Warwick District Council leader Ian Davison is happy to bide his time despite the spectre of Labour's "unnecessary" threat to dissolve a power sharing pact.

Cllr Davison argued that national figures from Labour were "point scoring" in issuing an ultimatum to local councillors over a controversial motion that was passed at the Green Party's conference, declaring 'Zionism as racism'.

The stance rejects a two-state solution in the Middle East and calls for Israel to be replaced by a single Palestinian state "with equal rights for all".

Prime minister Andy Burnham MP called it "antisemitic" with Labour chair Bridget Phillipson stating that local coalitions, like the Green-Labour deal that runs Warwick District Council, would be dissolved if Green councillors failed to reject the motion and call for national colleagues to follow suit.

It was a motion that less than one per cent of the Green Party voted on and the Warwick District Green Party declared that the "general consensus" was that its councillors "do not agree with the motion as it stands".

However, it stopped short of rejecting the motion outright, adding that "Green Party leaders cannot overrule a conference decision". Labour was also accused of "political intimidation".

Locally, Labour has been in a muddle with district group leader Cllr Jess Melrose issuing a statement that she said had come from her party's West Midlands regional office. It welcomed Cllr Davison's "rejection" of the Zionism motion, something that was not reflected in the Green statements.

Since then, a representative of Labour's West Midlands regional office has insisted it did not release the statement.

In the meantime, Cllr Davison, like Cllr Melrose, insists the cabinet is "working well together" and getting on with running the council.

"We haven't had political divides in this cabinet, we still talk honestly with each other, do our best and work closely," he said.

"Depending what happens with Labour things may change for now, we carry on.

"I always say let's not have red lines. Let's have mature discussion, try not to close down decisions too early and decide on matters once we've seen everything. It is the same with this.

"We could make red lines to Labour but if everyone does that it is arguing, it is not constructive work for the benefit of residents."

Asked if he had been disappointed by Labour's actions, Cllr Davison said: "Politics is a mixture of trying to do good and trying to score political points. I felt this was more on the point scoring.

"You expect this. It is politics, it is not a surprise.

"I think we'd all hope that decisions are made logically and rationally. The intervention from the government was unnecessary. It conflates all sorts of different issues and that's not helpful."

He went on to add: "I have been well aware throughout (the coalition's life) that these things can dissolve at any time.

"There is no surprise in that regard, maybe some surprise over the reasoning, but I would have been foolish to think things are signed in blood and never change. That's not politics and I've been well aware of that from the word go."

Nevertheless, Cllr Davison hinted that it still might not be the end of the road even if Labour pulls the plug.

"There are splits and there are splits," he said.

"The relationships are good so we will see what can be maintained if national at any party (does that) – and let's be frank, other parties are trying to do the same sort of thing. We'll have to see how things settle down."

As leader, Cllr Davison has the final say on who sits on cabinet. He could form a Green-only cabinet but that could prove difficult with just 14 seats out of 44 at the council, meaning up to 30 councillors could oppose their work or even his leadership.

He said no options had been ruled in or out.

The Labour ultimatum was clear – to reject the motion and call on the Green Party's national leaders to "reconsider".

Asked to confirm that Warwick's Green group had done neither of those things in their statements, Cllr Davison referred back to what had been issued and declined to go further.

"We have responded with the integrity we can, as accurately as we can. It is up to them to decide on their view and how they make a decision on that," he said.