In 2006, a cross-party group of MPs reported on their Inquiry into anti-semitism which I had commissioned. That report featured 35 recommendations for government, parliament and civil society. A great number of those recommendations have been successfully actioned, but one in particular has proven difficult to implement.

The report advised that the Electoral Commission should: “[...] draw[s] up a contract of acceptable behaviour which outlines the duty of all election candidates to exercise due care when addressing issues such as racism, community relations and minorities during political campaigning.”

In the government’s 2007 response to the Inquiry they advised that this matter was one for the Electoral Commission. The commission has advised that codes beyond the reach of the law were unenforceable by them. The issue can therefore only be resolved by a clear code agreed and enforced by the political parties. In other words each political party keeps its own house in order, using a transparent process agreed by all parties.

To that end, I have commissioned a new inquiry into electoral conduct, with a particular focus on discrimination – in all forms, not just anti-semitism. In doing so, I have drawn on the lessons learned from the previous inquiry. We have a respected chair in Natascha Engel MP who leads the backbench business committee. We have a group of distinguished parliamentarians from both houses and we have representation from five of the parties represented in our parliament.

This cross-party approach is key, especially given electoral malpractice is a cross-party blight. One does not have to look very far to find examples of conduct unbecoming of public representatives and their agents.

The 2004 campaign for Bethnal Green and Bow was marred by what was described as anti-semitic campaigning on the part of some campaigners against Oona King, the then Labour candidate.

The Labour party circulated proposed elections posters in 2005 of then Conservative Party leader Michael Howard depicted as a Fagin-like character. Whilst concerns were raised at the time, there remains a vacuum of responsibility for election-time publications. Neither OFCOM nor the PCC have taken responsibility, deferring to the political parties to self-police.

In 2010, ex-MP Andrew Pelling who had the whip removed by the Conservative party after serious allegations were made against him by his ex-wife, had his depression used against him in a briefing widely distributed by local Conservatives.

Then in 2012, the Liberal Democrats issued a leaflet in south-west London describing a ‘straight-fight’ between their party’s candidate and the Conservative candidate also standing for the council who happened to be gay. Stonewall CEO, Ben Summerskill suggested there were “things whispered on doorsteps” in Kingston that would be shocking to many. The ‘straight fight’ or ‘straight choice’ mantra was used during the 1983 Bermondsey by-election in which Simon Hughes faced Peter Tatchell. Hughes has since apologised for what he said were inappropriate leaflets.

Part of the problem in investigating electoral conduct is that it is broadly unquantifiable. High profile cases like those above make the press but many other stories are not publicised – Lee Scott MP for example spoke in a parliamentary debate about a leaflet distributed in his constituency claiming he was an “enemy of Islam” alongside a picture of him in a Jewish head covering. This inquiry is an opportunity to reach a better understanding of the extent of the problem.

The purpose of the inquiry however, is not to drag the parties through the mud, to shut down free speech or to exasperate with tails of misconduct. Rather, we hope to bring to the fore examples of good and replicable practice. Working outside of an election cycle, we would like to see considered thought given to a transparent, workable and enforceable framework on electoral conduct which can be agreed by the political parties. This will give clarity for candidates and agents, for the parties and ultimately confidence to constituents about how concerns will be addressed.

The call for evidence has been issued and details are available at www.antisemitism.org.uk

John Mann MP is the chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism. He tweets @JohnMannMP and the group can be found @APPGAA.

1. To inquire into the culture, practices and malpractices exhibited during election campaigns by electoral candidates and others with a particular focus on discriminatory behaviour.

2. To review whether the current law, regulations, political party and agency measures relating to electoral conduct are appropriate, well-co-ordinated or require amendment and to make recommendations accordingly.

3. To uncover what models of good practice exist for assessing and addressing accusations of discriminatory behaviour during elections.

4. To make recommendations, rooted in best practice where possible, for cross-party frameworks to prevent and address accusations of discriminatory conduct.

