Islamophobia definition could have chilling effect, says peer
The government's new Islamophobia definition could stop experts warning about Islamist influence in Britain, a former anti-extremism tsar has warned.
Lord Walney said that a review being carried out by Angela Rayner's department should drop the term Islamophobia, or risk 'protecting a religion from criticism' rather than protecting individuals.
Ministers launched a 'working group' in February aimed at forming an official definition of what is meant by Islamophobia or anti-Muslim hatred within six months.
The group was created because incidents of hate crime in England and Wales aimed at Muslims were at an all-time high, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) said.
Rayner has been warned that using the term Islamophobia rather than anti-Muslim hate risked efforts to expose malign influence from countries such as Iran being branded as Islamophobia.
The Times previously revealed that Iran had developed a 'sophisticated network' across the UK to actively promote propaganda and 'plant seeds of suspicion' against the British government.
Walney, a Labour peer who wrote a government review into political violence and disruption, said the government did not need to 'scrap the whole thing' because 'prejudice against Muslims absolutely exists in this country, and we should be alive to it'.
He said: 'But by dropping the term Islamophobia you could send a clear message that this is not about protecting a religion from criticism.'
Walney said that a previous definition adopted by the Labour Party in the Corbyn years specifically said that referring to Pakistani grooming gangs or 'the idea that there are Islamist organisations in the UK that seek to infiltrate British communities' would have been counted as Islamophobia.
The government confirmed that was no longer its position and it made it clear that it would uphold free speech in the terms of reference for the review. But Walney said: 'Where really significant worry remains is that the legal framework, or certainly how it is being interpreted at the moment across the country — when no definition exists — is having a significant chilling effect on freedom of speech.'
He also warned that it would be 'toxically damaging for Labour' if the government was seen 'as furthering a process which can be in any way seen to perpetuate or extend that culture' that led to the cover-up of grooming gangs.
Rayner's department has been accused by the Conservatives of carrying out the review in secret, because although certain groups would be invited to respond to a consultation on any definition, the public would not be asked to do so.
It is also facing a potential legal challenge from the Free Speech Union if the definition is deemed too wide.
One group that has been asked to contribute is the National Secular Society, which said any definition would 'not protect Muslims' but would threaten freedom of speech.
Stephen Evans, the society's chief executive, said: 'Anti-Muslim bigotry is a genuine issue which threatens the rights and wellbeing of individuals, as well as wider community cohesion. However, attempting to protect Muslims by using an 'Islamophobia' definition is likely to fail, and may even have the opposite effect.
'Such a definition could fuel fears around 'two-tier justice', as well as demands for other 'religionphobia' definitions. It could also hinder free speech around Islam, including the ability to criticise aspects of Islam which may cause harm.
'We believe the government should rethink its approach, and instead tackle anti-Muslim bigotry by promoting and upholding the fundamental human rights we all share as individuals.'
The MHCLG said: 'We are absolutely committed to defending freedom of speech and any proposed definition must be compatible with the right to freedom of speech and expression.
'The independent working group has been engaging extensively with a wide range of communities and will provide independent, evidence-based advice to ministers.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Keir Starmer's authority has vanished. What's the point of this Government? When the time comes the British people will kick him into orbit: Read BORIS JOHNSON's devastating verdict a year on from Labour's loveless landslide
So that's it. Pffft! With a long sibilant farting efflatus as if from a punctured balloon the last of Keir Starmer 's authority has vanished to the four winds. He can't control his backbenchers. He can't deliver on his election promises. His flagship welfare reform Bill – once hailed as the superdreadnought of the Labour fleet – has run up the white flag at the first whiff of gunfire and vanished back to port.
