Tower Hamlets councillors have a reputation for being a fractious bunch, but Wednesday’s council meeting was largely an evening of mutual agreement and positive contributions. The children’s choir who sang a song about Jesus to a predominantly Muslim and godless audience set the tone.

I went along to watch the debate on an Aspire motion which committed the council to divest all funds away from companies which deal in arms and to request the Pensions committee and Cabinet to report on how this can be done.

The Aspire motion focussed almost exclusively on how weapons made by companies which receive money from pension funds are used in Gaza. The meeting was preceded by a decent sized lobby called by local Palestinian activists and word came through that Labour was submitting a friendly amendment.

Now, a thing that used to annoy me about some lefty meetings was that five members of the same organisation would get up and give more or less exactly the same speech. They were unwilling or unable to respond to points made by other people. It turns out that council meetings are a bit like that too, and no one ever says “it’s alright, my point was already made by councillor Jones.” It would speed things up.

So, when the council’s sole Tory made the obvious Tory point that considerations of morality, human or environmental damage must never be allowed to prevent the maximisation of profit, no one bothered to challenge him.

The Labour amendment significantly improved the Aspire motion. It widened the terms of reference to include Sudan and Congo. It made the point that the climate emergency has made the ethical implications of investment even more pressing. It referred to fossil fuel investments and surveillance technologies. Your inner cynic might point out that Labour are committed to a new runway at Heathrow and no Labour MPs seem to be making the same points. However, your inner cynic should also bear in mind that while there may be an element of Lady Macbeth’s damned spot, the councillors are seeing their voters every day and are reflecting what they are being told.

Anyway, setting aside the Tory, the entire debate was entirely free of disagreement and it really looked like the improved amended motion was going to get passed. THEN. Without any political preparation or hint that there was a problem with the amendment an Aspire councillor got up and said they would be opposing it. The ostensible reason was that they wanted to keep the motion narrowly focussed, a self-evidently stupid, sectarian and damaging approach. The only people who seemed to enjoy the moment were the two pro-arms trade types in the row behind me.

Have you ever watched a bunch of people do something indescribably daft in front of you and wondered what was going on in their heads? It was one of those moments. Certainly none of the Palestinian activists that I spoke to afterwards seemed to agree with it.

Mercifully, Labour had the good sense to vote for the unamended motion, as did the Aspire defectors and the Green councillor. The Tory remained true to his principles and put maximising return on investment above all else.

Maybe it wouldn’t have been an evening of Tower Hamlets politics without something incomprehensible happening. The upshot was that the movement against the genocide in Gaza has resulted in a major council actively seeking to get its money out of the arms trade.

It was a bit of a Kumbaya moment.