Labour councils told to end agreements with Greens who do not condemn ‘Zionism is racism’ policy

Labour councils working with Green politicians must review their local arrangements. They must ask Green groups to reject the national policy and urge Green leaders to reconsider it. The issue matters because Labour says public-office holders should uphold shared standards on antisemitism.

Bridget Phillipson said Labour would end any local arrangement if Green groups could not provide that assurance. Andy Burnham had already ruled out a Labour partnership with the Greens, calling the policy antisemitic. The policy rejects Zionism and supports replacing Israel with one Palestinian state.

The demand affects more than Labour-led councils. The article lists agreements involving Labour, Liberal Democrat, Green, independent and mixed local groups. Southwark Greens have already disowned the policy to preserve a coalition with the Liberal Democrats. Green councillors are unlikely to face automatic discipline because the party is highly decentralised.

Zionism is defined in the article as the movement for a Jewish state. The Green party’s binding policy says Zionism is racism. It also rejects a two-state solution and calls for Israel to be replaced by one Palestinian state with equal rights for all. That makes the policy a major statement about Israel and Palestine.

The wording triggered political opposition because Andy Burnham called it antisemitic. Bridget Phillipson said Labour had a responsibility to uphold standards against antisemitism in its relationships with other parties. The Green party’s spokesperson rejected that interpretation and said criticism of Israel should not be conflated with antisemitism.

The controversy also reached Green members. Jewish Greens’ chair called for Zack Polanski to resign. An amendment protecting members linked to Jewish institutions that support Zionism was rejected. Four of the Greens’ five MPs opposed the policy, while the European Green group expressed dismay.

The article lists 15 named councils or local-government agreements that could be affected, followed by an incomplete entry beginning with “S”. The arrangements show that the issue reaches well beyond Labour-led councils. They include coalitions, a minority-led administration and a confidence-and-supply agreement.

Six listed arrangements are Liberal Democrat-led: Derbyshire Dales, Broadland, Arun, West Oxfordshire, West Sussex and North Somerset. Four involve Labour leadership: West Suffolk, Havant, Monmouthshire and Coventry. Lewes and Wealden are Green-led. Rother is led by a local independent group, West Devon by independents, and Runnymede has Liberal Democrats, Greens and local independents.

These arrangements could be reviewed if Green groups cannot reject the national policy. The article does not say that every agreement will end. Southwark Greens have already disowned the policy to maintain a coalition with the Liberal Democrats, showing that local groups can respond differently.

Labour’s proposed consequence is clear: a local arrangement with Green politicians should end if the Green group cannot reject the national “Zionism is racism” policy. The demand is framed as a standards issue, not simply a dispute over party politics. Labour says people holding public office should share certain values.

Bridget Phillipson said local Green groups would be asked to reject the position and call on their national leadership to reconsider it. Labour would then end arrangements where the group could not provide that assurance. This mechanism applies to local partnerships, including coalitions and other forms of cooperation listed in the article.

The outcome is not automatic across every council. The article says local groups are being asked to respond urgently. Southwark Greens have already disowned the policy to keep a Liberal Democrat coalition. Green councillors are also unlikely to face party discipline merely for condemning it.

The Green party’s structure gives local politicians room to disagree with national policy. The article describes it as highly decentralised and says it has no whipping system. That means councillors are not automatically required to follow a single national voting line in the way Labour is demanding from its local partners.

Several Green MPs and former leader Caroline Lucas have already opposed the motion. Southwark Greens have gone further by disowning it, because they want to maintain a coalition with the Liberal Democrats. These examples show that local or parliamentary Green representatives can take a different position from the conference vote.

However, the policy has still caused concern inside the party. An amendment protecting members linked to Zionist Jewish institutions was rejected. Jewish members worried about possible disciplinary action, though Salma Yaqoob said nobody would be removed or disciplined for expressing belief in Zionism. The article says such discipline is unlikely.

The Green policy rejects a two-state solution. It calls for Israel to be replaced by a single Palestinian state with equal rights for all. In that model, Israelis and Palestinians would live within one state rather than having two separate national states. The article presents this as part of the same policy equating Zionism with racism.

A two-state solution takes a different approach. It seeks separate Israeli and Palestinian states, generally with arrangements for coexistence and security. The article specifically says the group representing European Green parties supports a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, placing it at odds with the new Green policy.

That disagreement helps explain the controversy. Four of the Greens’ five MPs opposed the policy, and the European Green group expressed dismay. Labour has said it will not support partnerships with a party holding the newly adopted position, while local Green groups must decide whether to reject it.

Local councils can be run through different cooperation agreements. In a coalition, parties share executive responsibility and jointly administer the council. A minority-led administration governs without holding more than half the seats, so it must seek support from others. A confidence-and-supply agreement is narrower: another party supports the administration on confidence votes and budgets without fully joining it.

The article’s list shows all three forms. Lewes and Wealden are Green-led coalitions. Monmouthshire is a Labour minority-led coalition. Coventry has a Labour-led confidence-and-supply agreement with the Greens. Other councils have Liberal Democrat-led, independent-led or mixed coalitions involving Green councillors.

Labour’s instruction could therefore affect arrangements in different ways. Ending a coalition could remove shared executive control. Ending confidence and supply could threaten a Labour administration’s ability to pass budgets or survive key votes. The article does not say which agreements will definitely end.