UK government’s proposed definition of “Islamophobia” is “dangerous and divisive”; it should be scrapped entirely
RHODA WILSON
Shadow Equalities Minister Claire Coutinho has strongly criticised Labour’s plan to introduce a state-sanctioned definition of Islamophobia, warning it could grant grooming gangs “impunity” and intensify a “culture of censorship” that hinders necessary discussions on issues like Muslim grooming (rape) gangs, gender equality and Islamist extremism.
The move to draw up an official definition of “Islamophobia” stems from a working group set up by Angela Rayner over the summer to advise on “appropriate and sensitive language” around discrimination against Muslims.
Rayner recently quit as deputy prime minister, but the group’s work continues under Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government Steve Reed.
Keir Starmer is set to deliver a major speech at the Labour conference this week, pledging a “progressive fightback” against the “decline and division” fuelled by the “far-right.” He is expected to use his address to outline a strategy for rejecting division and hate, positioning the government as a leader in the fight against “far-right” extremism and its impact on communities, including Muslims, which heightens concerns that he will be pushing the concept of making “Islamophobia” illegal further.
In an article published last week, The Times reported that a legal opinion given by Tom Cross KC concluded the formal definition of “Islamaphobia” being prepared by ministers may end up influencing sentencing and hampering the work of the police and security services.
In the biggest challenge yet to Labour’s definition of “Islamophobia,” The Telegraph reported earlier this month, Jonathan Hall KC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, said he was against an official definition of Islamophobia because it was “directed” at a religion rather than protecting people from anti-Muslim hatred.
Hall warned that any “spongy or inaccurate” definition would threaten freedom of speech in the face of a likely “overzealous” enforcement of it by police and other authorities.
The Times quoted Lord Young of Acton (Toby Young) of the Free Speech Union, who warned: “We have put the government on notice that we won’t hesitate to bring legal action if it rolls out an official definition of Islamophobia. We have various laws that protect people of faith from harassment and discrimination and state agencies whose responsibility it is to advise public bodies on how to interpret and apply those laws. Any attempt by the government to trespass on the jurisdiction of these agencies would be unlawful.”
“If Labour pushes this definition through … no one will be able to criticise grooming gangs, Islamist extremism or political Islam without breaking the law and being branded Islamophobic. That’s a direct threat to free speech, public safety and honest debate,” a former Conservative MP told the Conservative & Reformer Post.
Shadow Equalities Minister Claire Coutinho has accused Labour of attempting to rig the consultation process by initially limiting public input, only allowing it after she exposed the restricted access.
Coutinho said the definition, pushed by “radical activists,” would give Muslims a “special status” above other groups, potentially breeding resentment and worsening community cohesion. She suggested the move is politically motivated, aiming to appease pro-Palestine and pro-Gaza candidates ahead of the next election, rather than genuinely tackling anti-Muslim hate.
She has called on Reed to scrap the definition entirely. “This is nothing but a cynical attempt to give special protections to one group in society … The new secretary of state must scrap this dangerous and divisive definition,” she said.
Related:
- Angela Rayner to promise a new definition of Islamophobia, Free Speech Union, 3 March 2025
- Activist advising Rayner over Islamophobia definition sparks conflict of interest row, The Telegraph, 21 July 2025
- UK government effort to define Islamophobia reportedly delayed, JNS, 16 August 2025
- UK ‘faces social unrest’ if Labour pushes ahead with Islamophobia definition. The Times, 25 August 2025
- Blue Labour Peer Urges Keir Starmer To Drop Plans For Islamophobia Definition, Politics Home, 28 August 2025
Featured image: Steve Reed, taken from ‘Labour’s shadow justice secretary Steve Reed personally intervened in the case of a violent thug facing deportation from Britain’, Daily Mail, 10 May 2023 (left). Keir Starmer at the Labour conference in 2022. Source: The Guardian (right).
This article (UK government’s proposed definition of “Islamophobia” is “dangerous and divisive”; it should be scrapped entirely) was created and published by The Expose and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Rhoda Wilson
••••
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.
Leave a Reply