Labour Government lobbied Equality and Human Rights Commission to adopt Islamophobia definition

Max Thompson, Campaigns Officer

24 August 2026

The decision by the last Labour Government to introduce an official definition of Islamophobia — repackaged as "anti-Muslim hostility" — has faced significant criticism, not least from the Free Speech Union.

When the last Government announced plans for an official, non-statutory definition, the Free Speech Union — amongst others — raised concerns that it would have a chilling effect on free speech and revive Britain's blasphemy laws for Islam alone. We were correct.

Since the definition was announced in March by the then Communities Secretary, Steve Reed, we have seen it weaponised by activists and even Labour MPs to silence legitimate criticism of Islam. Indeed, when the Shadow Justice Secretary, Nick Timothy, criticised a mass Muslim public prayer event in Trafalgar Square, Labour MPs branded him Islamophobic, reported him to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, and he even faced calls to resign from the then Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer.

But in recent weeks, the whole process of drafting the definition has come under increased scrutiny. This comes as no surprise to the Free Speech Union, as we exposed at the start of the year that all five members of the Working Group tasked by Angela Rayner to draft the definition have troubling links to Islamist organisations, including the Muslim Council of Britain and MEND — both of which successive governments since 2009 have refused to engage with due to their extreme views.

It has been revealed through a Freedom of Information request sent by the Shadow Justice Secretary that the Department for Housing, Communities and Local Government has deleted all responses that were submitted to the Working Group's consultation on the definition. This has raised a number of questions and is a serious cause for concern. Why did the department delete responses to a consultation that resulted in the effective reintroduction of Britain's blasphemy laws for Islam alone? Did extremists have an opportunity to submit evidence to the process while the Free Speech Union and the Equality and Human Rights Commission were not? Did ministers direct the department to dispose of all the submissions? And what on earth have they got to hide?

Nick Timothy has written to both Angela Rayner and the Interim Permanent Secretary at the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government to demand urgent answers.

In a more recent development, the former Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, Baroness Falkner, has accused the Government of attempting to persuade the watchdog to accept its "unworkable" definition of Islamophobia. This is despite the fact that the EHRC had warned against the definition, stating it was opposed due to its potential to have a "chilling effect" on free speech.

A Freedom of Information request has also revealed that the equalities watchdog will not be adopting the "anti-Muslim hostility" definition.

The Free Speech Union and the EHRC have long argued that the Islamophobia definition is not needed because laws are already in place that protect all followers of any faith from religious discrimination and hatred. If the Government were genuinely serious about addressing actual instances of anti-Muslim hatred, it should ensure that existing laws are enforced.

So why did it do this? It is blindingly obvious that the Labour Party is facing a problem with the Muslim vote, which it has neglected for years. With this core strand of its vote splintering in the direction of more sectarian, independent candidates, Labour has sought to woo these voters with the Islamophobia definition. By doing so, the Labour Government has sacrificed our fundamental right to free speech — including the right to criticise any religion — on the altar of electoral ambition.

General Secretary of the Free Speech Union, Lord Young of Acton, has told The Times: "Reading between the lines, it looks as though the government's adoption of a definition of anti-Muslim hostility was just the latest move in Labour's long-standing effort to get the EHRC to investigate the Conservative Party for 'Islamophobia'. So nothing to do with protecting Muslims and all about political point-scoring."

The Government has some serious questions to answer. As more and more details come out about this shady process to introduce a de facto Islamic blasphemy law, the public deserves to know what on earth is going on.

Read more in The Times.