A response to the Jewish Chronicle

This is a guest post by Andrew Gilbert, Deputy for UJIA. He writes here in a personal capacity. Follow him on twitter @AndrewGilbert1

Last week’s Jewish Chronicle contained mainly unfair criticism of the Board of Deputies. I would like to correct some points here.

1. When someone leaves a senior communal post, it is a poor moment to publicly attack them. If you have nothing nice to say then say nothing. If you have anything nice to say, it is a good time to say it.
2. Clearly the leadership of the Board needs to and is making new appointments and strengthening the professional team – let us wait and support them.
3. I was a founding member of the JLC in 2003. I wish that Henry Grunwald had managed to push it then but it was his honorary officers that made it so difficult to create normal relations from the outset.
4. The Board could have chosen to fund and support the work of the London Jewish Forum (LJF) but they failed to do this. However, Vivian Wineman as President has worked hard to improve relationships and now in addition to the leadership of the Board taking part in trustee calls and in the steering committee of the LJF, a trustee of the LJF is elected to and attends the executive of the Board of Deputies.
5. On Shechita UK and Milah UK the Board remains a key player. It is hard to represent the needs of all parts of the community, but the current team seem excited to represent the whole community, not just the needs of a part of the community.
6. It is true that the Board underpays its staff, but this is not the fault of the current team who are addressing this.
7. It is 16 years since the constitutional amendments to which the article refers. At that time Divisions were made smaller and the Vice Presidents were elected to chair these divisions. It is not the fault of the current leadership and they are considering constitutional amendments.
8. The author harks back to a time prior to this triennial where the same speakers dominated the floor. It is a breath of fresh air to have more speakers just speaking for 2 minutes.  There are actually now close to 300 Deputies, so limiting speeches to 2 minutes and one intervention per meeting per Deputy allows more participation. If any Deputy wishes to question or scrutinise in writing, there is no limit to their interventions.
9. When considering the democracy of the Board, one should also consider the relationship between constituencies and their Deputies. Is it democratic that after electing their Deputies, constituencies should have no mandate, no control and no right of recall except to re-elect once every three years? Is this democratic? Surely if a Deputy is supposed to represent, then he or she must represent. Maybe Deputies need to be current leaders from constituencies. Should Deputies even be members of the boards of constituencies?
10. Why not have a maximum length of term that a Deputy can represent a single constituency?
11. When the JLC was set up, it had a clause that it should be chaired by the President of the Board which was later amended to say “[it] should normally be chaired by the President of the Board”. This clause was to avoid giving the Chair of the JLC to someone the JLC felt unsuitable.
12. The Board has rarely, if ever, been the community’s most important or only channel to government. It has been marginalised by the good and the great. Even when Moses Montefiore was president, others had direct relationships to government. However, the Board should never stop trying to represent the community effectively however often it is undermined or fails – and it should always represent ALL the needs of the community not just those connected to the good and the great.
13. Another quote requiring clarification is that “the Board needs to sort out and refashion its relationship with the JLC”. The current honorary officers are trying to do this. It was impossible in previous triennials as the Board’s leadership was not united on this matter.
14. When Mick Davis came to the Board and was attacked, the attack was not stopped.
15. In the whole history of the Board of Deputies, how many of the hundreds of honorary officers have been members of Reform synagogues? Unbelievably, only THREE! In previous times, Reform leaders chose to go directly to government or to work through the Anglo-Jewish Association. In the 1970s and 1980s Reform and Liberal chose to work through the Board and in the early 1990s – at last – the first two officers from Reform backgrounds were elected. However between 2000-2012 there were no Reform honorary officers. There has only ever been one Liberal honorary officer. Can the Board expect to represent or talk for the 20% of Reform Jews and 10% of Liberal Jews who make up our community if it is only led by Jews from the United Synagogue?
16. Another unwritten rule of fair play in communal organisations is not to publicly criticise one’s successors. Once your period of office is over, one should act to your successors as you would want your predecessors to have acted towards you.

***

Please click here to see our note to editors. For more independent thought on the Board of Deputies, check out our ‘Featured Posts’ column on the right of this page.

