councillors and MPs) is that it legitimises the likes of Rishi Sunak, Robert Jenrick, and Julia Hartley-Brewer* in their cynical attempts to brand demonstrators as a menacing public enemy to be feared. Polls show that 66% of the public support a ceasefire, and the Tories wish to erode that through fearmongering.
They want to depict indignation at the most heinous injustice of our times as utterly beyond the pale – and you are choosing to be a part of that. Despite your insistence that you support the right to protest, you are helping them by being one of the many liberal voices stretching the usual understanding of what ‘intimidation’ means in politics to include boisterous dissent in a public space in the same category as malicious threats of violence.
Do you not understand the serious consequences of that?
Carly Jeffrey
*The list of public figures working hard to portray Palestinian solidarity protesters as a threat to democracy extends to both main parties in the UK and many in the media. In addition to those mentioned already – Lindsay Hoyle, Lord Ian Austin, John Woodcock (Baron Walney) and James Cleverly, Suella Braverman, Lee Anderson, Nick Timothy, Michael Gove, Paul Sweeney, Siobhain McDonagh, Andrew Percy, Richard Tice, Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves, Carole Malone, Andrew Pierce, Maureen Lipman, Luke Akehurst, Lee Kern, Mike Freer, Douglas Murray, Mike Graham and James Whale.
I’ll end with four quotes that encapsulate my feelings about interactions between the public and politicians of Cllr Bright’s type, and the wider problem of politicians who place ‘reasonable/moderate’ behaviour (or the appearance of it) above justice – particularly justice for those who suffer the most severe forms of oppression.
“Centrists don’t have a lot of positive arguments, they’re not really for anything…the centre has become this set of performative symbols, and at the same time you get to feel morally superior, which is ultimately what liberal centrism is all about.”
– David Graeber.
“The idea that all bias is some deviation from an unbiased center is itself a bias that prevents pundits, journalists, politicians and plenty of others from recognizing some of the most ugly and impactful prejudices and assumptions of our times. I think of this bias, which insists the center is not biased, not afflicted with agendas, prejudices and destructive misperceptions, as status-quo bias. Underlying it is the belief .. that the people in charge should be trusted because power confers legitimacy, and those who want sweeping change are too loud or demanding or unreasonable.”
– Rebecca Solnit.
“The 2024 election will be fought between two knights of the realm and a former investment banker, and will, like in 2010 and 2015, be contested on an ideological terrain the size of a postage stamp.”
– Juliet Jacques.
“I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom..”
– Martin Luther King, Letter from Birmingham Jail.
In Whose Interests? 