Fears mounting over free speech as Labour plans to define Islamophobia
The Tories have warned that introducing a government-backed definition will lead to a clampdown on freedom of expression.
Housing and local government spokesman Kevin Hollinrake also said the committee – made up almost entirely of Muslims – set up by Labour to devise the definition would lead to a 'predetermined and biased' conclusion.
And a cross-party group of peers has written to Labour's working group, whose chairman is former Tory Dominic Grieve, expressing concerns.
They claim the move could lead to public sector workers, as well as university staff or students, facing disciplinary action if accused of doing or saying 'something that falls foul of the definition'.
Mr Hollinrake asked Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner in the Commons yesterday: 'Does the Secretary of State not share our concerns that their report and recommendations will be seen as predetermined and biased?'
He said 'freedom of speech is on the line' and expressed concerns about the definition being drawn up in secret by the Anti-Muslim Hate/Islamophobia Definition Working Group.
Ms Rayner accused Mr Hollinrake of using 'incendiary language', insisting: 'We will always protect free speech, including the right to criticise religions.
'The independent working group will submit its findings... We will then consider its recommendations and set out the next steps.'
Former Tory co-chairman Baroness Warsi also accused Mr Hollinrake of 'unbefitting gutter politics'.
Labour commissioned the work to devise a 'non-statutory' definition of Islamophobia in a what it says is a move to combat anti-Muslim abuse.
But there are fears it could lead to a blasphemy law by the back door and stifle legitimate criticism of Islam.
More than 30 peers said in their letter: 'Our principal concern is that if your working group comes up with a definition and it is taken up by the Government it will have a chilling effect on free speech and exacerbate community tensions.
'It would have 'wide-ranging implications for what people in public life, and those who work for public bodies or attend schools or universities, are able to say about Muslims and Islam.
This presumably would mean any member of a university that says or does something that falls foul of the definition would face potential penalties.'
The Policy Exchange think-tank has said Labour's working group should be suspended, warning an official definition of Islamophobia would 'almost certainly turbocharge cancel culture'.
After a review by Whitehall troubleshooter Baroness Casey found public bodies covered up evidence about Asian grooming gangs 'for fear of appearing racist', Policy Exchange said Labour's measures 'would have made exposing the grooming scandal even harder and slower'.
Ms Rayner's department said 'any proposed definition must be compatible with the right to freedom of speech and expression'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
Starmer has worked to ‘cultivate' relationship with Trump, says minister
Sir Keir Starmer has put a 'lot of effort' in to 'cultivate' a relationship with US President Donald Trump, a Cabinet ally of the Prime Minister has said. With Mr Trump having said he will meet Sir Keir in Aberdeen later this month during a private visit to Scotland, Scottish Secretary Ian Murray said holding talks with the president is the 'right thing to do'. He said US tariffs and the situation in Ukraine could be on the agenda for those discussions. Scottish First Minister John Swinney will also meet the president – who recently voiced his support for the oil and gas sector over wind power projects. In a BBC News interview, Mr Trump hailed Aberdeen as the 'oil capital' of Europe and said 'they should get rid of the windmills and bring back the oil'. Mr Trump also said he and Sir Keir will 'refine' the recent trade deal struck between the UK and the US. The agreement reduced tariffs on car and aerospace imports, but questions remain over whether steel imports into America will face 50% tariffs. There is also a baseline tariff of 10% for most other imports – with the Scotch whisky industry now said to be pushing for this to be lowered. Mr Murray said: 'At this stage we have no sight of what the president's programme is, but we do know the First Minister and the Prime Minister will meet him, and it is right for them both to do so.' Speaking on BBC Radio Scotland's Good Morning Scotland programme, the Scottish Secretary added the meetings are 'the right thing to do because those relationships are incredibly important in terms of our own national interest'. He added: 'We should make sure we are working very closely with our allies for the benefit of Scotland and the whole of the United Kingdom.' Saying that doing 'what is in the UK's national interest' is the 'top priority' for the Prime Minister, the Scottish Secretary continued: 'Of course tariffs will be on the agenda I am sure, and the economic situation and the issue of Ukraine and defence. 'All of these issues I am sure will be on the agenda when they speak. 'The bottom line here is that it has taken a lot of effort for the Prime Minister to cultivate this relationship with our strongest ally, that's why we have the lowest tariffs in the world and why we had the first deal done with America in our national interest.' Mr Murray said while the 10% tariff on whisky exports to the US is something the UK Government would like to see lowered, he added the UK's trade deal with India had cut tariffs for sales of the drink there in a 'huge, huge boon to the Scotch whisky industry'.
