by Sheila Taylor.
This year’s Salter Lecture is definitely taking place! Controversy arose because QSS invited Jeremy Corbyn to be one of our two speakers, and those responsible for Yearly Meeting felt this would cause ‘reputational damage’ to Quakers. After much debate, we were given two options: either to go ahead in Friends House without Jeremy Corbyn, or to organise the lecture elsewhere. We chose the latter option and have made arrangements as follows:
The 2024 Salter Lecture
‘War and Peace: the peaceful resolution of conflict’
Speakers: Paul Ingram and Jeremy Corbyn
Monday, 29 July at 7pm
Hamilton House, Mabledon Place, London WC1H 9BD
Hamilton House is just a few minutes walk from Friends House, within easy reach of Yearly Meeting. However, the hall only has space for 200 people, and we want to give QSS members priority to attend in person. So we are sending the booking link to members first. We will then advertise it here and elsewhere, so others can book to attend in online.
Sheila Taylor (Salter Lecture Organiser)
Paul Ingram & Jeremy Corbyn
Quaker Socialist Society 
I am astonished at the decision to give way to government pressure and “uninvite” Jeremy Corbyn. No less a figure than Carol Cadwalladr commented at last year’s Byline Times Conference at Dartington that Britain had witnessed the dismissal of a potential party lleader after trial by newspaper. I am not sure now what “Speak truth to power” means, or if in a Quaker context it means anything at all.
As the occasion on 29 July will be highly popular, is there any chance of adapting it to be a Zoom presentation as well as live? I would rather be present, but if this is not possible it would be good to hear and see the presentation and questions.
Roger Iredale, Long Sutton Locall Meeting.
LikeLike
Thanks, Roger. It will be shown on You-tube. See the adverts.
LikeLike
Reading the reports in The Friends and the minutes of various meetings, I do not think it was ‘reputational damage’ that caused the request to re-think inviting Jeremy Corbin to speak during Yearly Meeting, but rather a careful weighing up of all the ramifications. I doubt that many Friends disagree with much of what Corbin has to say, and most would respect his stance on war and peace.
Staff at Local Meetings round the country have to cope with the dilemma of whether to allow certain groups to book their premises, when those groups are involved in polarised arguments. This is an ongoing balancing act that the management at Friends House have to perform. There is a whole system of assessing who is applying to book facilities, and at what level of management the booking can be approved.
Trustees have the ultimate legal responsibility for the safety of staff, and for anyone that comes into the building. I understand that staff warned BYM Trustees that, with perhaps 1,000 Friends from all round the country and overseas attending, and needing staff attention, there was a risk in inviting a speaker who has, rightly or wrongly, been the subject of press over-excitement and mob hysteria. The responsibility to keep staff and us visitors safe at this most pressured of events was, I believe, the reason for asking that the booking be reconsidered.
If reputational damage had been the first consideration, the risk of the advice being perceived as ‘not platforming’ Jeremy Corbin would have meant Trustees and management would not have asked for this reconsideration. They know that many people want to hear what Corbin has to say. They also know that most people do not want to put the staff under intolerable strain.
This won’t have been an easy decision to make, condemned if you do, condemned if you don’t. I am confident that there was careful discernment. I am sad to see Quakers indulge in conspiracy theories about ‘them’ – Trustees and staff at Friends House – ‘they’ are us.
Frances Voelcker, Bangor Local Meeting, North Wales Area Meeting.
LikeLike
Thanks for the query, Frances. The facts are that ‘reputational damage’ was the main objection given by the management team. They were particularly concerned about association with ‘perceived’ anti-semitism. Secondly, they did not “rethink” an invitation because they never invited Jeremy in the first place. It was QSS (an independent recognised group) that invited him. Thirdly, the Salter Lecture is not “during” YM but “at the same time” as YM, either at the beginning or the end. It’s not like Swarthmore, which is part of YM. The suggestion that there is any threat to the safety of staff is absurd, as you must know. Jeremy speaks all over London all the time, including at Conway Hall and Westminster Hall. As for ‘them’ and ‘us’, all organisations have tension between staff and management, and Quakers are no different. Consider the closure of Meeting Houses. Not long ago there was a strike at Friends House itself.
LikeLike