Town Hall reporter KEN LEE on a move to bring a more ethical approach to the council’s massive pension fund
World War III: a petition has been launched to stop your council’s money being invested in the arms trade
As global tensions increase over the Russian invasion of Ukraine, with permission being given by the United States for American missiles to be used against targets inside Russia, here in Croydon some councillors are demanding that the local authority stops investing in the companies behind many of the weapons being used in war zones around the world.
Green councillors Ria Patel and Esther Sutton have set up a petition calling for the council to end its investments in the arms trade and those companies supporting or enabling war crimes, human rights atrocities or genocide.
Croydon Council’s pension fund is estimated to be worth at least £1.9billion. The fund doubled in size between 2016 and 2022.
Councillors on the pension committee have in the past voted to divest in all arms companies – but council officials refused to follow through on this democratic decision.
Ethical activists: Croydon’s Green councillors, Esther Sutton (left) and Ria Patel
Patel and Sutton, councillors for Fairfield ward, want the council to adopt an ethical investments policy, stating that the council has obvious moral and ethical obligations.
To trigger a debate at the next meeting of full council in the Town Hall Chamber, the petition requires 2,000 signatures from people who are registered to vote in Croydon, before the end of this week.
The petition states: “Croydon should not be investing public money in companies that support and enable regimes to commit war crimes, human rights atrocities or genocide. Croydon residents have family and community connections to people across the world who are suffering, and our council should not be supporting those abuses.”
Collectively, local authority pension funds have more than £500million invested in the arms trade and more than £4.4billion “in companies complicit in Israel’s oppression of Palestinians”.
The petition states: “Croydon should not be trying to profit from atrocities. The Law Commission of England and Wales has issued guidance clarifying that ‘there are no legal or regulatory barriers to social investment’ and reminded trustees bluntly that ‘it is possible to do well and do good at the same time’.”
The petition cites the genocide being committed against Uyghurs and other groups in Xinjiang, China, as well as “accusations of apartheid genocide by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territories”.
It continues: “The former leader of Croydon Council issued a statement in support of Ukraine following the invasion by Russia and residents have highlighted the ongoing crimes and atrocities being committed in Yemen, West Papua, Western Sahara, Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan.
“This list is not exhaustive but each of them is a clear example of conflicts that Croydon Council should not be making any worse.
“Aside from the immediate impact on local populations, the world’s militaries combined and the industries that provide their equipment, are estimated to create 5% of all global emissions, with little transparency or accountability. Croydon Council’s recognition of the climate emergency is yet another reason to divest from these activities.”
One of the issues surrounding Croydon Council’s pension fund investments is the complete lack of transparency over where this public money is going. Councillors, even members of the council’s pension committee itself, have repeatedly been denied access to investment details by council staff.
The petition calls on the council to “specifically identify and disclose its investment in, or other financial relationship with, companies that support or enable war crimes, human rights atrocities or genocide – including any investments that are likely to include these companies or lead to these activities”.
It also demands that the council should divest in weapons manufacturers and calls for an immediate “freeze any new investment in the top 100 arms-producing and military services companies and any companies complicit in Israel’s genocide and apartheid”.
And it includes a call for Croydon Council to “endorse the global movement for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) of companies and entities that are complicit in the oppression and exploitation of the Palestinian people, as part of this council’s broader commitment to human rights”.
This should involve formal consultations with the trades unions representing council staff, and “explore formal representation of unions in the council’s investment decision processes”.
The use of the London councils’ investment vehicle, with other London boroughs, should also include finding funds to invest in “that align with the ambitions listed above”. The petition calls for a report to full council and the pensions committee twice a year.
To find out more, click here to visit the petition page – where signatories are required to provide their email addresses and postcodes.
- The Garwood Foundation is Inside Croydon’s nominated charity for 2024.
- To find out more about their vitally important work, click here
- To donate, click here
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
As featured on Google News Showcase
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here
Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
- Inside Croydon works together with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, as well as BBC London News and ITV London
ROTTEN BOROUGH AWARDS: In January 2024, Croydon was named among the country’s rottenest boroughs for a SEVENTH successive year in the annual round-up of civic cock-ups in Private Eye magazine
And who will be the arbiter in deciding which companies are to be banned? An appointed ‘Tsar’? or a committee of dedicated keyboard warriors. Much of our GDP is derived fom arms manufature and of course, if we don’t make it, someone else will. Our loss.
Democratically elected councillors, rather than nameless and unaccountable council bureaucrats, as at present
It’s a minefield. Yjat, then will be councillors without ties to food / clothing / consumer elctronics for starters, all of which import from countries with dubious human rights records?
“It’s a minefield.”
That’s sort of the point.
Councillors declare their interests, or are supposed to.
Paid council staff don’t.
The Officer Code of Conduct does require them to declare interests that have potential for conflicts. I used to declare where I had shares in companies I was dealing with ie utilities and Allders during Tramlink. I only had a few but there was no de minimus figure.
And those declarations are scrutinised by whom, David? Where are they available to councillors? Or the public?
You’re all heart.
The UK’s exports of the tools of death and destruction helps Netanyahu’s death squads commit genocide and war crimes in Palestine and Lebanon and aids oppression in countries like Qatar and Turkey. Better some Johnny Foreigner gets banged up or killed than our economy has a teensy weensy wobble, eh?
By the way, in 2022, the UK’s GDP was approximately £2.965 trillion. Arms exports that year, valued at £12 billion, would be about 0.41% of the UK’s GDP.
The “if we don’t make it, someone else will” argument could be used to justify anything, from child porn to crack cocaine. So the answer to your question “who will be the arbiter” is not cynics who value a little bit of money more than human life, freedom and democracy
The phrase “if we don’t, someone else will” can be used to justify anything. The for-profit military industrial complex with exponential technology is leading us to a very dark place and it’s time to look beyond GDP and the infinite growth fantasies of economists, to something that’s more sustainable. I for one am in favour of this move by our Green councillors.
As regards to “explore formal representation of unions in the council’s investment decision processes” there is a union representative on the council’s Pension Committee and two pension member representatives.
Sorry to be a bit dull with this, but as I see it there are a couple of different issues here.
1. Do we and our elected Councilor’s have the right to know how public money is being invested? I think the answer to that is a definite yes. This should include returns on those investments. The only reason not to publish information to us as citizens is if that information is commercially sensitive, national security, not in the public interest, I’m sure there are other reasons, but I don’t think any of them apply to this scenario and that doesn’t mean that councilors shouldn’t have that information.
2. Should we invest in companies that are legal but morally questionable? That’s harder as the priority of an investment fund is to get a good return. IN this case its to ensure that council employees have a secure pension. That can only happen if the investments make money and whatever else you might say about the military industrial complex is that whilst humans remain humans people will want to buy arms and sometimes those arms will be used legitimately and sometimes they won’t. The responsibility for using them illegitimately lies with the user. We could now have a full arms embargo on Israel as we’ve done to Russia. But that doesn’t make all arms sales wrong. So, sorry I won’t be signing this particular petition, but I totally get why others might.
Mind you, I’ll freely admit to being a hypocrite as I don’t buy produce of Israel, but seem to be if not happy than accepting of arms sales in general. Who said life is a series of hypocrisies and living is learning to deal with them? Oh wait, I did, that’s why its rubbish.🤣
The council pension fund falls outside the Mayor’s oversight so this investment policy is not his call.
Instead it is a Committee of councillors plus a trade union rep and two pensioner elected representatives that oversees the Fund. The Committee is chaired by a Labour councillor.