Thought for the Day guest doubles down on Jenrick ‘xenophobia' claim
Krish Kandiah provoked a backlash after accusing the shadow justice secretary of fuelling 'fear of the stranger' on Wednesday's Today programme.
His comments forced the BBC to apologise to Mr Jenrick and pull the entire Today programme, saying his references to xenophobia would be edited out before being reinstated.
However, Mr Kandiah, who is the founder of Sanctuary Foundation, the refugee charity, doubled down on his allegations.
Posting a clip from the Today programme on X, he said: 'This is the original audio of the complete Thought for the Day. Take a listen and let me know what I am wrong about factually?'
He also shared comments from Lord Dubs, a Labour peer who came to the UK as a child refugee, who said 'xenophobia' was an accurate description of Mr Jenrick's comments.
On Wednesday, Mr Kandiah claimed Mr Jenrick had increased 'fear of the stranger' among people in an article in the Mail on Sunday in which he said he did not want his children 'to share a neighbourhood with men from backward countries who broke into Britain illegally'.
The newspaper article followed protests outside migrant hotels including in Epping, Essex, where an Ethiopian asylum seeker was charged with sexually assaulting a schoolgirl days after arriving in Britain, which he denies
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.'
'Understandable fears'
In response to the remarks, Mr Jenrick accused the broadcaster of smearing 'millions of worried citizens as 'xenophobic' for their completely understandable fears'.
Writing to the Conservative MP, Roger Mahony, the broadcaster's head of editorial standards, said the comments 'went beyond' what is expected of its Thought for the Day segment.
'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,' Mr Mahony said.
'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.'
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.'
A spokesman for the corporation told The Telegraph on Thursday: '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 and we apologise for its inclusion.'
It is understood Mr Kandiah will not be prevented from future appearances on the BBC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
6 minutes ago
- BBC News
Nigel Farage urges PM to appoint Reform peers to House of Lords
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has called on the prime minister to allow him to appoint peers to the House of Lords. In a letter to Sir Keir Starmer, Farage said he wanted "the democratic disparity" in the upper chamber to be addressed, suggesting it was unfair that parties with fewer MPs were has four MPs in the House of Commons and controls ten councils in England, but currently has no appointments to the Lords are made at the discretion of the prime minister. Downing Street has been approached for comment. The House of Lords is a part of Parliament. It scrutinises the work of government and is independent from the House of Commons, where MPs sit. Members of the Lords are called peers. Like MPs, they scrutinise the work of government and recommend changes to proposed legislation. There are currently more than his letter, Farage said: "My party received over 4.1 million votes at the general election in July 2024. We have since won a large number of seats in local government, led the national opinion polls for many months and won the only by-election of this Parliament."Farage added that he was in favour of reforming the Lords, but that "the time has come to address the democratic disparity that exists in the upper house".He noted that the Green Party, Plaid Cymru and Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) have 13 peers between also pointed out that the Liberal Democrats have 76 peers, despite winning fewer votes than Reform at the previous election. The Lib Dems currently hold 72 seats in the Commons, making them the third largest party after Labour and the Conservatives."None of this holds water any longer given the seismic shifts that have taken place in British politics," Farage said his request to appoint peers was "modest", but did not outline who he would nominate if given the opportunity to do May, Reform made sweeping gains in local elections, as well as winning the Runcorn and Helsby by-election by just six success led Farage to claim that Reform UK was now the main opposition prime minister is under no constitutional obligation to elevate members of opposition parties, but will often ask opposition leaders to nominate individuals for December, Sir Keir appointed 30 new Labour peers, including his former chief of staff Sue Gray. The Conservatives appointed six new peers, while the Liberal Democrats appointed year, MPs backed plans to get rid of hereditary peers from the House of Lords.