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
ANDREW PIERCE reveals the breathtakingly cynical reason why Keir Starmer WON'T sack chancellor Rachel Reeves...yet
As MPs poured out of the Commons after another stormy Prime Minister's Questions this week, the Chancellor Rachel Reeves cut a particularly lonely figure. With her head bowed, Reeves was exiting the Chamber alone – until one colleague caught up with her to walk loyally by her side. It was the chairman of the Labour Party, one Ellie Reeves, the Chancellor's younger sister. No other Labour MP, it seems, was willing to be seen associating with the embattled Chancellor. What a dismal year she has had. Reeves came into office last summer promising to 'unlock private investment', 'fix the foundations of our economy' and deliver 'sustained economic growth'. She has failed on all three counts – and it increasingly shows. Many Labour MPs commented on the Chancellor's body language as she took her usual place next to Starmer at PMQs. 'She looked broken, like she had been tranquillised,' says one source. 'She is clearly deeply troubled and unhappy.' There have even been reports – sharply denied by the Treasury – that Reeves spent much of Thursday in floods of tears amid shouting matches with colleagues. 'It's not true: she is resolute,' says one of her allies – a diminishing group these days. Now the Chancellor's problems are about to get even worse. Keir Starmer 's screeching U-turn over disability benefit cuts means she has to find billions to fill a budget black hole – and comes only weeks after her humiliating £1.25 billion volte-face on winter fuel payments. With almost 130 Labour MPs joining the revolt over the Welfare Bill, there are now huge questions about the Prime Minister's grip over his party. Keir Starmer 's screeching U-turn over disability benefit cuts means Reeves has to find billions to fill a budget black hole But it is the debacle over disability cuts that threatens to destroy the remnants of the Chancellor's political and economic credibility. Reeves is now at the centre of a full-blown crisis in relations between Downing Street and Labour MPs. The Chancellor – more than any other member of the Cabinet – is being blamed for the shambles. Some MPs have privately said they 'hate' her. Now the Chancellor's critics within her own party are growing ever louder. Worryingly for Reeves, they include a number of ministers unhappy at her performance. In the increasingly febrile mood at Westminster, even moderate Labour MPs are now saying Starmer should sack her. If she stays, they reason, she will worsen the PM's poll ratings – languishing at an abysmal 46 per cent in the latest YouGov survey. But would Starmer have the guts to ditch his Chancellor barely a year after their landslide general election victory? Absolutely not – and the reason why, I can reveal, is breathtakingly cynical. One senior party figure tells me: 'Number 10 needs her. She is absorbing all the blame for our problems, and therefore diverting it from the PM. 'Whether it's in the rural areas over her decision to bring in inheritance tax for farmers, or with pensioners over winter fuel, it's Rachel's name that comes up on the doorstep every time, not Keir's. 'Keir is an anonymous figure at Parliament. We rarely see him and he's never in the division lobbies, while Rachel is there all the time. She's receiving huge flak from her own colleagues.' But my source also warned fellow Labour MPs: 'Have we learnt nothing from the Tory years? They went into the last election a shattered force and suffered their worst ever defeat.' While few MPs expect Reeves to be sacked or even demoted in the short term, the next big test could be the autumn Budget. Reeves set herself two new fiscal rules in the last Budget: pledging to balance day-to-day spending with tax receipts and to get public debt down as a share of the economy. Another source says: 'The PM may order her to change the rules to avoid tax rises. It could lead to a showdown. If she refuses, she goes. If she agrees to change them, her last scrap of respectability is gone and she will be a lame duck. If taxes go up, it's hard to see how she could limp on for much longer.' After the Budget, Labour faces the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament elections in May. Reform are expecting to capture Wales, a traditional Labour stronghold. A senior government figure says: 'If the local elections are a disaster, Keir will need to blame someone. There'll be yet another 'reset' and I think he'll throw Rachel under a bus if he hasn't already. He will pledge a new direction with a new Chancellor.' The favourite would be Pat McFadden, the dour Cabinet Office minister. But if Tuesday's vote is dramatically lost – now thought to be unlikely after the rebels won a raft of concessions – Reeves would be in dire trouble, as in fiscal terms the Government would be holed below the waterline. Reeves' own political hero is Gordon Brown. She will no doubt be aware of his infamous quip that there are two types of Chancellor: those who fail and those who get out just in time. A mere 11 months after she entered the Treasury, most Labour MPs – to say nothing of the country at large – have already decided which one of those she is.
