The Government has defended the right to be “robust” while discussing extremism and community divisions, but warned MPs must not inflame tensions.
The House of Commons heard fears around the impact of language used when discussing these topics, amid worries it could damage cohesion between different groups.
Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Select Committee, Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) said she was concerned about a further rise in hate crime.
The Labour MP said: “At a time when we are seeing such an increase in religious hate crime, including Islamophobia and antisemitism, we all have a duty in this house to be careful around the language we use.
“And I hope the Government will also have a look at the language coming out from the Government, because it’s really vital for community cohesion that we are careful and we don’t unintendedly inflame this.”
Communities minister Alex Norris said: “I think the point on language is an important one.
“It is reasonable and right that our constituents would expect us to be robust, where those who choose to challenge and undermine democracy and those basic principles that guide our society, but also that we use our platform, our very privileged platform, not to give rise, not to give succour for hateful ideas and prejudices.
“And indeed that’s one of the things that we know of the changing nature of terror is that those individuals are taking cues from organisations themselves that are stopping short of an obvious threshold of inflaming terrorist-type behaviours, but are instead using that as encouragement.
“I think we all have a responsibility, therefore, to be very measured in that.”
At a time when we are seeing such an increase in religious hate crime, including Islamophobia and antisemitism, we all have a duty in this house to be careful around the language we use.
Oldham East and Saddleworth Labour MP Debbie Abrahams said she was worried about any conflation between extremism and discussion of child sexual exploitation.
She said: “Does (Mr Norris) agree with me that the importance of using our language, but not only that, but how we use our language, is really important to avoid eradicating the social cohesion that some of us have spent many many years establishing in our communities?”
Mr Norris, who represents Nottingham North and Kimberley, said: “I think it’s important we’re careful with conflations, and one thing I know about many years of building trust in my community is it takes a long time to build that trust, but it can be lost very quickly as well if we are thoughtless in the language that we use as well.”
Mr Norris had earlier told the Commons ministers would be adopting a cross-Government approach to extremism. A steering group will be set up to develop a comprehensive strategy on the “underlying causes of divisions in our local communities”.
He had been accused by shadow communities minister David Simmonds of “ditching” the previous government’s policy on engagement.
In an urgent question, Mr Simmonds added: “Does the department still adhere to that working definition of Islamism? Does the department still have a working definition of non-violent extremism that public bodies can rely on, should they need to defend themselves if challenged? Can he tell the House why ministers have not been, to quote the ministerial code, as open as possible on this issue?”
Mr Norris replied: “The previous secretary of state, for whom I have a lot of respect, chose to assume a lot of responsibility, essentially for the entire government within MHCLG (Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government).
“I think there’s very good reasons why that isn’t the right approach, because actually counter-extremism, I believe, should be the fundamental purview of the Home Office, not least because of the access to often confidential information that they get that MHCLG doesn’t.
“So, the approach we’ve chosen as a new Government is for a cross-Government, but Home Office-led counter-extremism sprint that is going to lead to a counter-extremism strategy in due course, to shape the Government’s way forward.”
