BBC apologises to Jenrick over suggestions he is xenophobic in Radio 4 broadcast
Mr Kandiah added: 'The technical name for this is xenophobia.
'All phobias are by definition irrational. Nevertheless, they have a huge impact.
'Over the past year, xenophobia has fuelled angry protests outside hotels housing asylum seekers, deepening divisions in our communities.'
In a letter to the Conservative MP, the broadcaster's head of editorial standards Roger Mahony said the comments went 'well beyond' what is expected of its Thought For The Day segment.
Mr Mahony said: 'I have concluded that, while its reflection on fear in society from a faith perspective is broadly in line with expectations of Thought For The Day, some of the language it used went beyond that.
'I have asked for the two references to xenophobia to be edited from the programme on BBC Sounds. Please accept my apology for their original inclusion.'
The content has since been removed from the programme on BBC Sounds.
Mr Jenrick said: 'Illegal migration is obviously fuelling crime and the public are right to be concerned about it.
'It's extremely disappointing the BBC thought it was acceptable to smear millions of worried citizens as 'xenophobic' for their completely understandable fears about undocumented men entering illegally.'
Protesters outside the Bell Hotel in Epping (Yui Mok/PA)
A series of protests have been held outside the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, over recent weeks after an asylum seeker was accused of attempting to kiss a 14-year-old girl.
Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, 38, denies the charges of sexual assault and is due to stand trial this month.
In a statement, the BBC said: 'During this episode of Thought For The Day, criticism was made of recent comments by shadow secretary of state for justice Robert Jenrick, about hotels housing asylum seekers.
'While the programme's reflection on fear in society from a faith perspective was broadly in line with expectations of Thought For The Day, some of the language used went beyond that and we apologise for its inclusion.
'It has been removed from the version on BBC Sounds.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
2 hours ago
- Leader Live
Ricky Jones case should not be compared to Lucy Connolly
Ricky Jones, 58, faced trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court after he described far-right activists as 'disgusting Nazi fascists' in a speech at an anti-racism rally last year, in the wake of the Southport murders. The now-suspended councillor, surrounded by cheering supporters in Walthamstow, east London, on August 7 2024, was filmed stating: 'They are disgusting Nazi fascists. We need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all.' Jurors deliberated for just over half-an-hour and found him not guilty on Friday. This caused Conservative and Reform politicians to brand the decision 'two-tier justice' – with shadow home secretary Chris Philp comparing the case to that of Mrs Connolly, who was jailed for 31 months after she posted a tweet calling for 'mass deportation' of asylum seekers and to 'set fire to all the f****** hotels' on the day of the Southport attacks. Former home secretary and Tory leadership candidate Sir James Cleverly also called the jury's decision to clear Ricky Jones 'perverse' in an X post, adding: 'Perverse decisions like this are adding to the anger that people feel and amplifying the belief that there isn't a dispassionate criminal justice system.' Lawyers have said the cases should not be conflated as Connolly and Jones faced allegations of a different nature – and Jones faced trial where Connolly, having pleaded guilty, did not. Peter Stringfellow, a solicitor at Brett Wilson, told the PA news agency: 'Both (Jones and Connolly) said pretty unpleasant things. 'However, I'm afraid the conflation of the two after that is a problem. It comes from people who've got some sort of political agenda, in my view. 'They were facing completely different allegations and a massive part of those different allegations is the racial element. 'If you look at the Connolly case … her intention is of a racial nature.' Connolly pleaded guilty last year to a charge of inciting racial hatred by publishing and distributing 'threatening or abusive' written material on X. On July 29 last year, she posted: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care … if that makes me racist so be it.' 'She directs everybody to the fact that this was a racial comment,' Mr Stringfellow said. 'She pleads guilty to that intention … she accepted that she had intended to stir racial hatred. 'The Jones case is different because one, he's facing a completely different allegation: he's facing encouraging violent disorder. 'And the difference with him is he's saying: 'That's not what I was intended to do'.' Mr Stringfellow added that, in the case of Connolly, racially aggravated discourse on social media did translate into real-life violence across the country – whereas Mr Jones' comments at a rally did not cause a violent disorder. 'What she (Connolly) did, what followed her comments about threatening to burn people in hotels, is that that's precisely what then happened – and people were attempting to burn people in hotels.' Ernest Aduwa, partner at Stokoe Partnership Solicitors, said comparisons between Jones' and Connolly's cases were 'misplaced'. 'We need to be honest about what is going on here. The verdict in the Ricky Jones case was not political, it was legal,' he said. 'A jury listened to the evidence, tested it and decided unanimously he was not guilty. 'That is not bias or 'two-tier justice' – it is the justice system doing what it is supposed to do: separating facts from noise. 'Comparisons with the Lucy Connolly case are misplaced. 'Lucy Connolly pleaded guilty. There was no trial, no cross-examination, no jury. She admitted the specific offence: stirring up racial hatred online. 'Ricky Jones faced a different charge … with a high burden of proof. 'The jury decided the Crown had not met it. 'That does not mean the protest was not passionate or loud – it means there was not enough evidence to prove intent to incite violence. That distinction matters. 'I understand why emotions run high. But flattening two different situations into one misleading narrative does no favours to justice. 