UK and Irish governments should ‘consider their actions' over Kneecap funding
Communities Minister Gordon Lyons said the actions of the the band amounted the 'glorification of terrorism' and went well beyond artistic licence.
The group has seen gigs cancelled after historic concert footage appeared to show a member of the group shouting 'up Hamas, up Hezbollah', and another video allegedly showing one calling for Conservative MPs to be killed.
Made up of Liam Og O Hannaidh, Naoise O Caireallain and JJ O Dochartaigh, the group has faced an investigation by counter-terrorism police after the videos, filmed in 2023 and 2024, became public.
Mr Lyons was asked during ministerial question time at the Northern Ireland Assembly on Monday if his department had provided funding to Kneecap since 2017.
He said: 'Neither my department nor any of its arm's length bodies have provided any funding to Kneecap since 2017.'
TUV MLA Timothy Gaston referred to a planned gig in Belfast this August where Kneecap is set to support Irish rock band Fontaines DC.
He said: 'As the minister responsible for local government, what are you doing to stop this pro-IRA rap group from turning Belfast City Council-owned Boucher Road playing fields into their personal propaganda stage?'
Mr Lyons responded: 'The member will be aware that although I oversee local government legislation, it is up to individual councils to make their own decisions in those regards.
'But I hope that local councils would take into consideration some of the good relations issues that have been raised in light of some of the comments that have been made by Kneecap.
'Not only by Kneecap, but all of those that would seek to engage in what is essentially the glorification of terrorism.'
DUP MLA Jonathan Buckley asked the minister if he agreed the UK and Irish governments 'need to fully distance themselves from the funding of racist, antisemitic and sectarian state sponsorship in the view of Kneecap?'.
Mr Lyons said it was the responsibility of all to call out such behaviour.
He said: 'There are always things we can disagree with which other people do in the arts sphere but this is going far beyond anything which comes anywhere close to dealing with artistic licence.
'This is the glorification of terrorism and this is also supporting, calling for violence towards MPs.
'It is incumbent on us to call that out and I would also call on the UK Government and the Irish Government to consider their actions in this regard.'
Last year, Kneecap won a discrimination case against the UK Government in Belfast High Court after former business secretary Kemi Badenoch tried to refuse them a £14,250 funding award.
People Before Profit MLA Gerry Carroll asked the Communities Minister if his department had given funding to any organisations that have been publicly singing 'up to our necks in Fenian blood?'.
Mr Lyons said it was up to the Arts Council of Northern Ireland to determine funding policies.
He added: 'What I won't do is what some are trying to do which is to judge the entire bands community by the actions of a few if they have fallen beneath expected standards.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Pro-Palestinian protester in two-tier police row is Islamist refugee
A pro-Palestinian activist who evaded terror charges in a two-tier policing row is an Islamist propagandist granted asylum in Britain, The Telegraph can reveal. The demonstrator, who avoided prosecution after chanting ' I love the 7th of October ' at a London rally last year, can now be named as Mohammad al-Mail, a 27-year-old Kuwaiti national granted refugee status in the UK in 2017. In May, The Telegraph published footage of Mr Mail glorifying the Hamas massacre and shouting, 'I like an organisation that starts with H' through a megaphone at an anti-Israel protest in Swiss Cottage, north-west London, last September. He was later arrested on suspicion of terrorism offences but never charged. By contrast, a Jewish man who attended a counter-protest on the same day and briefly held a placard mocking Hezbollah's leader was charged after police claimed the sign could cause 'distress' to terrorist sympathisers. It took eight months for the Crown Prosecution Service to admit there was insufficient evidence to prosecute. The Telegraph can now reveal that Mr Mail claimed he avoided prosecution by telling counter-terrorism officers that the 'H' in his chant stood for the Home Office, rather than Hamas. In footage obtained by The Telegraph – which police confirmed they had not seen – Mr Mail appears to boast of misleading investigators. In an Arabic-language podcast aired in March, he said the case 'fell apart' after he gave what appeared to be a knowingly false answer when asked: 'Who do you mean by the letter H?' He said: 'Immediately, I answered, 'It could be the Home Office', you know, the ministry of the interior. 'I love the ministry of the interior', and so on. 