Counter-Extremism Report Downplays the Islamist Threat To Focus More on Misogyny, “Misinformation” and “Conspiracy Theories”

Leaked Home Office counter-extremism report downplays the Islamist threat to focus more on misogyny, “misinformation” and “conspiracy theories”

RHODA WILSON 

Two-tier policing claims are part of a “right-wing extremist narrative.” according to a leaked Home Office report.

Islamists are responsible for 94% of terrorism-related deaths and 88% of injuries in Great Britain since 1999.  Yet the report suggests the Government is deprioritising the Islamist threat and instead focusing on other “behaviours of concern,” such as misogyny, “spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories,” and “preventing integration.”

The UK Home Office’ ‘Rapid Analytical Sprint’ report was commissioned to address extremism following the Southport riots in August 2024.   The aim was to map and monitor extremist trends, understand what works to disrupt and divert people from extremist views, and identify gaps in existing policy.

The ‘Sprint’ report, leaked to the think tank Policy Exchange on 28 January 2025, claims that fears over two-tier policing is an “extreme right-wing narrative” and suggests that grooming gangs are an issue exploited by the far-right to stir hatred against Muslims.

“You can tell a government report has gone down badly when ministers are distancing themselves before it has been officially published,” The Spectator wrote the day of the leak. “Today, it’s the Home Office’s ‘Rapid Analytical Sprint’ …  that is causing trouble for ministers.”

The report recommends increasing the use of controversial “non-crime hate incidents” and introducing a new crime of “harmful communications” to tackle online abuse of Members of Parliament.

The Spectator went on to note that Dan Jarvis, the Security Minister, said he and the Home Secretary had rejected the report’s recommendations, despite having commissioned the review. The problem for ministers is that the report mirrors much of Keir Starmer’s earlier rhetoric on grooming gangs.

In further complications for ministers, The Sun noted that on the same day as the Rapid Analytical Sprint was leaked, a report by the Children’s Commissioner came out that said the 147 youngsters arrested in the unrest after the Southport murders were not motivated by racism or far-right misinformation.

The Children’s Commissioner cited a deep distrust of the police and lack of opportunity as drivers in children’s motivation to take part in last summer’s riots.  These won’t have been drivers for only the children.

Further reading:

Extremely Confused, an Overview

Policy Exchange has published a 27-page report titled ‘Extremely Confused: The Government’s new counter-extremism review revealed’ written by Andrew Gilligan and Dr. Paul Stot.  We have used an unchecked artificial intelligence (“AI”) summary of this report for the text below to give a preview of what the report contains. Related articles shown in [square brackets] have been added by us and do not form part of the report.

It’s important to remember that AI is not intelligent, it is simply a computer programme that will output what it has been programmed to output and can, and does, make mistakes.  If you are interested in reading Policy Exchange’s full report, you can do so HERE.

UK Counter-Extremism Review Proposes Shift in Focus

The UK Government’s ‘Rapid Analytical Sprint’ (“the Sprint”) review on extremism has been leaked, proposing a shift from focusing on “ideologies of concern” to a wide range of “behaviours” including violence against women, spreading misinformation, and misogyny.

This approach risks overwhelming counter-extremism staff and police with thousands of new cases, potentially missing genuinely dangerous people, and addressing symptoms rather than causes.

The review de-centres and downplays Islamism, acknowledging “left-wing, anarchist and single issue (LASI) extremism,” “environmental extremism,” and Hindu extremism as distinct phenomena to be tackled.

The review raises concerns over freedom of speech, recommending the reversal of restrictions on “non-crime hate incidents” and floating a new crime of making “harmful communications” online.

Concerns over the Review’s Approach to Extremism

The review may have been influenced by the events of Southport but risks confusing extreme violence with extremism.  Prevent is the UK’s counter-terrorism policing programme.  Experts suggest creating a “non-extremist” version of Prevent to interdict individuals with an interest in violence but no obvious ideological motivation.