'The fact that a black man at a protest can receive a fair trial and be acquitted should be seen not as an injustice, but as proof the system can still get it right.' He added: 'The law is not perfect, but it must rest on evidence – not opinion, pressure, or politics.' Laura Allen, head of the protest and public order team at Hodge, Jones and Allen lawyers, said the two cases involved different decisions that need to be put in their legal context and it is 'frankly offensive' to the ordinary members of the public who sat on the jury to suggest they had not acted appropriately. If there is anything close to a two-tier system in the British justice sector it is one that historically 'has not favoured ethnic minorities', although work has been done to try to repair that situation, according to Ms Allen. A judge made a ruling on Connolly's sentence after she had said she was guilty, while a jury listened to the evidence during the trial and found him not guilty. Ms Allen said they are 'just two very different things and it is not possible to compare them in the way that Nigel Farage is choosing to do as part of his political grandstanding'. She said: 'He (Farage) is suggesting that these 12 people, about whom I assume he knows nothing, have not made their decision on the evidence but on some other ulterior motive. 'They are 12 members of the jury, picked at random, who have done their civic duty, have listened to the evidence in the case and concluded they could not be sure that Ricky Jones was guilty. 'Due to the way our jury system works they are not required, and certainly are not permitted, to explain the reasons for their decision.' She added: 'All we know is that the jury found Ricky Jones not guilty. We don't know why. We also don't know the political background of any of these people. We don't know their views on immigration or on race. 'We don't know any of that stuff and that is the whole point.'
BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
No ceasefire, no deal. What summit means for Trump, Putin and Ukraine
US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin have left Alaska without reaching an agreement for a ceasefire in an almost three-hour meeting, the leaders delivered a joint statement to the media before leaving without taking BBC correspondents who are in Anchorage for the summit assess what it means for the US and Russian leaders as well as what happens next in the war in Ukraine. Meeting dents Trump's reputation as a dealmaker By North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher"There's no deal until there's a deal," Donald Trump said early in his post-summit remarks here in was a roundabout way of conceding that after several hours of talks, there's no deal. No ceasefire. Nothing tangible to president said that he and Vladimir Putin made "some great progress", but with little details about what that might be, it's left to the world's imagination."We didn't get there," he later said, before exiting the room without taking any questions from the hundreds of gathered travelled a long way to only produce such vagaries, even if America's European allies and Ukrainian officials may be relieved he did not offer unilateral concessions or agreements that could have undermined future the man who likes to tout himself as a peacemaker and a dealmaker, it appears that Trump will leave Alaska with neither. There are also no indications that future a future summit that includes Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is forthcoming, Putin's "next time in Moscow" quip about their next meeting Trump had less at stake during these negotiations than Ukraine or Russia, it still will put a dent in his domestic and international prestige after earlier promises that this meeting had only a 25% chance of more, the president had to suffer the apparent indignity of standing silent as Putin started off the press-conference-that-wasn't with extensive opening remarks. It was a marked difference than the normal routine in the Oval Office, when the US president typically holds court while his foreign counterpart looks on without Alaska is American territory, Putin seemed more at home in what his officials like to note was once "Russian America" before its 19th Century sale to the US. That may eat at the American president over the comings days, as will press coverage that will present this summit as a flop. The big question now - one reporters were unable to ask on Friday - is whether Trump will decide to impose his much-threatened new sanctions on Russia as punishment or if he will find a reason to once again push the deadlines farther down the road. Putin gets his moment in the global spotlight By Steve Rosenberg, Russia editorWhen is a "press conference" not a press conference?When there are no was palpable surprise in the hall when Presidents Putin and Trump left the podium as soon as they'd delivered their statements – without taking any of the Russian delegation, too, left the room swiftly without answering any of the questions journalists were shouting at signs that when it comes to the war in Ukraine Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump still have a major difference of Trump has been pushing for a Russian ceasefire. Vladimir Putin didn't give it to was a very different vibe earlier in the day. President Trump had rolled out the red carpet for Vladimir Putin, treating the Kremlin leader as an honoured the Russian president got his moment in the geo-political limelight, sharing the stage with the leader of the world's most powerful how will Trump react to what happened? He still hasn't managed to persuade Putin to end Russia's war in he'd threatened a tougher approach to Russia, with ultimatums, deadlines and warnings of more sanctions if Moscow ignored calls for a hasn't followed he? A sigh of relief from Ukraine - but fear for what's next By Vitaliy Shevchenko, Russia Editor BBC MonitoringWhat just happened in Anchorage may feel anti-climactic for many, but in Kyiv there will be sighs of relief that no "deal" has been announced that would cost Ukraine of Ukraine will also know that all of their key deals with Russia have ended up broken, so even if one had been announced here in Anchorage, they would have been will be alarmed, however, that at the joint appearance in front of the media Vladimir Putin yet again spoke of the "root causes" of the conflict and said only their removal would lead to lasting peace. Translated from Kremlin-speak, this means he is still determined to pursue the original objective of his "special military operation" - which is to dismantle Ukraine as an independent state. Three-and-a-half years of Western efforts have failed to make him change his mind, and that now includes the Alaska uncertainty that persists after the meeting is also worrying. What happens next? Will Russia's attacks continue unabated?The past few months have seen a succession of Western deadlines that came and went without consequences, and threats that were never carried out. Ukrainians see this as an invitation for Putin to continue his attacks. They may see the apparent lack of progress achieved Anchorage in the same light. WATCH: Smiles, handshakes and a shared limo: The greeting unpackedVISUALS: The war-ravaged Ukrainian territories in mapsVERIFY: Russian attacks on Ukraine double since Trump inaugurationGROUND REPORT: Left out of Alaska talks, Ukrainians fear an unjust peace
BBC News
3 hours ago
- BBC News
What do people in Epping think of the town's migrant hotel?