Daily Mail
18 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Britain's benefits crisis: 3.6MILLION people are on Universal Credit with no obligation to seek work - FIVE TIMES higher than before Covid
Some 3.6million Brits are getting benefits with no obligation to seek work after an extraordinary surge since Covid. Nearly half of all the 7.9million people on Universal Credit have 'no work requirement', compared to fewer than 700,000 in January 2020. Meanwhile, numbers classed as searching for employment while they get handouts have slumped to 1.6million. That is despite UC claims swelling by 1.1million over the year to June. The grim figures underline the scale of sickness issues blighting the UK economy, with ministers struggling to get a grip on spiralling spending. Keir Starmer was forced to gut a £5billion package of reforms earlier this month after a massive revolt by Labour MPs. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) said UC claims with 'no work requirements' overtook 'searching for work' as the largest conditionality regime in April 2022. It said the increase was down to people making new claims as well as moving across from the old Employment and Support Allowance (ESA). The government has pledged to scrap work capability assessments for UC by 2028 in a bid to toughen the rules, but not said what will replace them. For the first time the government released a breakdown yesterday of how many immigrants are getting the benefit. The data showed that 1.2million UC claimants had EU settled status, were refugees, arrived under a humanitarian route or had limited or indefinite leave to remain as of June. That was up from 1.1 million a year earlier. The majority of migrants being paid UC are not in work - a situation campaigners described as 'unsustainable'. Some 83.6 per cent of those on the benefit were British, Irish, or live or work in the UK without any immigration restrictions. The Tories said they have a 'clear, common-sense position' that UC 'should be reserved for UK citizens only'. The Government said it had 'inherited a broken welfare system and spiralling, unsustainable benefits bill' and was working on reforms including tightening rules on who can claim. The Prime Minister's spokesman said yesterday they will double the amount of time it takes to apply for settled status from five years to 10, limiting eligibility for the benefit. Asked whether Sir Keir wants to see the number of foreign nationals claiming benefits while unemployed reduced, his official spokesman said: 'Absolutely, we both want to see the overall numbers of immigration reduced and we've set out plans for that through the Immigration White Paper. 'Within that, we also want to see people making a contribution to the UK, and that's why in the White Paper we set out that we will be doubling the amount of time it takes to apply for settled status. 'That actually means that typically you can only access universal credit after you've lived here currently for five years, and we're doubling that to a starting point of 10 years, so that will obviously reduce those numbers.' The DWP said it had published the breakdown of immigration status 'following a public commitment to investigate and develop breakdowns of the UC caseload by the immigration status of foreign nationals in receipt of UC'. People can access UC only if they have an immigration status that provides recourse to public funds. Those with no recourse to public funds (NRPF) cannot claim most benefits, tax credits or housing assistance that are paid by the state. Asylum seekers do not have access to UC as they have NRPF but those granted refugee status – deemed to have been forced to flee their country because of a well-founded fear of persecution, war or violence – can claim the benefit. While refugees on UC had the lowest rate of employment at 22%, the department said those who have only recently been granted refugee status cannot be in employment at that point as asylum seekers are not permitted to work.
The Guardian
18 minutes ago
- The Guardian
No automatic right to resettlement for Afghans in data leak, says Healey
The defence secretary, John Healey, has said there is no automatic right to resettlement for Afghans named in a leaked Ministry of Defence database, as the former Conservative ministers Ben Wallace and Johnny Mercer clashed over whether 'thousands of people with little or tenuous links' had been admitted to Britain. The controversy revolves around a dataset containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan relocations and assistance policy (Arap) that was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a British defence official. The MoD only became aware of the breach when excerpts from the dataset were posted anonymously on a Facebook group in August 2023, and a superinjunction was granted at the high court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban from finding out about the leak. Healey told Sky News: 'Most of those names on the list were people who didn't work alongside our forces, didn't serve with our forces, aren't eligible for the special scheme that Britain put in place quite rightly to recognise that duty we owe those brave Afghans who supported our forces. 'Now they're not eligible for that. Their name is on the dataset, and there was never the plan, to bring everyone on that dataset into this country, and nor should we.' Asked if the risk posed by the leak could give them a right to claim asylum, he said: 'It doesn't give them a right to claim access to Britain. It doesn't give them a right to claim asylum. It doesn't make them eligible for the special scheme that Britain put in place for those who'd worked alongside or served with our forces.' Wallace, who was defence secretary at the time of the leak, denied that the Conservatives applied for a superinjunction. He told the BBC's Today programme that when ministers went to the high court to stop reporting of the leak, 'we applied for a four-month injunction, a normal injunction'. He said: 'I was not in court in September 2023 when the injunction was converted into a superinjunction, so I don't know why it was converted.' Healey directly challenged Mercer's assertion that thousands of Afghans with weak links to the UK had been admitted under the scheme. 'It's not correct. Not in the period I've been responsible for this scheme,' he told BBC Radio 4. 'This dataset contained names of many people who had never worked with our forces and were not eligible under the Arap scheme,' Healey said. 'Some were simply speculative applications. Their inclusion in the dataset didn't make them eligible then and doesn't now.' Wallace agreed. He told Radio 4's Today programme: 'I don't think he's [Mercer] entirely right. Originally, it was assessed there'd be about 12,000 people going spanning the 20 years, plus their families who had been leaked to working directly for the British state … The total number seems to be 18,000. I believe they were the right people.' Wallace added: 'The policy was, we didn't want the whole Afghan army to come. These were people directly linked to our different parts of our military.' On Tuesday, Healey told MPs he had been 'deeply uncomfortable' with the secrecy imposed by the previous government. 'I have been deeply uncomfortable to be constrained from reporting to this house,' he said in parliament. He told broadcasters the following morning: 'Accountability starts now.' Wallace defended the initial decision to seek secrecy, saying: 'The most important priority was to protect those people who could have been or were exposed by this data leak in Afghanistan, living amongst the Taliban who had no regard for their safety, or indeed potentially could torture them or murder them. That was my priority.'