Natascha Engel MP, chair of the Backbench Business Committee will chair the inquiry and is joined by 11 other Parliamentarians*.

Whilst it has been commissioned by the Chairman of All-Party Parliamentary Group on Antisemitism, the focus as outlined above, will be broader than antisemitism alone.

The Inquiry is seeking written submissions of no more than 2,000 words from interested parties, before taking oral evidence.  Organisations and individuals wishing to make written submissions are invited to do so by 29 March 2013.  Each submission should include the name and postal address of the individual or organisation and state whether it has been prepared specifically for the Inquiry.  Where submitted by an organisation rather than an individual, the submission should briefly explain the nature and membership of the organisation.  Oral evidence will be taken in Parliament, beginning in May 2013.  A report is expected to be published in the summer.

Submissions should be sent to the Clerk of the Inquiry on dstone@parliament.uk. If possible, please supply an electronic version in MS Word by email. The formal call for papers, which details other methods of submission is available by clicking here, guiding questions for submissions are available here and a press release here.

*The members of the inquiry are: Stuart Andrew MP, Lord John Alderdice, Lord Jeremy Beecham, Angie Bray MP (Vice-Chair), David Burrowes MP, Lilian Greenwood MP, Rt Hon David Lammy MP, Naomi Long MP, Seema Malhotra MP, Andrew Stunell OBE MP, Dr. Eilidh Whiteford MP

For those that missed it, the Society of Black Lawyers Chairman, Peter Herbert, drew fire from Tottenham fans and others by calling for the police to prosecute those holding banners proclaiming loyalty to the ‘Yid Army’ or chanting the phrase during games. Tottenham attempted to differentiate between antisemitic abuse it labelled as “real” such as hissing to simulate the noise of gas chambers, and the chanting of ‘yid’, calling for a determined and concerted effort from all parties to deal with the problem. Meanwhile, they welcomed the police statement that there was ‘no deliberate intent to cause offence’. They, I presume, support the common supposition that the chant is a predominantly Jewish crowd reclaiming the word or perhaps self-parodying.

Sadly, such suppositions are almost certainly false. Given the Jewish population of the UK is about 250,000 it is likely that less than 5 percent of spurs fans are Jewish.  In which case, a majority of non-Jewish fans are likely chanting ‘Yid Army’; presumably unknowing of the provenance of the word or the anti-Semitic abuse it provokes from some opposing team supporters. One could argue the case that Jewish fans could sing the term if they so wished, but it would be impossible to demarcate who could and couldn’t chant ‘Yid Army’ as a self-defining term. Rather stewards should have a policy of zero tolerance and continue to look for and report all abuse – including the Y-Word.

The well known comedian and author David Baddiel together with his brother Ivor, produced a film called ‘the Y-Word’, which our group helped to launch in parliament. It depicts clearly the shocking repercussions of the adoptive Jewish chanting as a platform for outright antisemitism. In discussing the film, Baddiel has suggested that a predominantly white team in Brixton adopting the N-Word as their badge of honour and chanting ‘N***** Army’ would be banned without hesitation. Of course, he is right.  I fear his analysis may also be right, that any culture which has shunned other race-hate words but accepts the Y-word, perceives anti-Jewish racism to be somehow less offensive or significant. 

However, the Spurs chants are not the only ones of concern. David Jones, manager at Sheffield Wednesday, recently had to endure offensive chants from Leeds fans – something he says he has put up with for over a decade. Meanwhile Leeds fans were subjected to taunting chants about the death of two of their fans in Istanbul 12 years ago.

As our group has pointed out, clubs have the power to act. The chants tend to emanate from a hard core who are season ticket holders. The FA should be working with the clubs to construct a strategy for clamping down on the abusive singing.

So too do other football fans, myself included, have a responsibility to speak out. I don’t want to have to cover my children’s ears when I’m at a football match, nor do I want to see this ugly racist chanting being mirrored at Sunday league grass roots games. I want the passion and excitement that football inspires and the lessons about sportsmanship and teamwork to have as wide a reach as possible. Surely, a family friendly game is a game with endless potential.