Daily Mail
4 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Critics warn Sir Keir's screeching welfare U-turn will now result in a 'two-tier' benefits system and a £3billion tax bombshell to pay for it
Sir Keir Starmer 's benefits climbdown will create a 'two-tier' benefits system with families facing a £3billion tax bombshell to pay for it, critics warned last night. And that will be on top of the £1.25billion bill caused by the Prime Minister's screeching U-turn over winter fuel payments for pensioners. Experts warned the £4.25billion black hole in the public finances caused by the backsliding will probably force Chancellor Rachel Reeves to plug it with more tax rises in her autumn Budget. The Prime Minister was humiliatingly forced to hand Labour 's welfare rebels the concessions in a bid to avoid defeat in a crunch vote on benefits cuts on Tuesday. The compromise deal last night looked like it had peeled off enough of the 126 rebels to pass the vote. However, as many as 50 were still threatening to rebel unless the vote was pulled. The reforms had originally been forecast to save the Government £5billion a year by the end of the Parliament. Charity bosses and Labour MPs still planning to rebel also warned the new proposals would create a 'two-tier' benefits system because existing Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claimants will keep their current level of disability payments. But new claimants after November 2026, when the changes are scheduled to kick in, would be entitled to as much as £4,000 a year less on average, even if they suffered from the same condition which meant they couldn't work. Before the U-turn, both existing and future claimants were facing stricter eligibility conditions for the daily living component of PIP, a working-age benefit for those whose health condition increases their living costs. The concessions on PIP alone protect some 370,000 people currently receiving the allowance who were set to lose out following reassessment. Meanwhile, existing claimants of the universal credit (UC) health element, paid to those with a condition which stops them working, will have their payments protected in real terms. However, new claimants will see it halved and frozen. According to calculations by the Resolution Foundation think tank, the PIP and UC reforms will cost £1.5billion each. Sir Keir yesterday branded his own climbdown 'common sense' and refused to rule out tax increases to pay for it in an interview. During a visit to RAF Valley in Wales, he said how the Government intended to pay for it would be revealed in the autumn Budget, adding: 'The changes still mean we can deliver the reforms that we need and that's very important because the system needs to be a system that is fit for the future. 'All colleagues are signed up to that, but having listened, we've made the adjustments. The funding will be set out in the Budget in the usual way.' Yesterday's climbdown is hugely embarrassing for Sir Keir as it highlights the scale to which he failed to read his MPs' mood over the proposed cuts, with rebels having spoken out for months. Care minister Stephen Kinnock dismissed criticism that the Government was in chaos and that Sir Keir was not 'competent', insisting that the process had been 'positive and constructive' and that the PM was someone who 'gets stuck into fixing problems'. Care minister Stephen Kinnock (pictured) dismissed criticism that the Government was in chaos and that Sir Keir was not 'competent', insisting that the process had been 'positive and constructive' and that the PM was someone who 'gets stuck into fixing problems' But Kemi Badenoch said the debacle left benefits claimants facing 'the worst of all worlds'. Speaking to reporters on a visit to North West Essex, the Tory leader said: 'I think we're seeing a government that is floundering, a government that is no longer in control despite having a huge majority. I don't see how they're going to be able to deliver any of the things they promised if they can't do something as basic as reducing an increase in spending. 'It's a real shame because what they're doing now with this U-turn is creating a two-tier system... this is the worst of all worlds.' Arch rebel Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, said: 'These revised proposals are nowhere near good enough, and frankly, are just not well thought through. It would create a two-tier system in both PIP and the Universal Credit health element based on when somebody became disabled.' Sir Mel Stride, the Shadow Chancellor, said: 'Labour promised not to raise taxes on working people, and their Jobs Tax has led to rising unemployment and growth being halved. Now the Government has been unable to rule out that taxes will go up this autumn in order to pay for Keir Starmer's latest U-turns.'
