Putting Extinction Rebellion on extremist list 'completely wrong', says Keir Starmer
Keir Starmer, the Labour leadership frontrunner, has branded a decision by police to include Extinction Rebellion on a list of extreme ideologies as “completely wrong and counterproductive”.
The shadow Brexit secretary and former chief prosecutor in England and
Wales joined police chiefs in denouncing the move – revealed in the Guardian on Friday – to put XR’s beliefs on the list of ideologies that warrant reporting someone to the Prevent programme, which seeks to stop terror attacks.
His condemnation came after the home secretary, Priti Patel, defended the decision, saying it was important to look at “a range of security risks”.
While accepting that XR was not a terrorist organisation, Patel told LBC radio that such an assessment had to be “based in terms of risk to the public, security risks, security threats”.
Starmer, who emerged as the clear favourite for the Labour leadership among MPs on Monday with 88 nominations, said the guidance was wrong.
“It’s completely wrong and counterproductive to describe Extinction Rebellion as an ‘extreme ideology’,” he told the Guardian. “I have spent a lifetime defending the right to protest – and campaigning for action on the climate crisis is hugely important.”
Starmer’s position was backed by Nick Thomas-Symonds, the shadow security minister, who called the decision “incomprehensible”.
He said: “Climate change is a real and present danger that requires an immediate policy response; this decision further calls into question the effectiveness of the Prevent programme, of which Labour has long argued for an independent review.
“Since Lord Carlile stood down as the independent reviewer following legal challenge, the government has not appointed a replacement. They must appoint someone who com
mands widespread confidence across different communities and carry out the robust review of Prevent that is urgently required.”
Carlile, a barrister and Liberal Democrat peer, was appointed by the Conservative government to carry out a review of Prevent, but stood down because of claims he was biased and amid a legal challenge.
He too denounced the decision. The first independent reviewer of terrorism legislation from 2001-11 said the police had made an error and were right to apologise.
Carlile said: “The Prevent strategy is meant to deal with violent extremism, with terrorism, and XR are not violent terrorists. They are disruptive campaigners.”
The list of extreme ideologies including XR came in a guide dated to last November produced by counterterrorism policing south-east and was intended for police officers, government organisations and teachers, who by law have to report concerns about radicalisation.
XR featured alongside threats to national security such as neo-Nazi terrorism and a pro-terrorist Islamist group. Police said including the nonviolent climate emergency group was a mistake and recalled the document, but only after they discovered the Guardian had learned of it.
Carlile said: “My view is it is important to distinguish between terrorism and protest. XR is mostly legitimate protest. It does not fall into the category of terrorism and the police are quite right to back down.
“It is a very difficult area and it is unsurprising that mistakes are made
… This was an error of judgment, but in this area, errors of judgment are going to be made from time to time.”
Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, said Patel’s comments were “indefensible”. XR has threatened legal action over the guidance.
Sir Peter Fahy, who was head of Prevent from 2010 to 2015, subsequently told the Guardian that such categorisations risked Prevent losing confidence from communities.
Asked about Fahy’s comments, Patel defended the Prevent programme and the police’s actions. “When it comes to anti-terrorism, Prevent and the work that the government is doing, and has done for a considerable period of time – we are constantly looking at individuals, groups,” she said. “That’s right and that’s proper. But everything has to be based and calibrated upon risk.
“Sir Peter Fahy has made one comment. Quite frankly, I look at a range of security risks.”
Asked if she believed XR was a terrorist organisation, Patel replied: “No, they’re obviously a protest organisation. But everything has to be based in terms of risk to the public, security risks, security threats. That is based on information from the police, and various intelligence that we will receive. That’s the proper thing to do. You develop your policy approach accordingly.”
Boris Johnson’s spokesman said said: “The home secretary was very clear that it was considered a protest group. These are obviously matters for the police and the police set out on Friday that they were looking at this.”
XR, which has held a series of protests against the climate emergency involving blocking streets, was included in a 12-page guide produced by counterterrorism police in the south-east titled Safeguarding Young People and Adults from Ideological Extremism, which is marked “official”.
It says that issues to look out for include people who speak in “strong or emotive terms about environmental issues” and to look out for young people who “neglect to attend school” or “participate in planned school walkouts”.
When the Guardian first asked police about the guidance, officials said they would review it. Following further questions, counter-terrorism police confirmed it had been circulated to “statutory partners” and had been recalled. They said they now accepted that the protest group was not extremist.