Football has come a long way in the past 20-30 years. Whilst there has been a recent spate of racist incidents, they have been followed with serious inquiries which will hopefully lead to resultant action. The kind of crass racist abuse of black players that emanated from the terraces in the 1980s has been met with countervailing forces, all be it not totally eliminated. I believe we need a renewed effort to face down aggressive and abusive chanting of all kinds.

Spurs fans defiantly sang ‘we’ll sing whatever we want’ in response to the Society of Black Lawyers criticisms, surely it’s for the FA to stand up and sing back in full voice, ‘No!, you won’t’.

John Mann MP

In recent weeks, the situation in football grounds around the country has spiralled out of control. David Jones had to endure offensive chants from Leeds fans throughout the derby with his club, Sheffield Wednesday – something he says he has put up with for over a decade. In turn, Leeds fans were subject to taunting chants about the death of two of their fans in Istanbul 12 years ago. Mann wrote to the FA a fortnight ago calling for action but is yet to receive a reply.

The All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism has for some time been working on issues around racism and intolerance in football, helping to launch the film ‘the Y-Word’ which addressed the chanting of ‘yid’ by football fans.

Piara Power, executive director of Football Against Racism in Europe defended the spurs fans chanting the ‘Y-word’ but Mann says Powers organisation should be fighting for zero tolerance too.

Spurs attempted to differentiate between ‘real’ antisemitic abuse such as hissing to simulate the noise of gas chambers and the chanting of ‘yid’, calling for a determined and concerted effort from all parties to deal with the problem. Mann’s view is that the responsibility lies with both Spurs and the FA:

“Clubs have the power to act. The chants come from a hard core who in the main are season ticket holders. Its time the FA got a grip and designed a strategy to address this problem including the removal of season tickets from abusive fans”.

Having long taken an interest in issues relating to racism and football, John Mann MP together with PCAA Foundation Director Danny Stone compiled a submission to the DCMS Select Committee for their special session on racism in football. The APPG submission is on the committee website here. However, the full unedited submission can be downloaded here with appendices available on request by emailing mail@antisemitism.org.uk The committees report is available here

Now that the dust has long since settled from the Euro 2012 championships it is perhaps a chance to review the successes and failures of the tournament, not on the field but rather in terms of tackling the incidents of racism and antisemitism which I had been forecasting for many months.

Many will have seen my warnings in the run up to the games, or the fears of violence documented by the BBC Panorama team in their ‘Stadiums of hate’ programme which included Hitler salutes, monkey-noises, violent attacks on south-asian fans and the admission by Sol Campbell that his family would be avoiding the tournament altogether.

First, it is worth congratulating the English FA. Despite my early concerns, they proved to be well organised and communicative about their plans. They liaised with the appropriate experts and many will have seen the successful visit they undertook with England players to Aushwitz with the Holocaust Educational Trust. It is to their credit that educational materials will be produced so that the impact of that day on the players might be used to inspire children to stand up against antisemitism and other forms of racism.

Our FA’s behaviour might be a credit to English football in this case, but it clearly was not an inspiration for some foreign teams and their players. A quick online search reveals a plethora of horrifying incidents which should have UEFA and FIFA worried indeed.

There was the inter-national violence I had specifically predicted, between Russian and Polish fans who clashed during an authorised march by the fans to mark a national day of liberation. At least 120 people were arrested and 10 people were injured. This could have been avoided had the authorities been properly prepared.

Perhaps the most high profile incident of racism took place in Krakow during the Netherlands training session. Dutch captain Mark Van Bommel was outraged by monkey chants directed at black players forcing the team to move their training. Quite incredibly the Dutch FA laid the blame on dispossessed Krakow fans, leading Van Bommel to criticise his own FA for ignoring the problem. UEFA, initially slow to react did at least put out a public statement, all be it mealy mouthed and non-committal.

