Campaign Update 30

28th May 2009

As you are aware, UCU Congress once again debated boycotting Israeli academics yesterday. Please see an update of what happened, below:

What happened?

• UCU Congress yesterday passed a number of motions relating to Israel and boycotts.
• The first few Israel motions (motions 24-27) passed without major debate. These four motions are rhetorically strong but don't have any real policy outcomes.

• Congress explicitly voted to adopt a motion (28A1) affirming support for a boycott - however, this motion was debated in the knowledge that it would be declared null and void.

• They then went on to pass an amended version of Motion 29. Because it was amended, it was not ruled as null and void.
• The amended motion calls on UCU branches to discuss boycotting Israel, and commits the union to organise a pro-boycott conference for other trade unions to attend.

• Separately, the Congress voted against investigating why so many Jewish members have resigned from UCU.
• It also voted not even to discuss the possibility of an all-member ballot on the issue of boycott

What does it mean?

• Although Motion 29 was not declared null and void, this does not mean it is legal.
• In fact, as it contains very similar language to the motions in 2007 and 2008, and explicitly makes UCU run a pro-boycott campaign, the motion is unlawful to implement.
• Sally Hunt, UCU's General Secretary, she said she "formally and personally commended" the debate on boycotting Israel.

• Speaking for Stop the Boycott, Jeremy Newmark and Lorna Fitzsimons said:

"Once again the now annual UCU debate exposes the warped priorities of those who promote an academic boycott of Israel. They claim to fight for democracy, human rights and tolerance yet they constantly contradict these values: They declined to discuss allowing all union members to vote on the boycott. During a debate on antisemitism, UCU congress overwhelmingly refused to investigate the mass resignation of Jewish delegates over recent years. At a time when trade unions should be focusing energy on the impact of the economic crisis on their members, some pro-boycotters declared that they wanted to see the UCU be forced to court to defend an unlawful boycott. It is no wonder that UCU's lawyers took the pre-emptive step of declaring one motion null and void; but we believe another motion is also unlawful. Sally Hunt and the UCU leadership should have learnt after two years of passing boycott motions and then abandoning them once they prove illegal."