
Political Islam is now a feature of British elections: Gaza is just the symptom, not the cause
Reform's strength now poses perhaps a greater threat to Labour even than to the Conservatives. Contained within Thursday's results, however, is another threat to the party – but one which, unlike the Reform surge, builds on a development evident since last year's general election. That threat is the rise of independent Muslim candidates on platforms designed to appeal to their fellow Muslims.
Last July showed the pattern when 'Gaza independent' MPs won in Leicester South, Blackburn, Birmingham Perry Barr and Dewsbury and Batley, after similar candidates had won two months earlier in local elections in Blackburn, Bradford and Oldham. That pattern was confirmed on Thursday.
In the general election Labour's vote fell by over 14 per cent from 2019 in constituencies where the Muslim population was above 15 per cent. Overall, 37 constituencies have a Muslim population of over 20 per cent, and in another 73 seats the Muslim population is between 10 and 20 per cent. Thursday's results demonstrate again that sectarian Muslim candidates can either win or secure enough votes in such seats to pose a real threat to Labour.
In Burnley Central East, for example, Maheen Kamran won with 38 per cent of the vote, beating Reform on 30 per cent. Labour trailed in third with just 14 per cent – down from 49 per cent in 2021. Ms Kamran says she wants 'segregated areas' to prevent 'free mixing' between men and women. She is joined on Lancashire County Council by her fellow independent Usman Arif from Burnley North East, who left Labour over the Gaza war.
Azhar Ali, dumped as Labour's candidate in last year's Rochdale by-election, won in Pendle. Ali was removed by Labour after he had been recorded making insinuations about 'certain Jewish quarters' in the media and had said Isael 'allowed' the October 7 Hamas massacre to happen to justify a war in Gaza.
It is no longer a prediction but a statement of fact that Britain has sectarian politics. The rise of Reform has led to much commentary about the shattering of political assumptions. But Reform merely challenges the existing party system. The emergence of sectarian politics challenges the foundations of our democratic norms. It is not so much identity politics as theocratic politics.
This is not some organic development in the wake of the Gaza war, in the narrative pushed by the independents, but rather a long-planned and well co-ordinated move to push Islamist politics into the mainstream. Gaza energised it and gave it cut through, but the real story is the creation of The Muslim Vote, an umbrella alliance of 24 activist groups which promotes and endorses selected candidates. The Muslim Vote has a long policy agenda, of which Israel and Gaza is merely one. Others – there are eighteen in all – include the legal adoption of a new definition of Islamophobia and reform of Ofcom's rules on extremism.
Labour's huge majority in 2024 masked how fragile many of its wins were, but Thursday's local elections have put the fear of God into Labour MPs. It is going to get worse. Next year there will be London-wide elections. Aspire (a de facto Bangladeshi party) already controls Tower Hamlets; last July Labour's Rushanara Ali clung on narrowly in Bethnal Green. Boroughs like Redbridge and Newham are also prime territory for sectarian candidates. Health Secretary Wes Streeting only just held his seat by 528 votes in July and in Birmingham, which will also vote, Jess Phillips scraped home by around 700 votes.