That was sadly not the only time racial abuse was levelled at black players. Within days, monkey chants had been directed by Russians at the Czech Republic’s sole black player, Theodor Gebre Selassie and at Italy’s Balotelli by Spanish and Croatian fans. The Russian Football Union and the Croatian FA were charged by UEFA for the racist chanting and after several days the Royal Spanish Football Federation was also fined.

Again, such behaviour was sadly all too predictable. The anti-racism efforts of UEFA were woefully underfunded, the warnings unheeded and the fines ultimately insufficient. UEFA President Platini placed ultimate trust and authority in the referees, dismissed specific examples of racism in Ukraine and Poland as part of a general rise in racism and went on to threaten bookings for any player that walked off the pitch should they find themselves the victim of racist abuse. This threat was later downplayed by both the Premier League referees and Football Against Racism in Europe (FARE) highlighting a shocking lack of co-ordination in the approach to tackling discrimination.

My visits to Poland, Ukraine and UEFA headquarters proved only that no-one was prepared to listen. The most I got from UEFA, despite giving them precise warning about particular teams, games and off-field trouble was a plastic bag and a t-shirt.

UEFA can no longer pass the buck. The fines should be increased and teams should be banned from playing if their fans are consistently racially abusive. I am seeking a meeting with Brazilian, Qatari and FIFA officials to try and ensure they do not fall down where UEFA have. This problem is not going away. To tackle it needs serious planning and action. Unless football’s governing bodies urgently review their procedures the beautiful game will continue to be ugly.

CST, a charity which monitors antisemitism and provides security for the Jewish community in Britain, recorded 299 antisemitic incidents across the country in the first half of 2012, compared to 294 during the first six months of 2011. A further 214 reports of potential incidents were received by CST, but were not deemed to be antisemitic and are not included in this total.

Greater London saw a 48% rise in recorded antisemitic incidents, from 100 during the first half of 2011 to 148 this year. This rise occurred due to increased reporting to CST via a new incident exchange programme between CST and the Metropolitan Police Service, whereby the two agencies swap incident data that has been fully anonymised to comply with data protection requirements.
In Greater Manchester, where CST and Greater Manchester Police have successfully operated an incident exchange programme since the beginning of 2011, the number of antisemitic incidents recorded by CST fell by 38%, from 125 in the first six months of 2011 to 78 in the first half of 2012. This may reflect a genuine fall in the number of incidents, as there has been no apparent change to incident recording patterns or services during that period.

CST has recorded antisemitic incidents in the UK since 1984.

Concerns about the conduct of candidates to election featured both in the 2006 All-Party Antisemitism Inquiry report and in the last House of Commons debate on antisemitism.

Details will follow shortly, meanwhile pictures of the reception can be viewed below.

123►

On Tuesday, a BBC Panorama documentary highlighted racism and antisemitism on the football terraces of both Poland and Ukraine, the two host countries of the Euro 2012 tournament.

John Mann MP, as chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism, visited Poland, Ukraine and the UEFA headquarters months ago to raise his concerns. Having identified specifically some of the teams and matches covered in the programme John Mann is renewing his call for action.

He said: “UEFA’s approach has been lacklustre, they are hiding away, eternally passing the buck to other organisations and institutions who pass it on again.”  

Mann continued: “We have been highlighting in private, in explicit detail for over a year, our concerns about antisemitism and racism in Polish and Ukranian football and I am disappointed that the FA, The Football Minister Hugh Robertson and UEFA have failed to act on our recommendations which have been sitting on their tables for at least 6 months”.

Mann has renewed his call for the FA to establish an anti-racist team to be taken to Poland and Ukraine to engage with local communities and respond on a positive agenda to any problems that arise as part of a wider anti-racism strategy.

ENGLAND, 1946. Rationing, bombsites, the war over, fascism overcome. Or nearly overcome. The images of the Nazi death camps in Europe are still fresh in everyone’s mind, but a resurgence of support for Oswald Mosley’s Blackshirts has brought terror back to the streets and groups of British fascists roam the capital.

