Latest news with #Muslimness
Spectator
21-07-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
The looming ‘Islamophobia' scandal
Many people are now terrified to say what they think, voice unfashionable opinions, or even let slip the wrong words, having seen what happens to those who do. As we witness in the headlines with unremitting regularity, uttering something potentially offensive might cost you your job or prompt a visit from the police. This is why so many people are fearful of the proposal to have 'Islamophobia' defined by the state, and this fear is greatest among those who have felt the full force of our new censorial ethos: the British working class. According to a new survey carried out by JL Partners, Angela Rayner's proposal for a new official definition of Islamophobia would hand Reform a 100-seat parliamentary majority at the expense of Labour. The poll of 2,000 adults concludes that bringing in the definition would cause a loss of one million votes to Labour, with a fall in its seats in the Commons from 155 to 103. The survey also found that 37 per cent of Britons felt that protections against hate speech had gone too far, with almost a third saying measures against Islamophobia had also gone too far. Many live in fear of the 'cancel culture' that has evolved in recent decades, one that has established itself firmly in the mindset of those in authority. It is cited as one reason why the activity of the grooming gangs was ignored or enabled. It is said that councillors, the police and politicians were terrified of accusations of racism – accusations that today can ruin careers and shatter lives. Many Britons suspect that a repeat of such a scandal would be made easier were 'Islamophobia' to be codified and applied across the public sector. As the Telegraph reminded us this morning, it was Dominic Grieve, the former Conservative cabinet who is chairing the working group currently establishing the definition of the word, who praised a 2019 report which called the discussion of 'grooming gangs' an example of 'anti-Muslim racism'. Conflating criticism of Islam and the ethnicity of most of its adherents is an inevitable consequence of the definition of 'Islamophobia' produced by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims in 2018. This defined the transgression as 'rooted in racism and… a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness'. This conflation has been allowed to go unchallenged out of combination of lazy thinking and good intentions. The definition was devised by those who hoped that by introducing the spectre of racism, our society's most heinous crime, they could both silence critics of a religion and excuse the behaviour of some who happen to have been brought up in that faith. Earlier this month, the think tank Policy Exchange released a report in which it said that the Muslim Council of Britain's media monitoring unit 'acted in bad faith' by trying to suppress accurate reporting about terrorism, by accusing the media of 'Islamophobic, negative' coverage in their efforts to do so. Activists know the terror that accompanies accusations of racism, and much of the public lives in dread of it, too. This fear is increasingly accompanied by resentment among the white working-class, a feeling that they are disproportionately victimised and punished for their opinions and concerns. The name of Lucy Connolly, the mother sentenced to 31 months in prison after admitting to inciting racial hatred with a post on X, will continue to haunt this government. Her name will continue to be invoked whenever someone receives a lesser sentence for saying something even worse. The cry of 'two-tier justice' has gained traction out of a mood that the Labour government accords different treatment to different demographic groups, a drive borne out of political ideology and naive benevolence. In their well-meaning efforts to promote inter-communal harmony and keep together an increasingly fractious multicultural society, those in authority have either ignored problems or acted with appeasement. These same motives have, in the eyes of many, resulted in rough justice meted out to those deemed to threaten social cohesion or might provoke a breach of the peace. The taboo of 'Islamophobia' epitomises a culture in which subjectivity, 'perceptions' of racism, and the horror of giving or taking offence is moving away from the realm of manners, and into law.
Time of India
10-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
UK Islamophobia Definition Row: Deputy PM Angela Rayner backs down amid backlash over de-facto 'blasphemy law'
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner has been forced to back down from her push to define Islamophobia after intense backlash from free speech campaigners, legal threats, and criticism from multiple community groups. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The controversy erupted after Rayner's office launched a consultation to craft an official government definition of Islamophobia, appointing a 16-member working group known as the 'Islamophobia Council' to tackle anti-Muslim hatred. The proposed working definition, based on a 2018 parliamentary report, described Islamophobia as 'a type of racism targeting expressions of Muslimness.' Critics swiftly objected. Free speech advocates warned that equating criticism of religious practices with racism risked stifling legitimate debate, potentially creating a de facto blasphemy law. Hindu, Sikh, and secular organisations raised concerns that focusing solely on anti-Muslim hate ignored threats faced by other religious minorities in Britain. Insight UK and the Hindu Council UK called for a unified Religious Hate Council to ensure all communities are protected equally. Dominic Grieve, former Tory attorney general and author of the foreword to the 2018 definition, is tipped to chair the council. However, critics argue that reusing the 2018 formulation could dangerously blur the lines between racial discrimination and valid religious critique, including discussions around Islamist extremism and grooming gangs. In response to growing pressure, including a legal threat from the Free Speech Union which described the process as having a 'predetermined outcome,' Rayner has now extended the consultation deadline to July 20 and made it publicly accessible to all stakeholders. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The consultation process has also been expanded to include previously excluded groups such as the Christian Institute, Adam Smith Institute, Christian Concern, and the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The government maintains that its goal is to protect Muslim communities from hate crimes while safeguarding freedom of expression. However, the episode has highlighted deep divides over how Britain tackles religious hatred without undermining civil liberties. With the consultation closing next week, officials are expected to release a revised draft definition later this month, potentially with softened language or a broader remit to cover all faith groups. For now, Rayner's retreat underscores the political tightrope of combating discrimination while preserving the freedom to question religious ideologies.
