UK (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Conservative peer Archie Hamilton criticized for antisemitic remarks in House of Lords, suggesting the Jewish community fund the Holocaust memorial in London.
During a discussion in the House of Lords, a Tory peer has been accused of making antisemitic comments, stating that Jewish people should cover the cost of a proposed Holocaust memorial in London.
What did Archie Hamilton say about the Holocaust memorial funding?
Archie Hamilton, an ex-minister under Margaret Thatcher and John Major, and appointed as a peer in 2005, faced criticism after a speech regarding the proposed Holocaust memorial and education centre planned for Victoria Tower Gardens near Parliament.
Mr Hamilton, who resides near the proposed site, expressed concern that the park was too small for such a project as a memorial and criticised the government’s decision to allocate taxpayer money, given the limited resources.
He stated,
“The Jewish community in Britain has an awful lot of money. It has a lot of education charities that would contribute towards this. I do not understand why they should not pay for their own memorial.”
What did Ian Austin say about the Holocaust memorial and how did Hamilton respond?
Ian Austin, a former Labour MP who is now a crossbench peer, pointed out that the memorial was meant for everyone, not solely for the Jewish community.
Mr Hamilton responded,
“I take that point, but the driving forces behind putting up this memorial are the Jewish people in this country. They are people who have property everywhere. I do not see why they should not fund it.”
He added,
“I have a significant amount of Jewish heritage and am a member of the Conservative Friends of Israel.”
Mr Austin condemned Hamilton’s remarks as “completely unacceptable” and urged the Conservative Party to take action.
He stated,
“How many antisemitic caricatures is it possible to get in one speech? It is shocking to hear comments like this in a debate about the Holocaust. It shows that antisemitism remains a real problem – even in parliament – but it does show why a memorial that focuses on anti-Jewish racism is still necessary.”
Danny Stone’s views on Lord Hamilton’s remarks on Holocaust memorial
Danny Stone, CEO of the Antisemitism Policy Trust, criticised Lord Hamilton’s remarks as “ill-judged, racist, and false,” pointing out that they showed a lack of knowledge regarding the Jewish community and the significance of the Holocaust memorial.
He added,
“It is shocking that his slur was not challenged by those leading the debate. We will be working with parliamentarians to ensure this appalling rhetoric does not remain unchallenged.”
Ruth Deech call for fiscal discipline in the Holocaust memorial project
The proposed site for the Holocaust memorial and education centre was approved after a public inquiry in 2021, 8 years following its initial announcement by David Cameron’s administration.
Many Jewish groups backed the decision, but some opposed it, stating that using the small green space for the memorial was a mistake. Among those opposing it was Ruth Deech, a crossbench peer, whose father escaped the Nazis.
During the same Lords debate as Hamilton, Ms Deech expressed a desire to introduce “fiscal discipline” in a project she argued could now exceed £190m.
What did the Guardian’s analysis reveal about peers accepting payments from lobbyists?
A total of 91 House of Lords members have received payments from commercial firms to provide political or policy advice, raising concerns over inadequate regulation.
An analysis by the Guardian reveals that more than 10% of peers have accepted payments from businesses, including lobbyists and firms in banking, defence, and energy sectors, with some earning tens of thousands of pounds yearly.
Here is the list of some peers who have taken on consultancy roles:
- David Blunkett (Labour)
- Andrew Lansley (Conservative)
- Natalie Evans (Conservative)
- John Woodcock (Crossbencher)