The British Medical Association has passed a motion calling for an investigation into the use of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism within the NHS, arguing that it may restrict free expression by healthcare workers.
The BMA's annual representative meeting brings together representatives from the BMA's constituent bodies to debate motions on medical ethics, health, and NHS structure. The NHS is the UK's free medical service.
This year's conference, which began on Monday, featured just one Israel-related motion on Agenda 1 (the motions prioritized for debate), unlike last year's conference, which had five. There are ten anti-Israel motions on Agenda 2.
On Tuesday, the BMA passed Motion 55 in its entirety.
The motion expresses "grave concern" about the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism in the NHS "without proper consultation or risk assessment."
Call upon BMA to investigate IHRA definition's impact, chilling effect on speech
It calls upon the BMA to immediately investigate the impact of IHRA definition adoption on NHS staff, particularly regarding the "chilling effect on legitimate political speech and professional expression of ethical concerns about Israel's actions in Palestine."
It also requires NHS England and all NHS organizations to conduct comprehensive risk assessments before implementing any speech-related policies, ensuring compliance with Article 10 ECHR (freedom of expression) and Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (public authorities must act compatibly with Convention rights).
The motion also - and perhaps most controversially - asks the BMA to provide urgent support to members who face disciplinary action or professional detriment for expressing their views about Palestine/Israel.
It also asks the BMA to lobby the government and NHS England to revoke the mandatory adoption of the IHRA definition across the NHS until "proper safeguards, consultation processes, and clarity on implementation are established" and urges the BMA to work with other healthcare unions and professional bodies to "challenge any attempts to use the IHRA definition to suppress legitimate debate about human rights violations, war crimes, or colonial practices in international conflicts."
The core argument of the motion is essentially that the IHRA definition, as applied in the NHS, may be used to restrict legitimate criticism of Israel and discussion of Palestine, and therefore requires closer scrutiny and stronger protections for free expression.
Opponents of this view typically argue that the IHRA definition is intended to help identify antisemitism and protect Jewish staff and patients from discrimination, rather than suppress legitimate political debate.
Jewish people in NHS experience routine ostracism, antisemitism
This comes less than a month after the publication of the UK government advisor on antisemitism, Lord John Mann's review of antisemitism in the NHS.
As part of the review, Mann heard that Jewish people in the NHS experience “routine ostracism”, with Jewish staff being the only religious group in the latest NHS Staff Survey for whom discrimination from colleagues is rising rather than falling, resulting in some considering leaving the NHS.
He found that antisemitism extends to patients, too, as some Jewish patients reported they did not wish to present for treatment or put off receiving important care.
"It is well-evidenced that racism is persistent in the NHS," Mann said, adding that "the case for taking action to combat antisemitism and other forms of racism in the NHS is clear.