'Truly, as the saying goes, 'The worst calamity is the one that makes you laugh'', he joked, adding that officers 'wanted to delve into the depths of my conscience to know what I truly believe'. The Metropolitan Police twice referred his case to the CPS but he was never charged. A source familiar with the case said prosecutors declined to bring charges, fearing it would be 'speculation' to infer support for a proscribed group from his chant. The Telegraph can also reveal that Mr Mail's support for terror groups was not limited to the Sept 20 protest. Since being granted asylum, he has used the Upper Hand Organisation, his campaign group, to promote an Islamist ideology fundamentally at odds with British democratic values. In the same podcast, he urged supporters to 'seize opportunities' created by the October 7 attack – the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. 'Not every day is like October 7,' he said. 'If an opportunity arises, we must fully exploit it. If you strike, make it hurt.' His website hosts a string of Islamist manifestos and incendiary texts. He has criticised Al-Qaeda, the Taliban and HTS, the Syrian group, for being too pragmatic and failing to advance global jihad. He wrote that such groups have 'ultimately succumbed to the international system and failed to bring about significant change to the concept of jihad itself – jihad, which is understood as a struggle to establish Sharia on earth'. Mr Mail has promoted the jihadist cause online and distributed leaflets and stickers at protests. On Aug 17 2024, the Upper Hand Organisation issued a pamphlet titled Wake Up! Protect the Honour of Islam, which portrayed the Israel-Palestine conflict as a 'war of faith'. It glorifies jihad, urges mobilisation, and repeats the slogan 'a new Khaybar awaits' – a phrase often used to incite violence against Jews. The document claims his group is 'committed to channelling resources toward strategic projects to achieve Islamic dominance'. On Nov 11 2024, Mr Mail announced he would surrender to police over his chants but told supporters to 'continue the path of jihad'. He described peaceful Muslims as 'slaves and dwarves' and issued a warning to Britain: 'What is coming to you is terrifying – either our annihilation or yours.' In recent months, he has used his platform to lobby Parliament to de-proscribe Hamas and divert taxpayer funds to sharia courts. He also opposes the banning of child marriage, arguing it discriminates against 16 and 17-year-old Muslim girls. In a statement to The Telegraph, the Met said it was unaware of Mr Mail's apparent admission and record of Islamist advocacy until contacted by this newspaper. A spokesman said the force 'does not believe the material provided to us was known to officers at the time of their initial investigation. It did not form part of the case put to the CPS'. 'Officers will carefully review it to identify any offences so the appropriate action can be taken.' The case has been condemned as an example of two-tier policing, deepening embarrassment for Scotland Yard and raising concerns over national security among senior politicians and extremism experts. On Friday evening, Chris Philp, the shadow policing minister, said that, in light of The Telegraph's latest revelations, 'the police must urgently re-investigate the incident with a view to re-arresting the man concerned'. He added: 'I am deeply worried that someone came here, was granted asylum and then abused the UK's generosity by expressing extremist views. This is why our human rights and asylum laws need to be changed.' His comments were echoed by Lord Walney, the Government's former extremism tsar, who described the latest evidence uncovered by this newspaper as 'disturbing and raises serious questions for the Metropolitan Police'. 'The fact officers were apparently unaware of this open source material when they submitted the case to the Crown Prosecution Service suggests an alarming lack of rigour in their initial investigation,' he said. 'In light of this, it is vital that the police reopen the case to ensure national security can be protected.' The Jewish counter-protester, who was charged for 'causing distress', said the revelations were yet more evidence of 'two-tier policing'. The CPS dropped the case against him last month, eight months after he was first arrested. 'The police were sufficiently well-resourced to know I'd be at the counter-protest the following week and to circulate my photograph among officers on the ground so they could arrest me. Yet counter-terror police were apparently unable to carry out a basic Google search on this man before interviewing him,' he said. The CPS said it is urgently reviewing its decision not to press charges against Mr Mail. The Upper Hand Organisation, which he founded in 2012, was already active in Kuwait when Mr Mail arrived in Britain. During his studies, he was convicted in absentia of 13 offences by the Gulf state, including defaming the Emir and spreading subversive ideas, receiving a combined sentence of 53 years. He said these were politically and religiously motivated and was granted asylum in the UK on May 5 2017. He later received a partial pardon but remains in the UK. A Home Office spokesman said: 'Supporting a proscribed organisation is a serious criminal offence. The investigation and prosecution of criminal offences, including determining whether an offence has been committed or not, is a matter for the police and Crown Prosecution Service, who are operationally independent. 'It is our longstanding policy not to comment on individual cases.'
