Islamist-influenced report
other Jewish groups backed the APPG definition because if it was quickly adopted by the major political parties, it would expose Jeremy Corbyn to further criticism over his antics with the IHRA antisemitism definition.
In April 2018, the APPG began a six-month inquiry, taking evidence from Muslim organisations, legal experts, academics, MPs and other groups, before agreeing on the definition, which states: “Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.”
Those who worked on the definition of Islamophobia said they wanted it to capture the idea that, while Muslims are not a race, abuse against them amounts to a form of racism.
On July 10, the Board’s Parliamentary Officer Joel Salmon and Interfaith and Social Action Officer Anthony Silkoff met with Muhbeen Hussain, one of the APPG’s secretariat, for their first official discussions about the working definition.
Mr Hussain, from Rotherham, organised a local Muslim boycott of the police in 2015 over their ‘Islamophobic’ behaviour after the child-sex grooming scandal.
Later that same month, the recently elected Board President Marie van der Zyl met with Baroness Warsi — whose close links to Mend have been revealed by the JC — at the House of Lords.
After the JC revealed the meeting, Mrs van der Zyl said the pair had discussed “the twin evils of antisemitism and anti-Muslim hate, which I have made a priority for my presidency”, while she added that she had told the former Minister for Faith and Conservative Party Chairman that “the Board of Deputies would not work with Mend” — this just a few weeks after Board staff had begun a series of meetings with the Mend-dominated APPG over the definition.
Following further meetings with the APPG, the Board was said by one source to have found progress on the definition “encouraging”.
As the APPG then moved towards publication, Mr Salmon and a senior CST staff member were invited to meet Mr Streeting on November 19 for talks. According to one source, he is said to have “literally begged” them to back the definition. Both the Board and the CST were also urged to send representatives along to the December launch in Westminster as a show of solidarity with the APPG.
Mr Streeting was described as being caught between a rock and a hard place — keen for his APPG work to carry weight, but aware that its links to Mend could scupper any Jewish communal bodies from backing it.
The subsequent launch was deeply controversial after Lord Nazir Ahmed appeared in publicity photos alongside other parliamentarians at the event, including APPG chairs Ms Soubry and Mr Streeting and Baroness Warsi.
Lord Ahmed, a member of the APPG, once warned of a “Zionist lobby” and claimed a prison sentence he served was the result of a Jewish conspiracy. He resigned from Labour in 2013, two months after he was suspended by the Party for sending antisemitic messages.
A damning assessment of the Islamophobia definition was published after the launch in a Policy Exchange report by Trevor Phillips, former chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and Sir John Jenkins, a former ambassador who co-authored a government review into the Muslim Brotherhood in 2015.
Sir John concluded: “It is clear that Mend, an organisation with a tarnished reputation in government circles, has exerted an important intellectual influence on the APPG.”
Referring to the involvement of former Mend activist Dr Perra, he added: “The connection between the APPG report and the Mend agenda is not simply intellectual. Dr Perra was, until recently, also a member of Mend but no mention is made of this affiliation. In a similar vein, the APPG makes reference to evidence it took from the ‘Islamophobia Response Unit’ (IRU). But it fails to mention that the IRU was created in April 2017 by Mend.”
Mr Phillips concluded the new definition would “make life harder” for Muslims in the UK and reduce them to “the status of perpetual victims.”
There has been no official comment from Jewish communal organisations following the publication of the APPG definition and report.
Asked for comment on their decision to cooperate with the APPG’s work up until only a few days before the launch of the definition, a Board spokesperson said: “As is usual with new policy ideas, we considered various options including supporting a definition, or continuing to monitor developments.
“We haven’t yet given our support to any definition. We are aware that there are a number of definitions under discussion in the Muslim community, including the APPG’s, Tell Mama’s, and the Runnymede Trust’s, and we felt it wasn’t the right time for us to endorse any of them.
“We follow the conversation with interest as an ally of the Muslim community against the ugly scourge of anti-Muslim hatred.”
I was shocked at the Board’s handling of this issue. Where was the due diligence?’ MP Wes Streeting ‘begged’ the Board representative to back the definition