The General Election of December 12, 2019, stands as a defining moment in contemporary British political history, not only for its decisive reshaping of the parliamentary landscape but for the unprecedented role played by non-state actors in the electoral discourse. Among the most significant interventions was the op-ed published by Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis in The Times on November 25, 2019, titled “A new poison – sanctioned from the top”.1 In this text, the spiritual leader of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth questioned the “moral compass” of the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn, suggesting that the “soul of the nation” was at stake.2
While public discourse largely framed this intervention as a solitary “cry of pain” from a beleaguered religious community 3, a forensic examination of the institutional, professional, and communications networks surrounding the Office of the Chief Rabbi (OCR) reveals a far more complex reality. This report posits that the intervention was the output of a sophisticated, highly professionalized network of influence that integrated religious authority with commercial public relations expertise, political lobbying infrastructure, and strategic communications consultancies.
This research report provides an exhaustive network analysis of the 2019 intervention. It dissects the operational nodes—specifically the Office of the Chief Rabbi, the Jewish Leadership Council (JLC), and the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA)—and the connective tissue provided by communications professionals, including “The PR Office,” Portland Communications, and figures associated with the Crosby Textor strategy. Furthermore, it analyzes the theological instrumentalities deployed to translate this political strategy into pulpit messaging, specifically examining the redefinition of “Zionism” and the guidance issued to the rabbinate.
The analysis proceeds through a detailed mapping of the “human infrastructure” behind the intervention, challenging the notion of a spontaneous religious outcry in favor of a model of coordinated strategic communications. By tracing the movement of personnel, the sharing of service providers, and the synchronization of messaging across distinct organizational entities, this report illuminates the mechanics of a modern political-theological campaign.
To fully appreciate the significance of the network mobilization in 2019, one must situate the OCR’s intervention within the broader political turbulence of the period. The 2019 election was dominated by two overarching narratives: the resolution of the Brexit deadlock and the fitness of Jeremy Corbyn for high office.4 The latter narrative was heavily shaped by allegations of antisemitism within the Labour Party, a crisis that had escalated steadily since Corbyn’s election as leader in 2015.1
By November 2019, the relationship between the official institutions of the British Jewish community and the Labour Party had reached a “nadir”.2 Previous interventions, such as the “Enough is Enough” demonstration in Parliament Square in 2018, had signaled the willingness of communal bodies like the Board of Deputies (BoD) and the JLC to engage in direct political protest. However, the Chief Rabbinate had historically maintained a stance of cautious neutrality, adhering to the convention that the Chief Rabbi stays “well away from party politics”.1
The decision to break this convention required a robust support structure. The “anxiety” described by Mirvis—”What will become of Jews and Judaism in Britain if the Labour Party forms the next government?” 5—was not merely a sentiment but a strategic narrative line reinforced by a network of supporting organizations. This narrative posited the election not as a choice between policy platforms, but as a referendum on British morality itself.2
The intervention was timed with precision. Published on the eve of the Labour Party’s launch of its race and faith manifesto, the op-ed effectively neutralized Labour’s attempt to present itself as the champion of minority rights.6 This synchronization suggests a high degree of political intelligence and media planning, capabilities that extend beyond the traditional remit of a religious office. This points to the presence of professional political operatives within the decision-making loop of the OCR.
The central node of this analysis is the Office of the Chief Rabbi. In 2019, the OCR was not operating as a sequestered ecclesiastical court but as a modern executive office with specialized departments for communications, external affairs, and community excellence.
Under the tenure of Ephraim Mirvis, the OCR underwent a significant professionalization. The key figure in this transformation, particularly regarding the 2019 intervention, was Mark Frazer, the Director of Communications.7
Mark Frazer’s background is pivotal to understanding the OCR’s capability to execute a high-stakes media intervention. Frazer joined the OCR in 2015, having previously worked as a senior figure at The PR Office, a leading commercial public relations agency.8 This transition from a top-tier PR firm to the Chief Rabbi’s office represents a critical importation of commercial crisis management skills into the religious sphere.
Frazer’s profile is multifaceted. He is not only a communications professional but also an ordained rabbi (ordained by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel) and a chaplain in the US Air Force Reserve.9 This combination of theological literacy, military-grade organizational discipline, and commercial PR experience made him a uniquely effective operator. He was described in profiles as the gatekeeper, the man “shooting the boss a ‘we’re going to be late’ stare,” indicating his central role in managing the Chief Rabbi’s public movements and messaging discipline.10
Frazer’s role extended beyond press relations to “Community Excellence,” where he lectured on “Marketing community in the Digital Age”.11 This suggests that the OCR viewed its relationship with the public and its congregants through the lens of modern marketing and strategic communications—a perspective that would have informed the “moral compass” campaign.