Scotsman
2 hours ago
- Scotsman
Mainstreaming of far-right ideas in UK politics shows why John Swinney was right to raise alarm
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Received wisdom at Westminster has it that the far-right has never made it into UK politics. Coupled with that theory is then the debate by the same commentators around what constitutes the 'far-right'. However using the measurement of policies pursued, which is, after all, the very essence of a political movement or party, the far-right has most certainly arrived in UK politics. UK parties, across the political spectrum, now embrace the hardest of hard Brexit, unthinkable even in the aftermath of the referendum in June 2016, and a policy that has done untold damage to the economy and our rights. We also had a government that promoted the sending of asylum seekers to Rwanda and MPs who openly campaign on leaving the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which has underpinned our rights since the end of the Second World War. Were the UK to leave, it would be joining Russia and Belarus in doing so, hardly polite company. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Brexit, leaving the ECHR, and the Rwanda scheme are or were mainstream policy proposals in the UK yet they are policies that far-right parties elsewhere in Europe would baulk at. Even the hardest of hard-right parties in other parts of Europe such as the National Rally in France, the Vlaams Belaang in Belgium or Alternative fur Deutschland in Germany have abandoned plans to leave the EU, given the UK's Brexit debacle. John Swinney's stances on the EU, Donald Trump and migration, among others, have won plaudits (Picture: Jeff J Mitchell) | Getty Images An attack on justice Yet despite these policy failures, the mainstreaming of the far-right has become all too common in our politics along with their tactics. Over the past few days alone, Conservative Shadow Justice Secretary, Robert Jenrick, attacked the Labour Attorney General for doing his job and defending his clients. His remarks were described by former Conservative Attorney General Dominic Grieve 'as a direct attack on our principles of justice'. As we saw in this week's Hamilton by-election, we in Scotland are certainly not immune. Nigel Farage's attack on Anas Sarwar, which he doubled down on when challenged by the press, should act as a warning to us all. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Such remarks are unacceptable and whereas I may have legitimate policy differences with the Scottish Labour leader, they should have no place in our political discourse. For all the heat of the campaign in the run-up to what was a hard-fought by-election, it was good to see SNP and Labour leaders call out these disgraceful comments. Zia Yusuf's resignation as chair of Reform on Thursday and his concerns around Reform in the Commons should also act as a warning. Calling out bigotry That is why the First Minister was right to bring together colleagues from across the political spectrum in a summit seeking to 'lock out' Reform from Holyrood earlier this year. John Swinney is right to call out their policies and the 'bigotry' that they represent and to call out Farage as 'an accomplice of the Russian agenda'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Fair play to the politicians and representatives of civil society who put any political differences aside and joined the First Minister. That meeting was criticised at the time by the Conservatives and a range of commentators. Given Reform's tactics and language over the course of the by-election campaign, we have seen just how badly needed that stance was and remains. Labour will be pleased with Thursday's win, and I congratulate them on it, however, no party can afford to be complacent about Reform. One of the lessons from Hamilton must be that the key to taking on the far-right is to challenge them on their ideas. Nigel Farage's track record is not a particularly good one. He has been a driving force campaigning to leave the EU for decades. That was a decision that has exacerbated the cost-of-living crisis, removed rights from UK citizens, damaged business, especially small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs) and ultimately made us all poorer. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad He backed Donald Trump whose presidency has destabilised the world, seen tariffs introduced that have damaged the global economy, and undermined efforts to support Ukraine against Russian aggression. 'Island of Strangers' The Reform policy platform is weak. For their opponents, that should provide ample targets. Yet, in the Westminster bubble their policies are given far too much credibility. There is an omertà around discussing the glaring failure of the Brexit experiment and the less said about Keir Starmer's 'Island of Strangers' speech on migration frankly the better. John Swinney would be the first to admit that the Scottish Government haven't got everything right. However, on the big calls around our relationship with the EU, the impact of Donald Trump's presidency, migration, child poverty and the rights we should enjoy as citizens, the SNP leader has maintained credibility for his stances, winning plaudits at Westminster and further afield. Politics is about ideas and Reform's are simply not good ones. The Conservatives and Reform are increasingly aligning on a range of policies and a pact or even merger is not out of the question. This is to be expected, given that Reform draws its politicians and many voters from the Conservatives. They have, in turn, turned their backs on One Nation conservatism, and instead the party is dominated by the Johnson/Truss populist wing, which is not so different from Farage and Reform. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This week's by-election and the preceding campaign must act as a wake-up call. During the run-up to the Holyrood elections, there is an opportunity for all parties to set out their vision for Scotland. On the one hand, there is an inclusive, outward-looking and internationalist vision represented by John Swinney, on the other is Reform's inward and exclusive offering. I know which one I'm backing.