The insidious impact of sectarian politics is that MPs with small majorities will tack to embrace their demands to try to head off the threat – and thus start to act as sanitised advocates for Islamist ideas, pushing them into the mainstream and changing not just politics but our country itself.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Western Telegraph
35 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Welsh FM accused of doing ‘nothing' to protect pensioners from winter fuel cut
Darren Millar, leader of the Welsh Conservatives, called for Eluned Morgan to apologise to the pensioners affected by the change last winter, arguing the Welsh Government should have stepped in to support those in need. Speaking during First Minister's Questions on Tuesday, Mr Millar said the cut had forced vulnerable people to choose between heating and eating. Baroness Morgan, leader of the Welsh Labour Government, said she was 'absolutely delighted' that the UK Government had reversed the cut for many. The payment, worth up to £300, will be restored to the vast majority of pensioners, with anyone with an income of under £35,000 a year now getting the payment automatically. The decision last July to restrict the winter fuel payment to the poorest pensioners was intended to save around £1.5 billion a year, with more than nine million people who would have previously been eligible losing out. Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, announced the partial U-turn on Monday, following significant backlash from charities, opposition MPs and the Government's own backbenchers. Speaking in the Senedd, Mr Millar said: 'Yesterday we saw a screeching U-turn on the winter fuel allowance by Rachel Reeves, after considerable pressure from the Conservative Party. 'You will know that over half a million Welsh pensioners were deprived of their winter fuel payments last year, leaving some very vulnerable people with the unenvious choice of having to choose between heating and eating – it's an absolute disgrace. 'You are meant to stand up for Wales but what did you actually do in terms of this winter fuel allowance? You did absolutely nothing.' Mr Millar argued Baroness Morgan should have implemented a Welsh winter fuel payment or stood up to Sir Keir Starmer and demanded the payment be restored sooner. Baroness Morgan responded that she was 'absolutely delighted' that Sir Keir Starmer had listened to pensioners in Wales and across the country. 'I'm really pleased that because we have made representations to the Prime Minister on this issue that he has changed his mind and that will make a difference to hundreds of thousands of pensioners across Wales this winter, in a country where we do have more older people and housing which is more difficult to heat. 'I don't think that it's bad to listen to people and then to make sure that you respond to them.' Baroness Morgan had previously pushed back against the cut, having called for a 'rethink' in early May, saying it was something 'that comes up time and again'. At the time, the Government said there would 'not be a change to the Government's policy'. On Monday, Ms Reeves suggested that the 'stability we've brought back to the economy' meant the Government was able to change the eligibility threshold for winter fuel payments.


BBC News
38 minutes ago
- BBC News
Family visa income threshold should be lower, review says
The minimum income threshold for family visas should be relaxed, a government-commissioned review has recommended.A report by the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has suggested a reduction from the current level of £29, warned against previous proposals to raise the threshold to the same level as for skilled workers - £38,700 a year - saying it could breach the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).The Conservatives said that the UK should leave the ECHR if it "stops us from setting our own visa rules". Article 8 of the ECHR enshrines the right to family threshold is the minimum income a British citizen or settled resident must earn to bring their partner to join them in the UK. If the partner is already in the UK on a valid visa, their income also counts towards the minimum applications are made by people not already living in the UK. The MAC suggested a range of possible new thresholds. It said a level between £23,000 to £25,000 would enable families to support themselves.A threshold of between £24,000 to £28,000 meanwhile would put more emphasis on economic wellbeing - both of the families themselves and for said it did "not understand the rationale" for setting the family visa threshold at the £38,700 level for skilled workers, as the two visas have "completely different objective[s]".A £38,700 level would be the "most likely to conflict with international law and obligations".It is the government's decision whether to accept any of the MAC's recommendations. Prof Brian Bell, chairman of the MAC, said that balancing family life and economic wellbeing was a "real trade-off"."There is a cost to the UK economy and UK taxpayers of having this route, and we should just be honest about that and say there is a trade-off," he said."But similarly, on the other side, people who say 'we should set it at very high numbers to make sure that we don't lose any money' ignore the massive impact that has on families and the destruction of some relationships and the harm it causes to children." A higher threshold would also have a "negative impact on the family life of a larger number of people", the MAC said. It noted many families with lower incomes still earn enough to support themselves even if they do not make a net positive fiscal impact on the said an adult would need to earn £27,800 to have a neutral impact on the public finances - and £40,400 for a couple to have no impact in the first year a spouse arrived in the MAC did not recommend a higher threshold for families with children, saying the impacts on family life for them would be "particularly significant". In 2023 the previous Conservative government announced plans to raise the salary threshold to £38,700, as part of plans to cut the level of they backed down following criticism that this would keep families apart, settling on a £29,000 threshold with plans to gradually increase it did not implement those further rises when the party came into government and asked the MAC to review the committee said the threshold of £29,000 was already high compared to other high-income countries it had looked at. The MAC said it "was not possible to predict with any confidence" the impact different thresholds would have on the level of net migration - the difference between those entering and leaving the did suggest lowering the threshold from £29,000 to roughly £24,000 may increase net migration by up to 8,000 migration in 2024 was an estimated 431,000 people, down almost 50% on the previous followed record high levels in recent years, with the government under political pressure to get numbers down further. The MAC also criticised the Home Office for its data collection, saying insufficient data "greatly hindered" their review.A Home Office spokesperson said the government was considering the review's findings and would respond in due course. Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said migration figures remain too high and that the government "must urgently re-instate the Conservative plan to further increase the salary threshold"."If the ECHR stops us from setting our own visa rules, from deporting foreign criminals or from putting Britain's interests first, then we should leave the ECHR," he ECHR, which was established in 1950, sets out the rights and freedoms people are entitled to in the 46 signatory countries and is a central part of UK human rights month, the government said it would bring forward legislation to clarify how aspects of the ECHR should apply in immigration cases.


