Andrew Dismore

Transport for London has refused to admit today that the contract they signed with Emirates for sponsorship of the cable car allows the boycotting of Israeli companies in the operation or monitoring of the performance of the cable car.

TfL’s Head of the Emirates Air Line has said: “It is to be expected that a sponsorship contract would include a clause to ensure that an organisation cannot simply introduce someone else that cuts across the commercial interests of a main sponsor.” And that: “This is standard practice..”

Labour London Assembly Member Andrew Dismore said:

 

“TfL clearly have not read their own contract.

“Clause 1 .1 – the interpretation clause – defines “conflicting person” in terms which clearly apply to Israeli based companies, businesses, and nationals.

“Clause 16.4 prevents DLRL from not just assigning its rights (i.e. disposing of the cable car) under the contract, but also from transferring or otherwise disposing of its obligations under the contract.

“Clause 6 sets out the obligations of DLRL, which include operational obligations (clause 6.3), obligations to maintain detailed records of its performance, and the performance regime itself is set out in detail at clause 6.4(a).

“It is clear that if TfL wished to bring an Israeli company into the operation or monitoring of the performance of the cable car, it would be in breach of this contract.

“It is clear the contract is aimed at boycotting Israeli businesses. If it is not, why do they have these terms in the contract at all?

“It is fatuous of TfL to suggest that it is to exclude an organisation “that cuts across the commercial interests of a main sponsor” and that “this is standard practice”.

“If that were the case, the “conflicting person” definition would be set out in terms of commercial conflicting interests, not in terms of diplomatic interests by referring to countries with which the UAE does not maintain diplomatic relations.

“This cannot by any stretch be seen as normal standard business practice.

“TfL must renegotiate this discriminatory contract now.”

 

Notes

1. Andrew Dismore is the London Assembly Member for Barnet and Camden.
2. Attached is the relevant part of the contract with the sections highlighted.
3. 3.    Below is the full statement from Transport for London. TfL’s Head of the Emirates Air Line, said:

“It is factually incorrect to suggest that the contract we have with Emirates constrains TfL from entering any contracts with any other body or organisation of our choosing.

“It is to be expected that a sponsorship contract would include a clause to ensure that an organisation cannot simply introduce someone else that cuts across the commercial interests of a main sponsor.

“This is standard practice and simply means that, if we were to sell the Emirates Air Line to someone else, then Emirates would have the option to withdraw their sponsorship. Moreover, we have no plans to sell the Emirates Air Line.

“Nothing in the contract prevents the expression of opinion about the scheme. We would always expect our spokespeople to base their statements upon facts, and would therefore be able to offer whatever assessment of the scheme we saw fit.”