New Statesman
2 hours ago
- New Statesman
The eco-centrists want the Green Party back
In last year's General Election, the Green Party quadrupled its representation in parliament (from one in 2019 to four in 2024, albeit). Caroline Lucas, elected in 2010, was for a long time the party's only MP. After years of the Green's representation in Parliament resting solely on Lucas's shoulders, July 2024 was a turning-point. 'I spoke in the House of Commons five times yesterday, on a range of topics,' Ellie Chowns, the Green MP for Northwest Herefordshire told me when we met on a drab evening at a café in St James's Park. 'We as Greens have got a much stronger voice [in Parliament] speaking day in day out on the issues that really matter,' Chowns said. Alongside her, Adrian Ramsay, the Green MP for Waveney Valley nodded. During our 45-minute interview, we were all variously forced to dodge the pigeons who kept flying dangerously close overhead. Ramsay has been the current co-leader of the party, alongside Carla Denyer, the Green MP for Bristol Central since 2021. But their term is almost up; the party will hold a leadership election later this year. While Denyer has decided not to re-contest, Ramsay, who has been a Green Party politician since 2003 felt he isn't done yet. He is running once again to be co-leader of the party once again, with Chowns as his co-star. Chowns and Ramsay's pitch to Green Party members is simple: a vote for them is a vote for two experienced leaders, who already have a position inside parliament and a proven track-record of winning elections .'We're the only candidates in this [leadership] election who have won under first-past-the-post,' Ramsay told me, 'and we want to build on that success, it is about substance.' He added: 'Anyone can say that they want to be popular,' Ramsay said, 'we've shown how you actually do it.' Chowns agreed: 'The only way to change politics is by winning more seats in the system,' she said, 'and Adrian and I have shown how to do that. You build the biggest possible coalition of voters.' The pair have received backing for precisely this reason from Green Party Grandees such as Lucas and Baroness Jenny Jones. This is all no uncertain dig at the pair's main competition: current deputy leader, Zack Polanski. Shortly after the May local elections, in which the party won an additional 181 councillors, current Polanski, launched a (not so surprise) solo-leadership campaign. His platform of 'eco-populism' has exposed a split in the party between the radical left wing (which Chowns and Ramsay indirectly describe as 'loudhailer politics') and those who want to appeal to a wider base, including former Conservative voters. Ramsay is irked by Polanski's decision to run. The current co-leader, who wrote the Green Party's handbook on how to win council elections, has spent most of his political career working out how to turn the party from a fringe group into a force capable of winning Parliamentary elections. The election of an additional three Green MPs last year, was the culmination of this, or so he says. Polanski's wants to position the Greens as a left-wing mirror to Nigel Farage and Reform. In fact, when I spoke to him shortly after he launched his leadership bid in May, Polanski said he may even actually 'agree' with some of 'Nigel Farage's diagnosis of the problems' . Chowns and Ramsay think this is the wrong approach. 'We've already demonstrated how ecological ideas can be popular,' Chowns said. She added: 'I don't aspire for the Green Party to ape Reform in any way neither in its content, not its style…We can't out shout Reform.' Polanski is a member of the Greater London Assembly, but if he is elected he will sit outside the machinations of Westminster; an arrangement which could cause more trouble than it's worth. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe 'There are some major pitfalls that would need to be addressed here,' Ramsay said, 'journalists look to what's happening in parliament to see where each party stands on the issue of the day because parliament is the centre of British political debate.' Having a leader outside of Westminster could become particularly troublesome if there is a disagreement between the party's leadership and its MPs. In some ways, this has already happened. Polanski has said the UK should withdraw from NATO, a policy which neither Ramsay nor Chowns support. 'If on that day you had the leader, who was outside parliament, speaking for the party saying I want to leave NATO and then our foreign affairs spokesperson in Parliament saying that the Green party want to stay there and reform NATO, then who do you look to as giving the Green Party's position?' This could get messy. Members of other parties are looking at this race, curious about where it could leave the Green Party (one sympathetic Labour MP told me they thought it would be a 'disaster' and would alienate much of the party's more moderate base). Polanski did not inform Ramsay or Chowns of his intention to run before going public with his campaign. When I ask the pair how things will work if Polanski does win, Ramsay said: 'I think that's for Zack to set out… he's certainly had no conversations with the MPs about whether that would work or how he would make it work.' As I went to ask my next question, Ramsay shot back, 'he's made no attempt to talk to us about it at all.' Though Chowns and Ramsay's campaign may not have landed as loudly as Polanski's, they have election-winning credentials. As Ramsay said, it took time to build the 'broad coalitions' which have pushed the Green Party to where it currently sits. With polling for the leadership election opening in a matter of months, the pair may need to ramp up the volume in order to win the fight; it won't take much time for that 'broad coalition' to be unpicked. [See more: Did Zia Yusuf jump, or was he pushed?] Related
