I want to list some of the things that are curious about Goldsmiths, University of London's antisemitism inquiry.
1. How was it decided that we needed one?
2. Why was it decided that out of all possible racisms and forms of discrimination to have inquiries about, why was it decided that it was antisemitism that needed an inquiry?
3. Did anyone in management suggest that we needed inquiry or was it someone or some people on the staff who made the suggestion?
5. Who drew up the terms of reference?
6. Some inquiries publish interim findings and clarifications, why isn't this happening?
7. The inquiry has called on people to come forward and report antisemitism. Fair enough. But if you're Jewish and you haven't experienced antisemitism, how is that being taken into account? Is there a list of Jews who are not complaining of antisemitism?
8. So far, the inquiry hasn't produced a definition of antisemitism, ie the one that they will be using in order to detect the thing they're investigating. Wouldn't this be useful for those of us who are Jewish in order to assess whether what we experience is the kind of antisemitism that the inquiry is investigating?
9. By last May (2024) the inquiry had cost £128,000. Why isn't there any indication what this money is being spent on?
10. Why can't the KC give some kind of indication as to when the inquiry might conclude?
11. It's possible that some people (eg me) have experienced what they deem to be antisemitism coming from a member (or members) of staff but in off-campus situations. Would that be relevant?
