Activists from the Palestine Solidarity Campaign have asked the Berkshire Pension Fund to withdraw its investments from companies it says are linked to human rights violations in Palestine.
The fund administers the pensions for employees of every council in Berkshire.
The activists put their questions to councillors on the fund committee at a meeting on Monday, March 17.
Stella Hughes said she wanted the fund to divest from arms companies such as GE, Safran and BAE Systems.
She said: “Arms companies supplying Israel with weapons and military technology play a key role in enabling Israel’s military assaults on Palestinians.
“Our pension fund continues to invest in arms companies supplying Israel.”
Ms Hughes also called on the fund to divest from companies ‘conducting business activities in or with Israeli settlements in the occupied territory’.
This refers to the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, which Israel occupied in 1967 and where it has since built towns and villages for its citizens.
She noted these settlements are ‘recognised unequivocally as illegal under international law’.
Stella Hughes of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign calls on the Berkshire Pension Fund to divest from companies linked to war crimes (Image: RBWM)
Councillor Zafar Satti, who represents Slough on the committee, agreed with the call.
He said: “What Israel is doing is a clear violation of human rights.”
Apparently referring to an order to Israel by the International Court of Justice to prevent acts of genocide he added: “International Court of Justice also mentioned there is a clear genocide happening in Palestine and it is really a concern for all of us that we should look into that matter.
“If these companies are involved in that why don’t we suggest an alternative?”
Head of the Berkshire Pension Fund, Jo Thistlewood, said a coming review of the fund’s investment policy could include ‘a specific statement on conflict-affected areas’.
But she said the fund’s investments had to be based on ‘financial factors’.
She said: “Trustees must have good reason to think that scheme members would share the concern and the decision should not involve risk of significant financial detriment to the fund.”
She also argued that divesting from ‘companies active in Israel would neither stop the conflict nor address its causes’.
Councillor Julian Tisi said the fund could write to companies asking them if they are supplying Israel and if they are aware that ‘potentially human rights violations are taking place’.
He said: “That might be a simple way forward which doesn’t commit us to somehow resolving these hugely complex questions, but it’s more than just dismissing it.”
Councillor Mark Wilson said the fund shouldn’t make a decision without knowing its members’ views.
He said: “We should be understanding what those 30,000 people want rather than make quite a strong decision on their behalf which may affect their finances as well.”
