Christians and free speech campaigners have criticised a recently announced government policy aimed at improving social cohesion.
In a foreword to the policy, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer took aim at “digital grifters, hostile states, [and] politicians of grievance”, who he said had a “vested interest in division”. Starmer’s comment appears to be aimed at Nigel Farage and Reform UK, who he has previously accused of grievance politics and sowing division.
For almost a year now Reform has been ahead in British opinion polls, although their numbers have dropped recently, with increasing support apparently going to the Green Party and Rupert Lowe’s Restore Britain.
Writing for Christian Concern, Carys Moseley, questioned the thinking behind the government’s new social cohesion policy, noting the “British values” appears to essentially mean liberalism and acceptance of all the rights claims made by LGBT activists.
Moseley writes, “How will the decision be made as to what is an ‘intolerant world view’? Gender self-identification is an intolerant world view. It is not tolerant of people who want single-sex spaces for specific functions … Having preached tolerance, the government shows increasing intolerance in relation to speech. The report contains some new rhetoric that will no doubt become socially, politically and legally significant in the near future.”
The Free Speech Union, raised similar concerns, saying that the new policy, combined with the controversial new Islamophobia definition “will only entrench already fragile community tensions by offering one religion, Islam, greater protections than others”.
“It will also stifle free speech by silencing legitimate criticism of Islam and discouraging individuals from speaking out about the grooming gangs scandal and Islamist extremism,” she said.
Moseley expressed concern that the policy will entrench liberal views by denouncing dissent as “extremism”.
“The definition [of ‘extremism’] uses the Human Rights Act as its legal instrument. This is important because there is a long-standing debate on whether the UK should leave the European Convention on Human Rights, which is enshrined in the act … So is a politician who argues that the UK should leave the ECHR an extremist?” she said.
The definition, Moseley, pointed out, could lead to pro-lifers being branded “extremists” for denying the “right” to have an abortion.
A crackdown on charities promoting “extremism” is also a cause for concern, according to Moseley, as many churches are registered charities.
Despite the significant concerns cited, Moseley argued there were some positives to the policy. For the first time the government said it would be cracking down on far left groups, rather than just Islamist and far right groups. Additionally the policy says it will not tolerate attempts to silence people via blasphemy allegations.
While welcoming the sentiment, Moseley noted that the government’s proposals on this front are “frustratingly thin on the practicalities”.
