Conservatives accuse Birmingham’s ruling coalition of disgraceful political grandstanding after councillors celebrate plans to investigate withdrawing investments linked to Israel.
BIRMINGHAM City Council has been accused of abandoning its priorities after councillors voted to investigate cutting financial ties with Israel, despite the city continuing to struggle with the consequences of financial collapse, soaring council tax bills and a prolonged bin strike.
In extraordinary scenes this week, councillors cheered and chanted “Free Palestine” after voting by 54 to 19 in favour of a proposal that could eventually see public money withdrawn from investments connected to Israel.
The decision has provoked furious criticism from Conservatives, who question why politicians responsible for running Britain’s second-largest city are spending their time debating Middle Eastern affairs when residents are still struggling with basic council services.
The motion was introduced by independent councillors Nosheen Khalid and Jamil Khan, whose Better Birmingham group forms part of the coalition governing the authority alongside the Green Party and Liberal Democrats.
But what exactly have Birmingham’s councillors voted for?
In practical terms, the council has agreed to investigate whether it should stop doing business with certain companies connected to Israel, reconsider its banking relationships and seek the withdrawal of investments from businesses considered to be implicated in human rights abuses.
The proposals also involve examining investments held within the West Midlands Pension Fund, which manages approximately £21 billion on behalf of more than 300,000 public sector pension scheme members.
That means the review could involve investments connected to the retirement savings of council employees and other public sector workers across the West Midlands.
Birmingham cannot simply order the entire pension fund to sell investments. The fund is governed by its own legal responsibilities and investment arrangements, and the council must seek cooperation from other participating authorities.
Nevertheless, councillors have backed a six-month examination of options that could ultimately include excluding companies from investment portfolios or selling existing holdings.
The vote does not itself withdraw any money from Israel-linked investments, nor does it establish that any particular companies will be excluded.
However, critics argue that the very decision to pursue such a politically charged exercise demonstrates how badly the ruling coalition has lost sight of its responsibilities.
A city struggling to deliver basic services
The controversy comes against the backdrop of Birmingham’s disastrous financial record.
In 2023, the council effectively declared bankruptcy after being overwhelmed by equal pay liabilities and serious problems associated with a failed IT system.
The financial crisis resulted in government intervention, sweeping spending cuts and council tax increases of 10 per cent in two consecutive years.
For ordinary households, this meant paying substantially more for local services at precisely the time those services were coming under increasing pressure.
Meanwhile, the city has endured a lengthy dispute involving refuse collectors, with industrial action beginning in March 2025 and continuing into November 2026.
Residents have faced disrupted collections and rubbish accumulating in their streets.
Yet, instead of celebrating progress on fixing the city’s finances or resolving its waste collection problems, councillors were filmed cheering a political motion concerning Israel.
Conservatives say the contrast could hardly be more damning.
Katie Lam, the Conservative shadow communities secretary, told The Telegraph: “The fact that Birmingham city council is focused on the Middle East, rather than on dealing with the city’s actual problems, is a complete disgrace.
“This is Europe’s largest council. In just the past few years, people in Birmingham have suffered nearly two years of bin strikes, and watched their council go bankrupt.
“Yet, in an effort to stoke up group-based grievances, the Greens and their Lib Dem enablers are spending their time grandstanding about foreign affairs.”
She added: “This brand of obsessive sectarianism is poisonous for our democracy and is a complete insult to taxpayers in Birmingham, who just want the roads fixed and the bins collected.”
Conservative shadow justice secretary Nick Timothy was equally scathing.
Reacting to footage of the council chamber, he wrote: “Is this Ramallah? Gaza City?
“No, it’s Birmingham. Where bins go uncollected, more than a quarter of the adult population is economically inactive, and the benefits bill is higher than anywhere else in the country.
“I will never tire in fighting this disgusting sectarianism.”
Birmingham Conservative group leader Robert Alden also criticised the motion, arguing that the council should be concentrating on reliable rubbish collections, housing, vulnerable residents and restoring financial stability.