Gradually men rise up to confront them. Jews back from the war, young radicals and demobbed English blokes determined to tackle in their streets the evil they had spent six years fighting. Armed with fists, coshes and the occasional knuckle-duster, they depend above all on their spirit as a group and their bravery as individuals. And one of the bravest of them all, certainly one of the toughest, is a teenage hairdresser’s apprentice called Vidal Sassoon.

It is one of the most unlikely bits of fashion trivia anyone could imagine. Vidal Sassoon, the man who invented modern hairdressing, gave us the Five Point Cut, the Asymmetric Bob and Mia Farrow’s £2,500 haircut for Rosemary’s Baby, was a street-fighting man.

Never Again

“When I came back to London after the evacuation I was 17,” he recalls. “I wanted to be a footballer but my mother insisted I get a profession. We lived on the fourth floor of a Petticoat Lane tenement building, where the smell of bagels wafted up from the bakery downstairs. The Lane was a maze of colourful humanity, people cared for one another and showed a kindness that knew no barriers of race. But then that popinjay Mosley was released from prison, where he had spent most of the war. And our lives were to change for the worse.

“Suddenly, there were fascists preaching hate on every corner,” says the cool pensioner, his voice tightening a little with anger that seems undimmed by the passage of time. “These rabble-rousers were the same Nazi sympathisers who had spent the war years in prison and were now starting up where they had left off.

“Their speeches and their literature depicted us, the Jews, as coarse, ugly caricatures with long beards and dirty finger-nails, dressed in black gabardine. And they hurled the same abuse that I remembered from the 1930s, when I was too young to do anything about it.

“I don’t remember exactly when we decided to fight back, but the pictures we were seeing from Auschwitz and Buchenwald and Dachau changed the shape of our rage.”

And so it was that the fresh-faced cockney (the measured, mid-Atlantic tones of the modern Vidal are the product of elocution lessons taken in the 1950s) signed up with the 43 Group, a crudely armed paramilitary force which began as 43 Jewish ex-servicemen and which by its peak was to number more than 1,000 Jews and gentiles, men and women.

“We had turned the cheek for the last time,” says Sassoon, “and as a 17-year-old recruit, I was proud to be involved. The men were mostly ex-servicemen. They didn’t want anything but peace, but it was disgusting that having just fought a war against Nazism, home-grown fascists were allowed to start reorganising.

A boy among hardened fighting men, Sassoon was to become one of the toughest and keenest of all the informal soldiers.

Many former 43ers remember Vidal well and his solid reputation of standing firm when the fists started flying. “To think what a big deal hairdresser he would become,” said one of the veterans. “You would never have guessed to see him there, deep in the fray.”

Arrested

Inevitably the police arrested hundreds of people during the five years of organised violence and on at least one occasion the young Sassoon found himself in jail. “I’ve lost count of the number of actions I was involved in,” he smiles, “but I do remember the night we were told to go up to Kilburn [in northwest London], to break up a fascist meeting. There was a real punch-up.

We chased the Blackshirts into a pub, but we were ourselves being chased by the police. They arrested us on the spot, threw us in the back of the van and started calling us filthy foreign Jew bastards. They beat the hell out of my old friend Big Mo Levy and threw us in a cell for the night.”

At every turn, his modesty will not allow him to describe his double life as anything out of the ordinary for the time and place. “I took a few knocks, but we did physical damage to them, too. That’s what happens when there is hate.” But to show up for work, in a ladies hairdresser’s salon of all places, battered and bruised from a night’s fighting, must have been a surreal position for a young man to find himself in.

“Well yes,” he says gently, “I had to have a sense of humour. There was one occasion one morning after a particularly nasty tear-up, I went to work at the salon in Mayfair with a badly scratched face and this refined client looked at me and said, ‘Good God, Vidal, you look terrible. What happened to you?’ “Nothing much, I said. I just fell over a hairpin.