The UK government’s counter-extremism review, known as the Sprint, focuses on various forms of extremism, but it does not adequately address the threat posed by Islamist extremism.

Islamist extremism has been responsible for 94% of terrorism-related deaths and 88% of injuries in Great Britain since 1999. Yet the Sprint devotes equal space to other forms of extremism that have caused no terrorist deaths.

The review’s emphasis on behaviours rather than ideology risks tackling symptoms rather than causes, and ignores the role of institutions in spreading and incubating extremism, particularly in Islamist extremism.

Criticism of the Review’s Focus on Behaviour over Ideology

Policy Exchange criticises the Sprint for its approach to extremism, which may confuse extreme violence with extremism and terrorism.

The review’s focus on behaviour rather than ideology has been influenced by the Southport case, in which Axel Rudakubana committed violent acts without a clear ideology.

[Related: Southport stabbings: Who trained Axel Rudakubana? Could he have learnt from his father?]

Experts, including Jonathan Hall KC and Neil Basu, argue that a new approach is needed to deal with people who are motivated by non-instrumental extreme violence but do not fit into traditional definitions of extremism.

Concerns about Freedom of Speech and Resource Allocation

The Sprint’s recommendations, including the introduction of a new criminal offence for “harmful communications” and the reversal of the code of practice on non-crime hate incidents, have raised concerns about freedom of speech.

The review’s approach is criticised for potentially diverting resources away from actual threats to national security and democratic values.

Labour’s Proposal to Reverse Downgrading of Hate Monitoring

The 2024 Labour manifesto proposed reversing the Conservatives’ decision to downgrade the monitoring of antisemitic and Islamophobic hate, which would encompass all five protected characteristics.

The reversal would involve changing the NCHI (Non-Crime Hate Incident) code of practice, which was introduced to ensure that recording NCHIs is proportionate and necessary to mitigate harm or prevent future crimes.

Criticism of the Review’s Labelling of Certain Narratives

The Sprint document labels claims of “two-tier policing” as a “right-wing extremist narrative,” which could lead to tarring significant swathes of the public as “far right.”

The document also categorises debates over perceived inequalities in resource provision as a “far right” narrative, which could be contentious.

Concerns about the Composition of the Ministerial Board

The creation of a ministerial board to take key decisions on extremism is a positive development but the absence of the Minister for Border Security and Asylum is concerning.

The document lists nine types of extremism, including Islamist, extreme right wing, and extreme misogyny, but fails to mention specific groups by name, which could lead to criticism that the Government lacks clarity on who it sees as a problem.

Criticism of the Review’s Handling of Specific Topics

The UK Government’s counter-extremism review is criticised for its handling of certain topics, such as the exploitation of child sexual abuse cases by right-wing extremists and the omission of high-profile grooming cases in towns like Rochdale and Rotherham.

The review highlights various forms of extremism, including Pro-Khalistan Extremism, Hindu Nationalist Extremism and environmental extremism, and notes the need for a more nuanced approach to addressing these issues.

The Government is advised to adopt a three-pronged approach to counter-extremism, involving targeted/punitive measures, building resilience and learning from partners, and to consider international best practices, such as those in Denmark and the Netherlands.

Establishment of a Counter-Extremism Ministerial Board

The UK government has established a Counter Extremism Ministerial Board, comprising representatives from various government departments, devolved administrations and security services, to oversee and develop the country’s counter-extremism strategy.

The board includes ministers such as Dan Jarvis, Diana Johnson and Jess Phillips, as well as representatives from the Security Service (MI5), GCHQ and the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre.

Recommendations and Criticisms of the “Sprint” Review

The Sprint recommends a focus on behaviours that cause harm rather than a definition of extremism and proposes changes to legislation, including extending aggravating offences for hate crime and targeting extremist abuse of the charity sector.

The review also suggests increased disruption of people and organisations that have a radicalising impact in communities but lacks clarity on how this will be implemented in practice.

Critics, including Policy Exchange, argue that the review is too broad and lacks focus on ideology and that the government’s efforts may be spread too thin, leading to an ineffective programme.