For weeks now, there have been protests near the Bell Hotel in Epping, which houses single male asylum far this month they have largely been peaceful, but in July some descended into disorder. Riot police were on residential streets; helicopters were whirring over homes at night. Twenty-eight people have been arrested, with police officers injured and vehicles damaged. The protests started after an asylum seeker housed at the hotel was accused of sexually assaulting a teenage girl. He is in custody awaiting further court where Sir Winston Churchill was MP from 1924 to 1945, is at the end of London Underground's Central line. Its bustling High Street has bakeries, hair salons, cafes and on some of the protest days, it has been a ghost town - with many businesses shutting early. One local councillor described Epping as the epicentre of Britain's anti-migrant protests. What do locals make of it? "They shouldn't be there. They should be gone. "They are causing nothing but trouble in the town," said Debbie was pushing her grandson in a pram on a warm said the asylum seekers should be "kept in a camp until they are processed" and suggested a military base like MDP Wethersfield in north Essex - where hundreds are currently being housed - would be Ellis welcomed the protests."I think it should be happening, I've been to a couple. If we don't stand up for our town no-one else is going to," she said."They shouldn't be left in a population where there's little kids running round, shops where they go shoplifting," she added. Several people alleged asylum seekers have been shoplifting. One store manager who did not want to be named said stealing from their shop was an issue, but they had no idea if the culprits were asylum seekers or not. They did not feel thefts were worse in Epping compared to other crime up to June (the current figures) has remained broadly the same in Epping and Ongar over the past 18 months, with between 261 and 365 crimes reported a month. The figure was slightly higher in some months in 2022-23 according to Essex Police's crime statistics. 'Haven't felt unsafe' For Priyam Atter, out and about with her toddler, it was the protests she was concerned about."I've never had any issues with people who I can see are from that hotel. "I certainly haven't felt unsafe by those people, but I certainly have felt unsafe by the riots that happened in this area."I think it is a stain on Epping." Elsabe Coericius was out shopping. She said "if the hotel is the only place where they can stay they should be allowed".She is a Quaker and said: "I believe in peaceful protest. "I think everybody should be able to share their views and opinions."Epping Forest District Council has been seeking an injunction against the owner of the Bell Hotel to stop it being used to house asylum seekers. Ms Coericius described that move as "a disgrace". But others like Sara and Jan Russell, out for a brisk summer walk, supported the council's High Court action."I'm all for it. I've lived here for over 50 years now. We've never seen anything like this."It's not right, nobody likes it," said Jan Russell added: "It's about time these asylum seekers did just go. "We are such a small town - we can't really afford to have that sort of people walking up and down the street." She said she saw the asylum seekers "just dossing around" in the town. They had not been involved in the protests, but they supported said Sara Russell, not "when people are coming off the Central line from the other side of London and are just pretending to be from the local area". "There's a very small percentage of people who are protesters from Epping town," she said she had "nothing against the legal migrants" but when it came to those arriving by boat across the Channel, her answer was to "put them on Ascension island". Social media 'drums drumming' As she strolled past, another resident, Sue Rosso, heard what they were saying and disagreed."There is this major issue that we have in this country with lots of people coming to seek refuge. "Fundamentally, the hotels, whilst not an ideal option is - as I see it - the only temporary option," she the shoplifting accusations, Ms Rosso said: "There's a lot of drums drumming on the social media and a lot of fake news."In my view those incidents are not true."She said she felt the protests should be in Westminster, not Epping, as it was the government who was placing asylum seekers in the are strong views on the Bell Hotel in Epping and it appeared to be dividing opinion."It's turning neighbour against neighbour," Ms Rosso said. "This was a community based town and I hope it will be that again in the future." Follow Essex news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
