“Islamophobia” working group benefits from softly, softly Talk TV host - but Free Speech in Britain continues to be under grave threat
- Dr Chan Abraham
- 5 hours ago
- 3 min read
In this piece Ian Collins gave this man an extremely easy interview and a much longer segment than the first guest.
He didn’t challenge him on the facts, such as this ideology not being a race, so racism is a wholly inappropriate route. He didn’t raise the issue of the teacher in Batley who is in hiding. He didn’t ask why large numbers of Muslims congregate for prayers in the streets when there are many mosques.
He didn’t mention that official UK Government Casey report is unequivocal about the savage s*xual abuse of young white girls being carried out mainly by “Asian and Pakistani men”.
“In Rotherham, an investigation into historic cases by the National Crime Agency found that two-thirds of suspects were of Pakistani heritage, despite them accounting for just 4 per cent of the local population.”
He didn’t raise the fact that Charles 3 and Starmer each celebrated and gave prominence to Islam at Easter time, but made no mention of Ash Wednesday or Easter in a Christian country.
Those events alone reveal that people occupying the highest offices of Great Britain already are giving Islam special and privileged status, something that would not be permitted in the reverse in an Islamic nation.
He didn’t raise the historic realities of Islam and a good place to start would be with Raymond Ibrahim. It would be balanced if Talk could get him on the show. See his short video on “The true history of Islamophobia” here:
This subject needs much wider discussion than an elite committee meeting secretly.
The evidence suggests that Angela Rayner’s working group on Islamophobia operates with limited transparency, as its advice is private, and public consultation is minimal.
The group’s composition appears to lack representation from key communities, including Christians, Jews, ex-Muslims, and victims of grooming gangs, with a bias toward members who support the controversial 2018 APPG definition. Critics, including the FSU, political figures, and Muslim scholars like Dr. Taj Hargey, argue that this exclusivity and secrecy could undermine free speech and fail to address the concerns of all affected communities.
Baroness Casey’s 2025 report on group-based child sexual exploitation highlighted how fears of being labeled racist or Islamophobic contributed to institutional failures in addressing grooming gangs, particularly in cases involving Pakistani-heritage men. Critics argue that Rayner’s working group, by potentially adopting a broad definition of Islamophobia, risks perpetuating this chilling effect, which could further silence victims and whistleblowers.
The Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, which represents individuals who have converted away from Islam, was explicitly ignored by the working group, according to the FSU. This exclusion is significant, as ex-Muslims often face unique challenges, including accusations of Islamophobia for critiquing their former faith. The lack of their representation suggests a gap in addressing the full spectrum of experiences related to Islam and its criticism.
The FSU has criticized the working group for failing to invite groups that could provide alternative perspectives, such as Christian Concern, The Christian Institute, the Adam Smith Institute, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, Don’t Divide Us, the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, and the Oxford Institute for British Islam. These groups represent Christians, ex-Muslims, and others who might challenge the impact of an Islamophobia definition on free speech or raise concerns about other communities.
The Free Speech Union (FSU) has raised concerns about the secretive nature of the working group. In a letter to Angela Rayner, the FSU noted that “all advice to ministers is marked ‘not to be made public’” and criticized the closed-door operation of the group. The terms of reference explicitly state: “The group will provide private advice for internal consideration by ministers only. The work of the group will not be made public.” This indicates a lack of transparency in the process.
Conservative frontbencher Claire Coutinho wrote to Angela Rayner, accusing her of conducting the work in secret without allowing public input during a consultation period. Coutinho highlighted that a “culture of secrecy around matters relating to race and religion” could hinder open discussion, particularly on sensitive issues like grooming gangs.
Only five members of the 16-person working group are publicly known, raising concerns about the transparency of the group’s composition and its decision-making process. The FSU has pointed out that the consultation process appears to focus solely on justifying a definition of Islamophobia without inviting broader perspectives.
Articles from outlets like Spiked and The Telegraph describe the working group as a “secretive” Labour initiative, with Spiked specifically calling it a “miniature Labour quango” that operates behind closed doors. These reports argue that the lack of public engagement risks pushing through a definition without proper scrutiny.
The Talk TV interview can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/aQoYCdsubkU?si=Y4kAAYIcHhjnDv-m