Supporting Frazer was a team recruited from the professional Jewish communal sector. Ari Jesner, the Chief Executive of the OCR, oversaw the operational strategy.8 Dan Bacall (Director of External Affairs) and Michelle Bauernfreund (Director of Community Affairs) were recruited from Mitzvah Day and Langdon, respectively, reinforcing the OCR’s connectivity with the broader ecosystem of Jewish charities and NGOs.8 This recruitment strategy ensured that the OCR was staffed by individuals with deep preexisting networks across the community, facilitating the rapid dissemination of messaging during the election crisis.
The hiring of Frazer and the restructuring of the communications function signaled a shift from reactive pastoral care to proactive reputation management and advocacy. In previous eras, a Chief Rabbi might have relied on informal advice or a small circle of scholars. By 2019, Mirvis commanded a communications unit capable of competing in the fast-paced 24-hour news cycle. This capability was essential for the “moral compass” op-ed, which required careful placement, embargo management, and the coordination of supporting statements to ensure maximum impact.
The network analysis identifies The PR Office (TPRO) as the most significant external commercial node connected to the 2019 intervention. This agency serves as a bridge between the religious authority of the OCR, the political lobbying of the JLC, and the activism of the CAA.
The founder and Chairman of The PR Office is Shimon Cohen.12 Cohen’s relationship with the Chief Rabbinate is foundational and deeply entrenched. He served as the Executive Director of the Office of the Chief Rabbi under Lord Jakobovits and as Private Secretary to the Chief Rabbi for ten years.12
Cohen’s influence is best understood through his own analysis of the power dynamics within the OCR. In an interview, he recounted advice given to him: “When retires, you will be the most important person in the office… because the successor will need you desperately”.13 This institutional memory and deep personal connection allowed Cohen to maintain an unparalleled informal influence over the OCR under Mirvis, acting as a strategic anchor outside the formal hierarchy.
The PR Office functions as a central hub where various strands of the anti-Corbyn campaign converged.
During the critical period leading up to and including the 2019 election, The PR Office was the registered public relations agency for the Jewish Leadership Council (JLC).14 The JLC was one of the primary antagonists of the Labour leadership, organizing protests and lobbying MPs. By utilizing the same PR agency that was historically and personally linked to the Chief Rabbi, the JLC and OCR effectively shared a communications brain. This explains the tight synchronization of their narratives—where the JLC provided the political “muscle” and the OCR provided the moral “spirit,” both guided by the same strategic communications ethos.
The network analysis also uncovers a direct link between The PR Office/OCR nexus and the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), a grassroots group known for its litigious and confrontational approach. Snippet 15 reveals that Shimon Cohen acted as an intermediary between Chief Rabbi Mirvis and the CAA leadership (Gideon Falter). Specifically, Cohen wrote to the CAA to convey the Chief Rabbi’s message that he was “extremely impressed” with their documentary Target Jews and wanted to “re-affirm [his] continued support.”
This evidence is crucial. It demonstrates that while the OCR publicly maintained a dignified distance from the more aggressive tactics of the CAA, there was an active back-channel of validation facilitated by Shimon Cohen. This allowed the OCR to benefit from the atmosphere of crisis generated by the CAA’s activities while maintaining the veneer of rabbinical transcendence necessary for the “moral compass” intervention to carry weight.
The PR Office also facilitated a revolving door of personnel that tightened the network. Philip Rosenberg, the Director of Public Affairs at the Board of Deputies (BoD)—who played a “leading role” in the community’s response to antisemitism in the Labour Party 16—left the Board to join The PR Office as an Associate Director. This movement of high-level personnel creates a closed loop of influence: from the representative body (BoD) to the commercial agency (TPRO) that services the political arm (JLC) and advises the spiritual arm (OCR). This insular network ensured that the “moral compass” message was developed and amplified within an echo chamber of like-minded professionals.
Beyond the specific Jewish communal PR ecosystem, the 2019 intervention sat within a broader web of Conservative-aligned political consultancies. The analysis identifies key linkages to Portland Communications and inferential links to the Crosby Textor sphere of influence.
Portland Communications is a major strategic communications consultancy with deep ties to the “Blairite” wing of the Labour Party and the Conservative establishment. The network analysis reveals a structural integration between Portland and the Jewish Leadership Council during the 2019 cycle.
The primary human bridge in this sector is Lord O’Shaughnessy (James O’Shaughnessy). In 2019, Lord O’Shaughnessy held two simultaneous positions that are highly relevant to this analysis:
This dual mandate placed a senior figure from one of the UK’s most influential political consultancies directly at the helm of the Jewish community’s primary political lobbying organization. O’Shaughnessy, a former Director of Policy for Prime Minister David Cameron, embodies the fusion of high-level Conservative Party strategy and communal advocacy.
