UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) has written to the Commissioners overseeing Birmingham City Council, asking them to intervene before resources are committed to implementing a boycott and divestment motion adopted at the Council’s meeting on 3 November.
UKLFI warned that implementing the motion, which was adopted by 54 votes to 19, would require a costly and legally problematic review.
The motion, as amended, commits the Council to ensuring that public money is not received from, paid to, invested in or otherwise used to support any state, company or organisation responsible for, complicit in, facilitating, financing or profiting from genocide, war crimes or other grave violations of international humanitarian law.
It requires an urgent and comprehensive review of all money received and spent, rigorous due diligence procedures and, where legally permissible, the termination of existing relationships.
Birmingham Town Hall – Wikipedia
Why the Commissioners have a role
The Commissioners were appointed by the Conservative Government in October 2023 after the Council’s Chief Financial Officer declared that it was insolvent. The intervention was initially established for five years, giving the Commissioners powers over key areas including governance, financial management and recruitment.
Their responsibilities include scrutinising strategic decisions, promoting good governance and helping secure the Council’s financial sustainability.
UKLFI considers that implementing the motion falls squarely within these responsibilities, since it would have significant consequences for the Council’s finances, strategy and governance.
A worldwide investigation with significant costs
UKLFI points out that the motion is not confined to Israel or the conflict in Gaza. Its wording would require the Council to investigate an extensive range of relationships, including every contractor and subcontractor, global supply chains, banks, asset managers, investments, grants and other income.
For example, the Council would need to examine the worldwide operations of Microsoft, with which it entered into a contract worth up to £16.2 million approved in October 2025. It would also have to investigate the sourcing of copper and cobalt used in its phones, computers and vehicle batteries. It would have to assess which States are responsible for, complicit in, facilitating, financing or profiting from war crimes all round the world, including parties to wars in the Ukraine, Sudan, Yemen and Syria and their backers. It would have to investigate the activities of leading fund managers such as Blackrock and Vanguard.
The Council would further need to reach accurate conclusions on contested allegations of genocide and war crimes. In this regard, UKLFI notes that the Council’s motion relied heavily on “findings” of the UNHRC’s Commission of Inquiry. UKLFI draws attention to a detailed analysis by UKLFI Charitable Trust and UNWatch of the most recent report of that Commission, demonstrating that it is full of allegations for which no sources are cited or which are not supported or are contradicted by cited sources, or which are based on and enlarged from the Commission’s previous, compromised reports, amongst other egregious flaws.
UKLFI warns that the investigations required by the motion would need the commitment of extensive staff time and potentially expensive external advice and research. It could also lead to more expensive procurement, reduced investment returns and costly legal challenges.
The scale of the proposed exercise is particularly concerning given the Council’s financial position. The Commissioners themselves have described its finances as fragile. The Council has sought exceptional financial support of up to £997.4 million, and the Commissioners have referred to the prospect of asset sales of £750 million being needed to meet liabilities and deficits.
Legal restrictions make the whole exercise a waste of time and money
UKLFI’s letter also highlights statutory restrictions on local-authority procurement under section 17 of the Local Government Act 1988 and the provisions of the Procurement Act 2023. It points out that pension investment decisions must comply with fiduciary duties and government investment guidance, while treasury investments must prioritise security, liquidity and yield.
According to UKLFI, these regimes make the exercise required by the amended motion even more problematic, since it is likely to be a complete waste of resources.
Failure to comply with PSED
UKLFI further points out that in passing the motion the Council failed to comply with its Public Sector Equality Duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010, which requires it to have due regard to the need to foster good relations between different ethnic and religious communities. According to UKLFI, this failure was itself poor governance.
UKLFI’s requests to the Commissioners
A Council spokesperson reportedly told the Jewish Chronicle that the motion did not commit the Council to action and was not binding. UKLFI disputes that interpretation, pointing to the motion’s express requirements for an urgent comprehensive review and new due diligence procedures.
UKLFI has asked the Commissioners to confirm that implementation of the motion falls within their remit, to require the Council to prepare and approve a workplan and budget before any substantive work begins, and to consider whether any resources should be allocated to the exercise at all.
UKLFI has requested a response by 25 November 2026.
Jonathan Turner, UKLFI Chief Executive, said:
“Birmingham Council’s limited resources should be used to deal with the serious problems facing the city, rather than carrying out a massive investigation that will be both divisive and a complete waste of time. It is a shame to see a city where I spent a number of years at school in such a mess.”