Concerns over pension money and legality
The plans have also raised serious questions about whether a local authority can use public contracts, banking arrangements and pension investments to advance a political campaign against another country.
UK Lawyers for Israel warned councillors before the vote that existing legislation places restrictions on politically motivated procurement boycotts.
The organisation also highlighted the legal obligations governing public sector pension funds, whose investment decisions must take account of the financial interests of members and beneficiaries.
A spokesperson said: “Birmingham City Council cannot lawfully use public contracts, pension funds and banking arrangements to pursue political campaigns.”
The legal objections do not mean that every possible change to the council’s investment arrangements would be unlawful. However, any decision to exclude companies or dispose of investments would need to comply with the applicable legislation and pension fund duties.
Conservatives have argued that pension investments should be managed responsibly for the benefit of scheme members, not used as instruments for ideological campaigns.
Fresh controversy over Green Party’s stance on Israel
The vote has also intensified questions about the Liberal Democrats’ willingness to continue governing alongside the Green Party.
The Greens have faced widespread criticism after adopting a controversial policy defining Zionism as racism.
Zionism broadly refers to support for Jewish national self-determination and the existence of Israel as a Jewish homeland.
The policy has been condemned by Jewish organisations and politicians who argue that it unfairly targets Jewish national identity and risks encouraging antisemitism.
Despite the controversy, Birmingham Liberal Democrat leader Roger Harmer has maintained his party’s coalition with the Greens, although he has publicly disagreed with their position.
The arrangement has placed further pressure on Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey, whose party has refused to abandon local power-sharing agreements with the Greens.
The Liberal Democrats insist they condemn the Green Party’s position and are working to restore services in Birmingham.
A party spokesman said: “We utterly condemn the Green Party’s ‘Zionism is racism’ motion and Ed Davey has ruled out entering into a national partnership with any party that is committed to such a dangerous and antisemitic policy.”
However, Conservatives argue that condemning the policy while continuing to govern alongside its supporters raises serious questions about the Liberal Democrats’ priorities.
Jewish groups condemn decision
The Campaign Against Antisemitism described Birmingham’s decision as “morally reprehensible” and warned that singling out Israel could further damage relations between communities.
The organisation argued that the council should be concentrating on protecting Jewish residents rather than pursuing measures that could contribute to hostility towards them.
The Jewish Leadership Council also criticised the move, warning that the message received by Jewish residents could be that the authority was more concerned with the conflict overseas than with their security and local concerns.
Supporters of the motion maintain that public bodies should examine where their money is invested and avoid financial relationships that could contribute to human rights abuses.
Councillor Khalid defended the principle behind the proposals, declaring: “Where money goes, responsibility follows”.
However, the council’s opponents question why Israel has become such a prominent focus when Birmingham faces so many urgent challenges of its own.
Birmingham residents deserve better, say Conservatives
The latest controversy adds to growing criticism of a council that has struggled to recover public confidence following years of financial and operational failures.
Birmingham’s 1.3 million residents rely on the authority for services including rubbish collections, social care, housing and maintaining local infrastructure.
Conservatives argue that these responsibilities should take precedence over attempts to influence international affairs.
The dispute is not simply about whether councillors are entitled to express opinions on the conflict in Gaza. It concerns whether a financially troubled local authority should devote its resources and political attention to investigating sanctions and investment restrictions targeting a foreign country.
For Birmingham residents who have endured higher taxes, service reductions and months of rubbish collection disruption, the question of priorities is particularly pressing.
The council’s ruling coalition has defended the principle of examining investments on ethical grounds.
But Conservatives contend that Birmingham’s leaders would better serve taxpayers by addressing the problems they have the power and responsibility to fix.
And with councillors celebrating their vote on Israel while the city’s domestic difficulties remain unresolved, the Conservatives’ accusation of political grandstanding is unlikely to disappear any time soon.
Express politics – Leaked EU plot orders UK to surrender on three huge red lines ‘absolute brexit betrayal’