Risks and Concerns of the Counter-Extremism Review

The UK government’s counter-extremism review risks delegitimising the fight against Islamism, a major systemic threat, by deprioritising it.

The Prevent programme is already being asked to deal with issues outside its national security remit, leading to missed threats, such as the murder of MP Sir David Amess.

[Related: Southport and Amess murders ‘linked by failings’, BBC, 26 January 2025]

Expanding the definition of extremism to include criticism of certain policies risks damaging democratic debate and politicising non-partisan issues like violence against women.

A “non-extremist” version of Prevent is proposed to address social ills and prevent crimes without using the counter-extremism lens.

Featured image: Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, launched Sprint, an internal review of anti-extremism strategy, in August 2024.  Source: The Times

This article (Leaked Home Office counter-extremism report downplays the Islamist threat to focus more on misogyny, “misinformation” and “conspiracy theories”) was created and published by The Expose and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Rhoda Wilson

See Related Article Below

Angela Rayner to set rules on Islam and free speech

Ex-Tory Dominic Grieve tipped to head up advisory council but critics warn ‘blasphemy’ law could be created

CHARLES HYMAS

Angela Rayner is planning to create a council on Islamophobia and is lining up a former Tory minister to lead it, The Telegraph can reveal.

The 16-strong council will help advise on drawing up an official government definition for anti-Muslim discrimination and will provide advice to ministers on tackling Islamophobia, according to sources.

Dominic Grieve, the former Conservative attorney general and a prominent Remainer, has been “recommended” to chair the council within Ms Rayner’s Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) as a politician who has been actively involved in tackling Islamophobia.

He chaired the Citizens’ UK Commission on Islam, which aimed to promote dialogue between Muslim and non-Muslim communities, and wrote a foreword to a controversial all-party parliamentary group’s report in 2018 that set out a definition of Islamophobia, which the Labour Party adopted.

The definition has been criticised for being so widely drawn that it curbs free speech, amounts to a de facto blasphemy law and stifles legitimate criticism of Islam as a religion.

Among the 16 candidates shortlisted for the council is Qari Asim, a Leeds imam who was dismissed as a government adviser by the Tories in 2022 after backing calls for a ban on the film The Lady of Heaven, about the Prophet Mohammed’s daughter.

Ministers have yet to say whether they will adopt the all-party group’s definition of Islamophobia or an alternative. Opponents have urged them to shelve the plans because of free speech concerns.

Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, said: “The Government should drop its plans for such a deeply flawed definition of Islamophobia. Of course we should tackle anti-Muslim hate wherever it occurs, but this definition is a Trojan horse for a blasphemy law protecting Islam.

“Why do Labour MPs think it is acceptable to mock Christianity but not Islam? Time and again this Labour Government displays an Orwellian disregard for freedom of speech.”

The all-party group, which was co-chaired by Wes Streeting, who is now the Health Secretary, published its definition in 2018 after an 18-month consultation. It stated: “Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.”

In his foreword, Mr Grieve said he “greatly welcomed” the report, saying it “makes an important contribution to the debate as to how Islamophobia can best be addressed. It is well researched and can give all of us food both for thought and positive action.”

In 2019, Mr Grieve was stripped of the Tory whip by Boris Johnson after rebelling on Brexit legislation. He stood as an independent candidate in the 2019 election.

Asked about the council, Mr Grieve said he had not received any formal approach from MCHLG but he told The Telegraph: “If I can be of assistance in doing something constructive requested by any government on a non-party political basis I am willing to consider it. It depends on what it is and whether I can add value and help the wider public service.”

Asked about the definition of Islamophobia, he said: “It was apparent at the time that defining Islamophobia is extremely difficult for perfectly valid reasons relating to freedom of expression.”

However, he said it was clear that “perfectly law-abiding Muslims going about their business and well integrated into society are suffering discrimination and abuse”.

The Telegraph: continue reading

Featured image: Mancunian Matters

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*