Telegraph
44 minutes ago
- Telegraph
There are no ‘journalists' in Gaza. Just Hamas propaganda operatives
Britain and the world's views of the rights and wrongs of the Gaza war are so often shaped by what the BBC reports. That's mattered more than ever in recent weeks, amid the feverishly heated coverage of Israel's new Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) scheme to deliver aid to the Palestinian people and bypass allegedly Hamas-controlled NGOs. Hamas-linked sources claim Israeli soldiers have repeatedly shot and killed Palestinian civilians waiting for GHF food with their families. Stories bearing the bylines of BBC 'journalists' in Gaza largely tell this version of events, albeit including the denials of the IDF. News organisations using Gazan reporters say they have no choice, given the IDF's refusal to allow in outside journalists. But that's no reason not to exercise care and employ the same editorial standards as they would on any other story. For critics of the BBC, the results have been a disaster for the Corporation and its standards. They point to the stories that have not been told, or have been largely overlooked, by these reporters almost throughout the war: of Hamas's tyranny over the people of Gaza, its torture and murder of opponents, and of the courageous Palestinians who defy its rule. And why is there such scant coverage of Hamas using the civilian population as a human shield by placing tunnels under civilian buildings and military bases in hospital? Where are the stories of Israeli hostages being moved across Gaza? Why is there no footage of Hamas firing rockets or their gunmen on the move? There is an obvious answer: it appears that these reporters are either pro-Hamas, or too afraid of reprisals from terrorist gunmen to tell the truth. It is a charge that BBC Global News Director Jonathan Munro entirely rejects. Almost spluttering in disbelief recently at the suggestion that 'some of the people you're using in Gaza might be under pressure, might be restricted in what Hamas allows them to see,' resulting in a 'partial view', he insisted: 'There's no restriction on what they can see, what they can show and what they can film when they're on location. 'There's no suggestion at all that any of those very brave people are under any political influence.' Munro's denial shows an astonishing disregard for the well-documented reality of life in Gaza. Take a recent report from the well regarded NGO the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ). It tears apart the notion that press freedom exists in Gaza. According to the CPJ, journalists there have been subject to 'detentions, assaults, obstruction and raids' going back to the start of Hamas rule almost twenty years ago. While detailing numerous violent assaults on members of the press in Gaza, the analysis warns that violations by Hamas are 'underreported'. Some journalists who have been assaulted are believed to be too afraid to say anything at all; others have gone to the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate (PJS) but say they do not want to go public for fear of retaliation. Note that both the CPJ and PJS are the staunchest critics of Israel. There can be no doubting the credibility and accuracy of their accounts on this matter. The picture they paint is light years removed from Munro's suggestion of unencumbered press freedom in Gaza. Some of the journalists in Gaza used by the BBC have been exposed as having deeply hateful views of Israel and Jews, making them entirely unsuitable as journalists. Yet there is a problem that goes far beyond any individual, if Munro and other executives cannot understand the reality of reporting from Gaza. TV producer Leo Pearlman has proposed the solution: 'The BBC make a huge deal of adding to every news script from Gaza by saying that Israel doesn't allow independent access for journalists. 'What it never says – and maybe should start doing – is that no journalist can operate freely in Gaza under Hamas control.'