Sky News
36 minutes ago
- Sky News
Russia's master negotiator knows Trump's weaknesses and will try to exploit them
Vladimir Putin will know exactly how he wants this to play out. He is the master negotiator who's been doing this for decades. He'll be across all the details, the history and the legal arguments. And he'll know that his opponent is not. His strategy will be to exploit that. I think the ultimate aim for the Kremlin leader is to convince Donald Trump that the quickest path to peace is a deal on Russia's terms. But he can't present it like that. He'll have to give the appearance of making concessions because he knows the American president can't lose face here. He must have something to show from this summit. 3:44 That something could be the promise of a meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, which Trump has once again talked up the chances of. But if that's the case, I suspect it'll be a loose promise, with strings attached. Something the White House can claim is progress, but may prove unachievable. I expect the Russian president will seek to play on Trump's desire for a rapid resolution to the conflict and his desire to take credit for it. That's why Putin has been buttering him up ahead of the meeting, praising Trump's "energetic and sincere" efforts to find peace. I think he'll also try to appeal to Trump's transactional nature and seek to tempt him with various sweeteners that could come from siding with Russia. 4:41 That means things like rare earth deals and joint projects in the Arctic, which is why the Russian delegation includes finance minister Anton Siluanov and Kremlin investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev. It also includes defence minister Andrei Belousov, which might suggest that Putin is serious about proposing a deal on nuclear arms control, after raising the prospect of it on Thursday. Only one pact remains between the US and Russia, and it expires in February. A new one would almost certainly be a prize the American president would go for. 2:54
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Five key points on how a long-respected US human rights report became a ‘cudgel' under Trump
In May, Donald Trump took to the stage at a business conference in Saudi Arabia's capital, promising that the US would no longer chastise other governments over human rights issues or lecture them on 'how to live and how to govern your own affairs'. With the release this week of the US government's annual report on human rights worldwide, the president has – in part – followed though on that pledge. The report – compiled by the state department – softens its criticism of nations that have sought closer ties with the US president, while alleging 'significant' human rights breaches among traditional allies across Europe, all while vastly scaling back criticism of discrimination against minority groups. The report's claims of 'no credible' human rights abuses in Hungary and El Salvador sit at odds with the state department's own report from a year earlier, which described the situation in Hungary as 'deteriorating', while highlighting 'arbitrary killings', 'enforced disappearance' and 'torture' in El Salvador. In April, a delegation of EU lawmakers warned that the rule of law in Hungary is 'rapidly going in the wrong direction' under Viktor Orbán's government. They highlighted threats to press freedom and targeting of minorities. In June a law banning content about LGBTQ+ people from schools and TV was found to violate basic human rights and freedom of expression by a scholar at the European court of justice. Meanwhile, activists and opposition leaders in El Salvador have warned the country is on the path towards dictatorship after its congress scrapped presidential term limits, paving the way for President Nayib Bukele to seek indefinite re-election. Bukele's hardline approach to crime has been accompanied by an assault on civil society and democratic institutions. Orbán and Bukele have both positioned themselves as Trump adherents – with El Salvador opening up a notorious mega-prison to detain US deportees. Orbán, who came to power in 2010, was once described as 'Trump before Trump' by the US president's former adviser Steve Bannon. France, Germany and the United Kingdom are among the European countries singled out as having seen a worsening human rights situation. The picture is a far cry from the previous report, which saw no significant changes. Criticism over the handling of free speech – in particular relating to regulations on online hate speech – was directed at the governments of the UK, Germany and France. The criticism comes despite the US itself moving aggressively to deny or strip visas of foreign nationals over their statements and social media postings, especially student activists who have criticised Israel. Since being returning to power, Trump and his administration have stepped up criticism of traditional allies – in February the vice-president, JD Vance, accused European leaders of suppressing free speech, failing to halt illegal migration and running in fear from voters' true beliefs. The report also singles out Brazil, where Trump has decried the prosecution of former president Jair Bolsonaro. Brazil, the report says, has 'undermined democratic debate by restricting access to online content deemed to 'undermine democracy.'' The report's section on Israel and the Palestinian territories is much shorter than last year's edition and contains no mention of the severe humanitarian crisis or death toll in Gaza. It acknowledges cases of arbitrary arrests and killings by Israel but says authorities took 'credible steps' to identify those responsible. More than 61,000 people have been killed in Gaza, the Gaza health ministry says, as a result of Israel's military assault after an attack by Palestinian militant group Hamas in October 2023 in which 1,200 people were killed. Sections within the report highlighting discrimination have been vastly pared back. Any criticism focused on LGBTQI rights, gender-based violence or racial and ethnic violence which appeared in Biden administration editions of the report, appear to have been largely removed. A group of former state department officials called some omissions 'shocking,' particularly highlighting the lack of detail on Uganda, which in 2023 saw the passing of some of the harshest anti-LGBTQ+ laws in the world, including the death penalty for some homosexual acts. For decades, the report has been used as a blueprint of reference for global rights advocacy – but critics have labelled this year's edition politically driven. 'The report demonstrates what happens when political agendas take priority over the facts,' says Josh Paul, a former state department official, adding 'the outcome is a much-abbreviated product that is more reflective of a Soviet propaganda.' In April, secretary of state Marco Rubio wrote an opinion piece saying the bureau that prepares the report had become a platform for 'left-wing activists,' and vowed that the Trump administration would reorient it to focus on 'western values'. State department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said the report was restructured to improve readability and was no longer an expansive list of 'politically biased demands and assertions'. Democratic party lawmakers, however, have accused Trump and Rubio of treating human rights only as a 'cudgel' against adversaries, in a statement released this week. Rubio's state department has 'shamelessly turned a once-credible tool of US foreign policy mandated by Congress into yet another instrument to advance Maga political grievances and culture war obsessions,' said Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. With Reuters