Middle East Eye
24-03-2025
- Politics
- Middle East Eye
UK Islamophobia definition to protect right to 'insult religions'
The UK government has published more details about a working group set up to advise it on a possible definition of Islamophobia which would also protect the right to "insult" religious beliefs and practices. The membership of the working group appears to signal that the government is engaging with the recently launched British Muslim Network (BMN), but not the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) - the largest umbrella body claiming to represent British Muslims. Dominic Grieve, a former Conservative attorney general, has been appointed chair of the group with BMN co-chair Akeela Ahmed among its four other members. Earlier this year it emerged that the government was planning to create a working group to draw up an official definition for anti-Muslim discrimination. This suggested it was rowing back plans to adopt the definition proposed in 2018 by the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for British Muslims. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters That definition, which the Conservative government rejected, was criticised by some as potentially stifling criticism of Islam, which the APPG strongly denied. Adopted by Labour in opposition, the definition characterises Islamophobia as "a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness". In September 2024, Labour's faith minister Lord Wajid Khan said that "the definition proposed by the APPG is not in line with the Equality Act 2010, which defines race in terms of colour, nationality and national or ethnic origins". Freedom of speech The new working group's terms of reference, published on Monday, include giving advice on "the merits of government adopting a non-statutory definition of unacceptable treatment of Muslims and anyone perceived to be Muslim, including what a proposed definition should be". This establishes that the government has not yet decided that it will adopt any definition of Islamophobia. In apparent reference to widespread criticism, the terms say that any proposed definition "must be compatible with the unchanging right of British citizens to exercise freedom of speech and expression - which includes the right to criticise, express dislike of, or insult religions and/or the beliefs and practices of adherents." Ahmed's inclusion in the working group comes just weeks after the official launch of the BMN in February with backing from faith minister Khan, and after Middle East Eye had previously revealed it had lost much of its Muslim support and was being backed by a charity set up by disgraced former Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby. Exclusive: British Muslim Network backed by charity set up by former archbishop Welby Read More » MEE reported ahead of the launch that several Muslim MPs privately said they would not attend after a series of controversies. Critics have suggested that the BMN's co-chairs and advisory board lack credibility, warning that the government could use the network to continue to avoid engaging with the Muslim Council of Britain. But the BMN's leadership has argued that the government should engage with a "whole range" of Muslim groups, including both the MCB and BMN. Consecutive governments have followed a policy of refusing to engage with the MCB - despite it having over 500 member organisations, including mosques, schools, local and county councils, professional networks and advocacy groups. Starmer's government adopted this approach and even ignored communications from the MCB during the far-right riots that raged across the country for over a week in August. The BMN does not claim to be a similarly representative body. But its representation on the new working group indicates that the government has chosen to engage with the organisation while continuing to boycott the MCB. Another notable omission from the membership list is Tell Mama, an Islamophobia reporting service funded by the communities ministry and accused of severely under-reporting hate crimes. The Guardian reported earlier this month that no grant will be provided to the organisation from the end of March, leaving it facing closure. Working definition Also on the working group is Professor Javed Khan, managing director of Equi, a new think tank which says it was "born out of the UK Muslim community". At the parliamentary launch of an Equi report last month, Khan told parliamentarians and civil society figures that the think tank was "seeing engagement" from the Labour government, including ministers and special advisers. "The government needs to be faith literate in its policy development," he said. Equi's report on Muslims in the British arts and culture scene notably warned that Muslim creatives are often "herded" into receiving funding from the contentious Prevent counter-extremism programme, which "often toxifies, devalues and limits artistic intent". British Muslim creators 'herded' into Prevent funding, says Equi think tank Read More » Grieve, the chair of the working group, previously chaired the Citizens' UK Commission on Islam, aimed at promoting dialogue between Muslims and non-Muslims, and wrote the foreword to the contentious APPG report on Islamophobia in 2018, calling it "food both for thought and positive action". He said last month that "defining Islamophobia is extremely difficult for perfectly valid reasons relating to freedom of expression", but noted that "perfectly law-abiding Muslims going about their business and well integrated into society are suffering discrimination and abuse". Baroness Shaista Gohir, a crossbench peer and CEO of Muslim Women's Network UK (MWNUK), is another member of the working group. MEE revealed in late February that an MWNUK event in parliament in March celebrating the "cultural contribution of Muslims in the UK" was supported by TikTok, the social media giant accused of censoring content on human rights abuses faced by Uyghur Muslims in China. Aisha Affi, an independent consultant, is also named as a member of the working group. The terms of reference say that the group will have six months to deliver a working definition of Islamophobia to ministers. It establishes that the government "has the right to disband the Group at any point and without notice if they deem that it is no longer meeting its aims and objectives".
