THE UK Parliament has been sent a formal complaint about the conduct of a debate on pro-Israel lobbying after a petition was repeatedly branded "antisemitic".
Andy Kalil lodged a petition earlier this year calling for an investigation into the scope and sway of pro-Israel lobbying in the UK.
It gathered more than 113,000 signatures and was debated in the Commons earlier this month, but Kalil has now submitted a complaint to the Commons Deputy Speaker, Nusrat Ghani.
In a lengthy letter seen by The National, Kalil said his main concern was the "repeated characterisation of the petition, its signatories, and several MPs who spoke in support of it, as antisemitic".
According to the Hansard transcript of the debate, the word antisemitism was mentioned 35 times during the course of the debate, while the word antisemitic came up 27 times.
Kalil argued this represents "a sustained attack on a genuine and necessary call for transparency and accountability".
He went on to question the decision to appoint both a chair and an opening speaker associated with Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) or Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI).
Carolyn Harris chaired the debate and is a member of LFI while opening speaker John Lamont had a trip to Israel paid for by CFI in February 2025.
Kalil said in his letter: "Given that the petition concerns pro-Israel influence in UK politics, I question the decision to appoint both a chair and an opening speaker associated with Labour Friends of Israel or Conservative Friends of Israel.
"I had previously requested a more neutral opening speaker to avoid any perception of a conflict of interest, but this request was declined."
He went on: "The petition reflects a genuine public concern about pro-Israel lobbying, political influence, transparency and accountability.
"The situation in Gaza and across the wider region has intensified public concern about the UK’s relationship with Israel and the influence of pro-Israel lobbying.
"Against that backdrop, I had hoped these issues would receive fair and substantive consideration. In my opinion, this did not happen."
During the debate, Lamont made a number of attempts to equate Jews in general with people who are pro-Israel.
He said: “We should be collectively clear that allegations of covert Jewish or pro-Israel control of politics are not legitimate political criticism, they are rooted in a tradition of antisemitic conspiracy theory that has caused immense harm throughout history.”
Kalil highlighted that the fifth speaker in the debate, Ayoub Khan, was the first to speak in support of the petition, with him adding it "remains unclear why a number of MPs who had expressed support for the petition did not contribute".
He has asked for the list of interested MPs to be made public "in the interest of transparency", alleging that the majority of the speaking time was allocated to MPs opposing the petition.
Responding for the UK Government after the debate, Cabinet Office minister James Frith said there would not be an inquiry “solely on pro-Israeli influence”.
Kalil added: "The anti-genocide movement in Britain is broad and diverse, encompassing people of many different backgrounds, faiths, and political traditions.
"I do not believe that reality was reflected in the way the debate was framed.
"The Government's decision to reject the petition was unsurprising. However, it means that many of the underlying questions remain unanswered.
"The debate did little to address fundamental questions relating to lobbying, political donations, parliamentary visits, transparency or influence. Instead, it demonstrated why many people believe greater scrutiny is necessary.
"It reinforced my view that transparency and accountability should be applied consistently, regardless of which country, organisation, or interest group is involved. In light of these concerns, I respectfully request that you review whether this debate complied with the standards expected of petition debates."
The UK Parliament has been contacted by The National for comment.
The complaint was sent to Ghani in her role as Chairman of Ways and Means. As well as deputising for the Speaker they have specific responsibilities such as chairing committees of the whole House, coordinating the sittings in Westminster Hall and oversight of all matters connected with private bills.