A challenge to Changing the Board

This is a guest post by Laura Marks, Senior Vice President of the Board of Deputies. Follow her on twitter @Laura_E_Marks

The headlines of your recent report, as Richard says, are “good news” and I too applaud the wider demographic now represented at the Board. As a new, female Deputy, under 60(!) I am doing my bit to widen our representation. This goes further with our Divisions now having a broader range of deputies bringing different perspectives and skills.

However, surely this is just stage one? It’s all well and good to have a more representative range of Deputies but this has to be the start of a trend to really improve our representation. And secondly, and more immediately, we need to consider what these Deputies are actually doing for the next two years.

The Deputy’s job is to understand how our constituencies are affected by matters facing their community, to engage with current and long-term issues, to act as a catalyst to action locally, to challenge the executive and to be heard.

Without this, the value of having a wider demographic range is somewhat limited.

Let me start with representation. How many Deputies campaigned in their constituencies last year? How many studied the issues and then ensured they were elected with real backing? How representative are we if we don’t have the considered support of our constituents? Our mandate comes through the depth of our representation – which I suggest, in some cases, could be improved.

Secondly, participation. There are some notable examples of where new deputies have stepped right up to the plate. Gabriel Webber’s blog shows how he is trying to engage with international issues, Sam Alston volunteered to be on the Oxfam Oversight group which is ongoing and challenging.

Several new deputies have been elected to divisions (on the Community Issues Division I am lucky to have Ilana Fenster, Georgina Bye and Rachel Elf) and of course, many others (including older new Deputies) have taken roles.

But there is a long way to go.

If our new Deputies (or established ones for that matter) are to he heard then they need to actively engage – working in their constituencies, speaking up at the plenary, helping decide where we want the Board to go. Just having a seat isn’t enough.

The Board of Deputies’ Women’s group (BoDWG) asked me to put together a list of the 17 Working Groups active within the Board, some new and still developing. These include social action, Closer to Israel, Heritage (cemeteries), fundraising, supporting educational projects and, crucially, political engagement.

Most groups require more enthusiastic, hard working members. We need Deputies to step up, supporting the vital work of the Board and, therefore, the community. It is only through engagement via our Deputies, that we can move forwards.

So my challenge to Change the Board is this. Changing the Board through a wider demographic is, for now done and dusted. The real tachlis is awaiting – get involved and take responsibility. Just let me know what you want to do and let’s get moving.

***

Please click here to see our note to editors

Changing the World Jewish Congress

This is a guest post by Gabriel Webber, Deputy for the Union of Jewish Students. Follow him on twitter @gabrielquotes

I’m glad I was able to laugh at the 14th Plenary Assembly of the World Jewish Congress… otherwise I’d have cried.

I spent three days listening to old men reciting a litany of woes, saying how terrible and dangerous and wearing and life-threatening it is to be Jewish in Europe these days.

Our opening dinner was entitled: ‘Celebrating Jewish Communal Life Around the World’, yet not one speaker – not one – did so. Not a single word was spoken about Jewish life flourishing, about new schools or shuls or community centres. Everybody was so busy wallowing in how awful it is to be Jewish that they forgot why we’re Jewish in the first place.

A lot of the delegates, it seems, are not active members of the community because they find our religion spiritually uplifting or culturally satisfying. No, sadly I get the impression that many of them remain Jews simply to spite imagined ‘enemies’ in the wider world.

The Congress is so far removed from actual, ordinary Jewish people. I have many criticisms of the Board of Deputies, but at least our Honorary Officers are always accessible and willing to listen.

The President of the WJC, on the other hand, is a multibillionaire who didn’t talk, sit or eat with any of us common delegates. At one point I accidentally walked within 3m of him in a corridor, and was physically pushed back by one of his bodyguards.

Most Jews have never heard of the WJC, and while it claims for itself the right to speak for global Jewry, it does nothing of the sort.

It provides some glitz and glamour for the media, five-star hotels and police motorcades, and it shows the world that the Jews are powerful and prepared to defend ourselves.

But is this really the image we want to project?

I hope not. Let’s work together over the next four years to ensure that in 2017, the average age of WJC delegates will be closer to 40 than 80. Let’s make sure that plural viewpoints are well-represented, on Israel, the settlements, Progressive Judaism – al the debates that characterise our community.