Yahoo
04-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Labour cannot defend their record on free speech while pursuing an Islamophobia law
Sir Keir Starmer was keen to stress Britain's history of freedom of speech in his meeting with Donald Trump at the Oval Office last week. 'We've had free speech for a very long time in the United Kingdom and it will last for a very long time,' the Prime Minister said proudly. He was commenting in response to a comment from the US Vice President JD Vance about 'infringements on free speech' in the UK. This makes it all the more terrifying that the Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner is pushing to introduce a new Islamophobia law in the UK, which will only restrict legitimate expression. Let me explain why. The term 'Islamophobia' suggests Islam cannot be questioned. It really is as simple as that. I have repeatedly called for the phrase 'anti-Muslim hatred' to be used instead, but this has fallen on deaf ears under the new Government. Why is Labour not providing the same service to other communities, such as Sikh people? Whilst some Sikhs have been attacked because perpetrators have thought they were Muslim, this does not provide a full picture of anti-Sikh hate crimes. We also know that racism and international issues in India also fuel hatred towards Sikhs. Many of these cases go unreported: will the Government step in and help this community? No. Labour does the usual: it forgets other communities in our country in its obsession with defining 'Islamophobia.' Rayner's department talks about transparency and ensuring that 'all voices' will be heard in consultations on the definition of Islamophobia. But why has she not publicly listed the names of those on the committee? How many members of the committee have delivered public reporting services on hate crimes, or discrimination, or on measurable levels of prejudice against British Muslims? Has MHLCG (the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government ) simply filled the committee with talking heads who all know each other and will not rock the boat within the Department? Rayner's definition will be non-binding on statutory agencies. This makes it utterly pointless. It does not have to be accepted by the courts, local authorities or even the police. The existing laws on hate speech, hate crimes and public disorder offences are clear, enforceable and have led to many prosecutions. There is therefore no good reason for Rayner to be spending her time and resources on a definition that is essentially pointless. Let us not forget that the Chair of the 'Council on Islamophobia' – Dominic Grieve KC – wrote a foreword to the APPG on Islamophobia's definition of 2018. That very definition was summarised into the following: 'Islamophobia is… rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness'. This definition is so wide you can drive a coach and horses through it: anyone can complain that their 'Muslimness' has been attacked. This does not bode well for free speech in our country. Fiyaz Mughal is the Founder of Faith Matters and the national anti-Muslim hate monitoring service, Tell MAMA Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
04-03-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Labour cannot defend their record on free speech while pursuing an Islamophobia law
Sir Keir Starmer was keen to stress Britain's history of freedom of speech in his meeting with Donald Trump at the Oval Office last week. 'We've had free speech for a very long time in the United Kingdom and it will last for a very long time,' the Prime Minister said proudly. He was commenting in response to a comment from the US Vice President JD Vance about 'infringements on free speech' in the UK. This makes it all the more terrifying that the Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner is pushing to introduce a new Islamophobia law in the UK, which will only restrict legitimate expression. Let me explain why. The term 'Islamophobia' suggests Islam cannot be questioned. It really is as simple as that. I have repeatedly called for the phrase 'anti-Muslim hatred' to be used instead, but this has fallen on deaf ears under the new Government. Why is Labour not providing the same service to other communities, such as Sikh people? Whilst some Sikhs have been attacked because perpetrators have thought they were Muslim, this does not provide a full picture of anti-Sikh hate crimes. We also know that racism and international issues in India also fuel hatred towards Sikhs. Many of these cases go unreported: will the Government step in and help this community? No. Labour does the usual: it forgets other communities in our country in its obsession with defining 'Islamophobia.' Rayner's department talks about transparency and ensuring that 'all voices' will be heard in consultations on the definition of Islamophobia. But why has she not publicly listed the names of those on the committee? How many members of the committee have delivered public reporting services on hate crimes, or discrimination, or on measurable levels of prejudice against British Muslims? Has MHLCG (the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government ) simply filled the committee with talking heads who all know each other and will not rock the boat within the Department? Rayner's definition will be non-binding on statutory agencies. This makes it utterly pointless. It does not have to be accepted by the courts, local authorities or even the police. The existing laws on hate speech, hate crimes and public disorder offences are clear, enforceable and have led to many prosecutions. There is therefore no good reason for Rayner to be spending her time and resources on a definition that is essentially pointless. Let us not forget that the Chair of the 'Council on Islamophobia' – Dominic Grieve KC – wrote a foreword to the APPG on Islamophobia's definition of 2018. That very definition was summarised into the following: 'Islamophobia is… rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness'. This definition is so wide you can drive a coach and horses through it: anyone can complain that their 'Muslimness' has been attacked. This does not bode well for free speech in our country.