Portland Communications was deeply involved in the media battles surrounding the Labour Party. Kevin McKeever, a partner at Portland, was a vocal critic of Corbyn and was accused by Labour supporters of “plotting” against the leadership.22 Furthermore, Lara Newman, listed as a Senior Consultant for Portland in 2020, appears in parliamentary registers, reinforcing the firm’s embeddedness in the Westminster-communal nexus.23
While there is no evidence in the snippets of a direct contract between the Office of the Chief Rabbi and Portland, the structural linkage via the JLC (of which Mirvis is a constitutional member) is undeniable. The JLC, advised by figures like O’Shaughnessy, provided the strategic political context in which the Chief Rabbi’s “moral” intervention was deployed.
The role of Crosby Textor (CTF Partners), led by Lynton Crosby, is less direct but contextually vital. Crosby, known as the “Wizard of Oz,” masterminded Boris Johnson’s 2019 campaign, which focused heavily on “wedge issues” to fragment the Labour vote.24
The analysis suggests a convergence of strategy rather than a formal contract. Former Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks and Ephraim Mirvis moved in circles that overlapped with Crosby’s associates. For instance, Sacks promoted the work of Douglas Murray, a figure aligned with the cultural conservatism often utilized in Crosby’s strategies.26
The 2019 Conservative campaign weaponized the antisemitism accusation as a primary wedge issue. Mirvis’s op-ed functioned perfectly within this strategic framework, providing the “moral” validation for a political attack line. The alignment between the Tory campaign’s messaging (“Corbyn is unfit”) and the Chief Rabbi’s messaging (“complicit in prejudice”) suggests a synergy that, if not explicitly coordinated by Crosby Textor, was certainly welcomed and amplified by their machine. The presence of figures like O’Shaughnessy (former Cameron aide) in the JLC leadership ensured that communal strategy was fluent in the language of Conservative political operations.
A unique feature of the 2019 intervention was the use of theological concepts to transmit political instructions. Since direct partisan campaigning is prohibited for charities, the OCR and United Synagogue utilized “dog whistle” strategies and doctrinal redefinitions to guide the faithful.
To make a vote for Labour “incompatible with British values” and Jewish identity, the OCR had to establish that anti-Zionism—Corbyn’s lifelong political stance—was synonymous with antisemitism. This required a theological maneuver: the elevation of Zionism from a political ideology to a religious tenet.
Chief Rabbi Mirvis provided the doctrinal foundation for this in various statements and guidance documents. He explicitly defined Zionism as an integral article of Jewish faith:
“Zionism is a belief in the right to Jewish self-determination in a land that has been at the centre of the Jewish world for more than 3,000 years. One can no more separate it from Judaism than separate the City of London from Great Britain.” 27
This definition was pivotal. By asserting that Zionism is as inextricable from Judaism as the City of London is from Great Britain, Mirvis effectively argued that any political critique of Zionism was a theological attack on Judaism itself. This definition was disseminated through OCR channels and interfaith glossaries 27, framing the political debate over Israel/Palestine as a matter of religious freedom and safety for British Jews.
The United Synagogue (US) and OCR issued specific guidance to rabbis on how to navigate the election without violating charity law.
Instead of instructing congregants who to vote for, rabbis were encouraged to discuss the anxiety of the community. The “moral compass” op-ed itself was a form of guidance, providing the approved language (“poison,” “sanctioned from the top”) for rabbis to use in their sermons.1
A key mechanism was the call for a “Day of Prayer.” The Chief Rabbi encouraged communities to recite specific Psalms—Psalm 91, 121, and 130—to help the community “stand in solidarity” and deal with the “anxiety” of the times.29 In the context of the election campaign, this was a powerful signal. It framed the potential election of a Labour government not as a political event but as a calamity requiring divine intervention and protection. The “Daf Hashavua” (weekly newsletter) reinforced this message, keeping the “threat” of the election at the forefront of the religious experience.29
Another rhetorical device identified in the snippets is the “canary in the coal mine” metaphor.30 This phrase was used by community defenders and echoed in the House of Lords to describe the Jewish experience under Corbyn. It argued that the “poison” of antisemitism in Labour was a harbinger of broader societal collapse. This universalized the threat, making the rejection of Corbyn a moral duty not just for Jews, but for all British citizens—a point explicitly made in the closing paragraph of the Mirvis op-ed (“the very soul of our nation is at stake”).
The focus on Zionism in the pulpit was supported by educational initiatives. Snippet 33 details the distribution of “The Zionist Ideas: A Guide for Synagogue Educators,” encouraging “Zionist Salons” and conversations about “What Zionism means to me.” While this guide (authored by Gil Troy) is a broader educational tool, its promotion during this period reinforced the OCR’s strategy of centering Zionism in the communal consciousness, thereby sharpening the contrast with Labour’s anti-Zionist platform.
