Extracts from Commons debate on the definition of Islamophobia - May 16
|
Wes Streeting (Ilford North) (Lab):...Alongside our definition, we
produced a series of examples, inspired by the International
Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, to
help people to understand how Islamophobia manifests itself. These
are outlined clearly in our report. They include calling for,
aiding, instigating or justifying the killing or harming of Muslims
in the name of a racist or fascist ideology or an extremist view of
religion; the tropes that Muslims...Request free trial
Wes Streeting (Ilford North)
(Lab):...Alongside our definition, we produced a series of
examples, inspired by the International Holocaust Remembrance
Alliance definition of antisemitism, to help people to
understand how Islamophobia manifests itself. These are outlined
clearly in our report. They include calling for, aiding,
instigating or justifying the killing or harming of Muslims in the
name of a racist or fascist ideology or an extremist view of
religion; the tropes that Muslims suffer about entryism in
politics, accusing Muslims of being more loyal to the alleged
priorities of Muslims worldwide than to their own nations; and
applying double standards not applied to any other group in
society...
...Let me conclude with some personal observations. I have watched, with some amazement and even greater despair, the Conservative party making exactly the same mistakes over Islamophobia as my party has with antisemitism—the same miserable, inexcusable pattern of dismissal, denial and delegitimisation of serious concerns raised by prominent Muslims about racism within their ranks. My friend Baroness Warsi has stood as a brave lone voice, challenging discrimination in her party. As we recoil in horror at the deafening silence of decent people in the Conservative party about racism within their ranks, I respectfully say to some quarters of my own party: that is the same silence you demand of me on antisemitism, and it is one you will never receive... Mr Khalid Mahmood (Birmingham, Perry Barr) (Lab):...I have been on the receiving end of hate mail and actions from both the far right and from the Islamist community. I have taken my job seriously since 2001 and I continue to do so. I am proud to be a British Pakistani Muslim Member of Parliament. I was elected in 2001 for Birmingham, Perry Barr, as the first Muslim to be elected to this Parliament from England. My great-grandfather and his brothers and cousins served in the British merchant navy in the first world war. My grandfather and his brothers and cousins served in the British merchant navy in the second world war. My maternal great-grandfather served in the British Indian Army in the second world war. I am proud of my roots and my heritage. I will take no lessons from anybody who tells me that I am Islamophobic or that I am too much of a Muslim. I am what I am, and I continue to be proud of that heritage. I am proud to be a member of the Labour party, because of its ideals in fighting against antisemitism, Muslim hatred, race hatred and LGBT hatred. I believe in equality and justice for all. That is why I am a Member of Parliament for the Labour party... Naz Shah (Bradford West) (Lab):...I originally prepared my speech for the debate that was postponed. Sadly, I can no longer deliver that speech because, just in the last 24 hours, I have witnessed the orchestrated nature of a machine that has come out in spectacular fashion in a continued attempt to shut down the voices and experiences of ordinary British Muslims. What I say today is neither a conspiracy nor some delusional hyperbole. I am referring to the fact that the chair of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, Martin Hewitt, wrote to the Prime Minister suggesting that the APPG definition of Islamophobia creates some sort of security risk. Let me put this to bed once and for all: this is a non-legally binding working definition, which is why that assertion is simply plain stupid. It is as stupid as saying that, because we have a non-legally binding definition of antisemitism, we can no longer do foreign policy in the middle east.I am a member of the National Police Chiefs’ Council national roundtable for race, religion and belief, which until this week was chaired by Chief Constable Jon Boutcher. He was not aware of Martin Hewitt’s letter or concerns. Furthermore, Chief Constable Ian Hopkins, the national lead on matters of policing and diversity from Greater Manchester police, did not know either, and nor did John Robins, my chief constable in West Yorkshire. What is deeply worrying is not only that Martin Hewitt attributes concerns to his colleagues without actually speaking to them, but that the intervention suggests that the police have a disgraceful lack of understanding of hate crimes. They recognise the importance of having racism and antisemitism defined, but the intervention suggests that the police are blind to the same need for Muslims, despite the fact that year on year the police have consistently produced figures that show an increase in hate crime against Muslims. This is not just about a Government who are failing to listen to the British Muslim communities; this is about a Government who on the eve of this debate coincidently and conveniently had a security leak from within their highest office, the office of the Prime Minister, with the serious concerns of the protection of British Muslims played out as a game on the front pages of a national newspaper. This is no longer about a political party that is institutionally Islamophobic; this is about a Government telling a section of those they govern they will not only silence their voices and ignore their legitimate fears, but define their experiences and actively shut down those trying to represent their views. If it is down to the experiences of women to define feminism, the experiences of people of colour to define racism, the experiences of Jews to define antisemitism, and the experiences of LGBTQ+ communities to define homophobia, I say to the Secretary of State: how dare he tell British Muslims that our experiences cannot define Islamophobia. If that is not a pernicious form of racism, what is it?
Wes Streeting:...My hon. Friend is
making a powerful speech. I can say hand on heart that she is
speaking with the passion and clarity that I hear in mosques and
Muslim community centres in my constituency. I heard from the
Conservative Benches the comment that clearly not all Muslims
agree with this definition and that is true, but I would just,
through her, ask the Secretary of State to reflect on the same
claims that are made by members of my own party about Jewish
Voice for Labour and by other fringe groups who consistently seek
to undermine the real fight against antisemitism. I am not
talking about Members of this House who disagree; I am talking
about fringe siren voices. Do not mistake the views of a minority
with the views of the majority...
Wes Streeting:...This has been a
wide-ranging and largely thoughtful debate, but the critical
thing that people will now look to us for is action. We will
engage seriously with the Secretary of State, as he has engaged
seriously with our arguments. Clearly there are points of
disagreement that we need to work through, not just as
legislators but with communities up and down the country. I say
gently, however, that as he goes about that work, he must do so
with a degree of self-awareness about the Government’s position
and the way that they are perceived among Muslim communities. I
say with some reflection and humility from the Labour Benches,
that I genuinely believe that the Government have no more
credibility to define Islamophobia than the Labour party had to
redefine antisemitism—that is how bad the politics of this place
have sunk in the eyes of so many people up and down the country.
I believe that we can and must make progress, and today’s debate
has helped us start to do that with, as the Secretary of State
said, some urgency...
|