Key Facts

• The Bill applies only to public authorities during their public functions.
• Individuals can express personal views on boycotts when not representing the council.
• Clause 4 prohibits statements of intent to boycott.
• Clause 1 sets out considerations for public authority decisions.
• Clause 4 prohibits statements of intent and hypothetical statements by councils.
• The Bill may exempt certain countries based on adaptive foreign policy needs.
• The Bill aims to prevent public bodies from making decisions related to boycotts in the context of foreign policy.
• The speaker asserts that such a measure would not hinder the effectiveness of movements like BDS globally.
• Clause 7(8) allows for information notices to override any obligation of confidence, but the interpretation is discussed as possibly freeing the discloser from liability rather than granting the Government power to extract privileged information.
• Clause 4 restricts public bodies from publishing statements about boycotts and divestments.
• The Henry Jackson Society supports divestment in China regarding Uyghur Muslim treatment.
• Dr Harris cites historical cases like Strathclyde local authority's South African goods divestment as examples of actions that would be prohibited by the bill.
• Rahima Mahmut is the UK director of the World Uyghur Congress and executive director of Stop Uyghur Genocide.
• Since 2016, up to 3 million people are believed to be in concentration camps in Rahima's country.
• The independent UK Uyghur tribunal found evidence of genocide based on forced sterilisation, forced abortion, prevention of future births, and other human rights abuses.
• The Bill aims to prevent public bodies from imposing bans on products and services imported from China based on unethical production chains using Uyghur forced labour.
• Rahima Mahmut expresses concern that the Bill may hinder local authorities' ability to express solidarity with oppressed communities, such as the Uyghurs in China.
• Stephen Cragg KC is a barrister at Doughty Street Chambers specialising in public and human rights law.
• The Bill provides enforcement authorities with powers to issue compliance notices and investigate public bodies.
• There are concerns about judicial and quasi-judicial review remedies involving restrictions on making statements in advance.
• Clause 7(8) is unclear regarding protection for legal professional privilege.
• The Bill aims to have a unified foreign policy for the entire United Kingdom.
• Professor Adam Tomkins supports applying the Bill to all UK public bodies due to community cohesion and foreign policy integrity.
• Professor Andrew Tettenborn uses an analogy comparing the UK's unity in foreign policy with other nations' expectations.
• Professor Tomkins agrees with using the Human Rights Act's template for understanding public institutions.
• The Bill is described as modest compared to anti-BDS legislation in France and several US states.
• Every publicly funded anti-BDS campaign targeted at a foreign power in the UK has been against Israel.
• Clause 4 concerns prohibitions on public bodies making statements about divestment and procurement decisions.
• Professor Tomkins supports clause 4 for political reasons, emphasizing its importance in protecting community cohesion and maintaining the integrity of British foreign policy.
• The speaker believes there is no legal issue with clause 4 as it targets only official capacity speech related to specific decisions.
• Clause 4 of the Bill restricts public bodies from making statements that could contravene section 1.
• Stakeholders have described clause 4 as a 'gagging clause.'
• The Bill requires advance scrutiny for regulations, but exceptions exist in clauses 3(2) and (5).
• Clause 4(1) is unclear regarding the relationship between individuals acting on behalf of public bodies versus in personal capacity.
• The Bill targets two specific areas where public bodies in the UK have engaged in anti-BDS campaigning.
• It does not seek to ban BDS generally or impose neutrality broadly across all foreign policy matters.
• Professor Tomkins argues that the legislation carefully addresses issues related to investment and procurement decisions without impacting the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.
• The session is part of the examination of witness in the context of the Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill.
• Andrew Whitley gave evidence during this session.
• Andrew Whitley is the chair of the Balfour Project, a Scottish registered charity focusing on peace, justice, and equal rights in Israel and Palestine.
• The Bill could prevent ethical procurement or divestment decisions related to moral or political disapproval of countries like Israel.
• Concerns are raised about the conflation of Israel proper with occupied territories such as Gaza and the West Bank.
• Caroline Dinenage is chairing the Public Bill Committee session.
• Mark Beacon is an international officer at Unison representing 1.3 million UK-based public service workers.
• Rozanne Foyer is general secretary of the Scottish Trades Union Congress with over 600,000 members in Scotland.
• The STUC supports BDS as a policy and campaigning method since 2009.
• In 1986, St George’s Place in Glasgow City Centre was renamed Nelson Mandela Place.
• The statement highlights concerns over potential restrictions on local councils' actions if the Bill had been introduced during the anti-apartheid movement era.
• Procurement decisions made by local authorities during the anti-apartheid movement are referenced as a historical example.
• In the UK, public bodies procure up to £380 billion worth of goods and services annually.
• The Bill prevents action on procurement or pension investment if there is potential political or moral disapproval of foreign state policies.
• The session concludes at 4:30 PM.
• Further consideration will be adjourned until Thursday, September 7th, at 11:30 AM.
• UK Lawyers for Israel was among those invited.
• Amnesty International UK was also included in the list of organisations.
• The City of London Corporation and Quakers in Britain are part of the submission list.