A smidgeon of proper democracy wouldn’t hurt either, but that’s not as important as doing a good job. So let’s have lots of voices crying out for positivity: schools, children, the future – anything but the endless, soul-destroying wallowing in self-pity that marked this year’s plenary.

The elderly Republican Party billionaires won’t be around forever. We have a chance to ensure that world Jewry’s representative body changes alongside world Jewry, not decades after as usual.

***

Please click here to see our note to editors.

***

Read more: More young people and more women as the revolution marches on

More young people, more women, as the revolution marches on

Changing the Board has been granted access to the demographic breakdown of the new set of Deputies at the Board. Our boffins have been crunching the statistics and have produced a new set of infographics to highlight the current lay of the land and analyse what has changed in the new triennium. (‘Triennium’ is the three-year term for which each Deputy is elected). Key headlines:

• More women: the current triennium boasts 28 more women, a rise of 44%
• More new Deputies: 95 of the current Deputies are taking their seat for the first time
• Younger Deputies: the number of Deputies under 40 has more than doubled
• Fewer ‘career Deputies’: the number of long-standing Deputies falls

The headlines are good news and we extend our congratulations to everyone involved in Changing the Board and all our supporters. However, as our infographics show, the statistics only tell part of the story and there is much work still to be done.

1. Gender

As the infographic shows, nearly one in three Deputies are now women, up from one in four in the last triennium. However, with more women than men in the Jewish community, if the Board of Deputies is to be truly the community’s representative organisation, we must get the figure up to 50% as soon as possible. The Board is missing out on swathes of talent and new approaches and must work alongside Women in Jewish Leadership to understand why women choose not to stand, and what can be done to facilitate their candidacy, such as investigating childcare for those who require it.

2. More new Deputies

Following increased interest in the Board, 95 Deputies were elected to the Board for the first time. This is good for the Board, as to be successful, it needs a good blend of wisdom and experience together with energy and fresh ideas. As the infographic shows, 28 more women joined the Board too.

3. Age demographic

The Board now has a slightly younger feel with the average age falling by two years, from 61 in the last triennium to 59. As we reported last year, 63% of Deputies were over 60; that figure has now dropped to 60%. Last time only 7% of Deputies were under 40; that figure has more than doubled to 15%.

4. Length of service

The inforgraphic shows a much more desirable result this triennium. The Board has suffered from too many Deputies refusing to stand down and let others lead. Over 20% of Deputies in 2009-2012 were in their fifth triennium, i.e. had been a Deputy for 13 years or longer. We now have a huge influx of new Deputies, driving down the average number of years served. The Board will be at its strongest with a good mix of experience and fresh ideas.

Commenting on the report, Richard Verber, Changing the Board representative on the Board of Deputies’ Executive, said: “Changing the Board is pleased at the progress these results show. Well done to everyone involved with Changing the Board and our supporters. There is much to celebrate – a large increase in younger Deputies, more women Deputies, more new Deputies – though women and young people are still under-represented on the Executive. Greater representation also needs to lead to action: plenary meeting reforms, reforms to the work of the four Divisions, and widespread self-reflection on the whole purpose of the Board of Deputies and what it does. Changing the Board will continue to influence and generate these debates.”

Please click here to see our note to editors. Please do use these statistics, but credit Changing the Board whether in print or online. For a quote or more information, email us at changingtheboard@gmail.com

Why I support Changing the Board

This is a guest post by Stephen Hoffman, Campaigns Officer at the Zionist Federation. He writes here in a personal capacity. Follow him on Twitter @thehoff102

Whilst the Board of Deputies (BOD) does some fantastic work, it is not reaching its full potential. One of the main reasons for this is that the BOD does not give enough voice to young Jews from across the UK. Indeed at time it appears like a closed shop to young Jewish and politically active people, like myself.

It is crucial for this to change and I believe thanks to the work of Changing the Board, which is seeking to give young people a voice in the BOD there have been significant improvements, though there is a still a long way to go. The work of Changing the Board must continue and as someone who wants to stop young Jews feeling disenfranchised in the UK, I am proud to support it.

If we do not get young people involved in the BOD, there is the danger of it being seen and acting as an old boys’ club, who in its actions, statements and research ignore the voices of many Jews. As an organisation that seeks to be the official representative of UK Jewry, that’s unacceptable.