The effectiveness of the “moral compass” intervention relied on the simultaneous mobilization of three major bodies. The network analysis shows they were not acting in isolation but were synchronized through the hubs identified above.
The JLC, led during this period by Jonathan Goldstein (Chair) and Simon Johnson (CEO), adopted a combative strategy. Goldstein explicitly stated in an interview that Jewish leaders had “lost the narrative” on Zionism and needed to regain it.34 The JLC’s strategy involved utilizing The PR Office 14 to professionalize this narrative.
The OCR and JLC are structurally fused; the Chief Rabbi is an honorary president or key constitutional figure in many JLC constituent members. Simon Johnson’s presence at OCR conferences, speaking alongside Mark Frazer 11, highlights the operational synergy. When Mirvis published his op-ed, the JLC was positioned to amplify the message through its political lobbying channels, utilizing the contacts and expertise of figures like Lord O’Shaughnessy.
The Board of Deputies, while distinct, shared the same communications personnel pool (e.g., Philip Rosenberg moving to The PR Office). The BoD’s messaging during 2019 focused on the “constitutional” crisis of antisemitism, epitomized by their “Ten Pledges.” The alignment between these pledges and Mirvis’s “Moral Compass” suggests a unified command of messaging.
The CAA provided the raw data and the legal threats that substantiated Mirvis’s moral claims. The link established via Shimon Cohen 15 confirms that the Chief Rabbi was not merely observing the CAA’s work but actively validating it via private channels. This allowed the OCR to keep its hands clean of the “grubby” business of litigation and protests while utilizing the atmosphere of crisis the CAA generated to justify the “unprecedented” intervention.
The intervention navigated a precarious legal line regarding the charitable status of the United Synagogue and the OCR. Charity law in the UK strictly forbids partisan political campaigning.
Mirvis’s op-ed carefully navigated this by stating, “Convention dictates that the Chief Rabbi stays well away from party politics – and rightly so”.1 He framed his intervention as “challenging racism,” which is a “matter of morality,” not politics. This distinction—attacking the Leader of the Opposition while claiming political neutrality—bears the hallmarks of professional crisis communications advice.
The sophistication of this rhetorical positioning reflects the input of seasoned professionals like Mark Frazer and Shimon Cohen. They understood how to craft messages that achieved maximum political impact—delegitimizing the Labour leader—while maintaining plausible deniability regarding regulatory infractions. The “anguished tone” noted by commentators 2 was a rhetorical device to mitigate accusations of electioneering, portraying the Chief Rabbi as a reluctant participant forced into the arena by the magnitude of the moral crisis.
The 2019 ‘moral compass’ op-ed was the kinetic component of a broader, deeper institutional realignment within the British Jewish community’s leadership. It was not a singular event but the culmination of years of network building, professionalization, and strategic convergence between religious authority and political capability.
Key Analytical Findings:
By 2019, the Office of the Chief Rabbi had effectively integrated itself into a modern, professionalized political campaigning machine. This network allowed it to deploy “moral” narratives with the precision, timing, and impact of a high-stakes election strategy, fundamentally altering the trajectory of the 2019 General Election.
| Node | Key Individual | Role/Connection | Linked To |
|---|---|---|---|
| Office of Chief Rabbi (OCR) | Ephraim Mirvis | Chief Rabbi | JLC, The PR Office, CAA |
| OCR Communications | Mark Frazer | Director of Comms | The PR Office (Former Employer) |
| The PR Office | Shimon Cohen | Chairman/Founder | OCR (Ex-Private Sec), JLC (Client), CAA (Liaison) |
| The PR Office | Philip Rosenberg | Associate Director | Board of Deputies (Former Director of PA) |
| Jewish Leadership Council (JLC) | Lord O’Shaughnessy | Vice President | Portland Communications (Advisory Council) |
| Jewish Leadership Council (JLC) | Jonathan Goldstein | Chair | OCR, The PR Office |
| Portland Communications | Kevin McKeever | Partner | Anti-Corbyn Activism |
| Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) | Gideon Falter | Chairman | OCR (via Shimon Cohen) |
| Individual | Role A | Role B | Impact on 2019 Intervention |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shimon Cohen | Private Sec to Chief Rabbi Jakobovits | Founder, The PR Office (JLC Client) | Maintained institutional memory and back-channel to CAA. |
| Mark Frazer | Associate Director, The PR Office | Director of Comms, OCR | Imported commercial crisis PR tactics to the Rabbinate. |
| Philip Rosenberg | Public Affairs, Board of Deputies | Associate Director, The PR Office | Aligned Board of Deputies messaging with JLC/OCR PR strategy. |
| Lord O’Shaughnessy | Director of Policy for PM Cameron | VP of JLC / Portland Advisor | Connected communal leadership to Tory political machine. |