Thankfully, already through Changing the Board encouraging more people to become Deputies, we have seen some overdue changes. For instance, to make the Board more accountable to UK Jews they purport to serve, live-streaming of Deputies meetings has been introduced. Through this a much larger audience can see what takes place at Board meetings. It has also led to a rise in the BOD’s social media profile.

This helps lift the veil of secrecy from the Board of Deputies, making it much more transparent. Consequently, more young Jewish people will hear and see about the BOD and from this it will become more representative of young Jewish adults. This will hopefully have the knock-on effect of more young Deputies and young adults in senior positions in the BOD.

Even here there is room for improvement. Currently, some Deputies have refused to have their faces shown in live-streaming. This needs to change for live-streaming to realise its full potential and for the BOD to be more accountable.

I know in the near future Changing the Board has more plans to play a major role in radically reforming the BOD, so it can represent all its members regardless of age, gender or levels of religious observance. If it succeeds, we will have an organisation that truly represents UK Jewry. Surely that is something we can all support; I certainly do.

***

Please click here to see our note to editors.

Changing the Board is one year old!

Happy birthday and congratulations to everyone who has got us this far.

Today Changing the Board celebrates its one year anniversary.

But we can’t rest on our laurels. It’s time to say well done on what we’ve achieved – more Deputies, more younger Deputies, more women Deputies, 25% of seats won on the Division elections and solid contributions being made on every Division, representation on the Constitution Committee, live-streaming in Plenary meetings, more engagement with social media and representation on the Executive. Not bad for 12 months.

But it’s also time to take stock and say, so what? What will be our strategy and priorities for the next 12 months? And how can we keep everybody engaged and interested?

You’ll be hearing more from us in the coming weeks. Join the conversation.

Find us on twitter @changetheboard, on Facebook and on email: changingtheboard@gmail.com

Can we move out from under the shadow of the Shoah?

This is a guest post by Neville Sassienie, Deputy for the Movement for Reform Judaism and chair of the Board’s Social Action Group

I am so excited by the posts on the Changing the Board website. The need to broaden the definition of what concerns us as a community and the need to operate effectively in the spaces where decisions are made, are two of the myriads of ideas to be found there. (Can we not post these also on the Board website?)

There is no doubt that the Board has begun to move in the last few years. The under-35 Observers, the working group to increase women involvement, Changing the Board itself with representation on the Executive, the strategic review by the Executive and the organisation review by the Finance and Organisation Division are some examples.

I will add the Grow Tatzmiach Oxfam project which was lead by BoDSA (the Board’s Social Action Group) which I Chair. The debate at the Board’s plenary meeting has been widely commended but I think its significance goes beyond that. The project is outward-looking, involves partnering with another non-Jewish agency with whom we do not always agree, involves training (for Deputies) and core Jewish values.

Let’s not beat about the bush, it was about the 925 million people (one in eight of the world’s population) who go to bed hungry each night. It was also (I believe) the first time that the perceived threat to Israel, which I believe is linked to memories of the Shoah, was not decisive in the debate of an adjacent issue.

I am humbled by the freshness, depth and variety of the ideas coming from Changing the Board. I realise it is due to the youth and professionalism of its members. It has shed new light on the deficiencies in the operation of the plenary meetings and the Divisions. The age profile of the Board (of which being in my 80s I am a prime example) is a major obstacle to future change. Historically we are largely comprised of Deputies who have already given long and valuable service to their communities. We experienced two of the most monumental events of Jewish history – the Shoah and the foundation of the State of Israel. It is not surprising that while they are both absolutely central concerns, linking these emotionally often affects, and I think narrows, our priorities for communal concerns.

Clearly we should extend the under-35 representation and give full rights. Can we find ways to make membership more appealing to them (and older people)? Plenaries have not been good value for leisure time. Enlarging the involvement of Deputies in the actual work of the Board is being promoted by Laura Marks in her Division. Training in ‘community organising’ would open new skills and fill a gap in synagogues.

We also need better ways to identify specialist skills to link them to the work of the Divisions and working groups. We should embrace those which are offered by the Jewish Leadership Council and working more closely, see whether these could be extended to a resource of specialists and professionals who could be called on to work with Deputies on particular projects.

I have left to the last our main resource – the staff. Should they not have time allocated to participate more prominently at revamped plenaries lead by our Chief Executive?