There is a cover-up at the heart of Government. Angela Rayner appointed five individuals to a Working Group tasked with drafting the official definition of Islamophobia — now repackaged as “anti-Muslim hostility”. At the start of the year, the Free Speech Union exposed that all five had previously supported the need for an Islamophobia definition and had troubling links to Islamist organisations. These included the Muslim Council of Britain and MEND — both of which successive governments have maintained a policy of non-engagement with since 2009. If that was not bad enough, Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy’s FOI request has revealed that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government deleted all responses to the Working Group’s consultation — submissions that helped shape what is now, in effect, an Islamic blasphemy law. Will Garton, the top civil servant at MHCLG, has now launched an investigation into what was going on in Rayner’s department. He also said no ministers directed officials to delete the responses — seemingly in breach of the Government’s own data policy. So who is in charge at the Communities Department? Did Islamists influence the drafting of the definition? The Islamophobia definition has had a chilling effect on free speech and has already been weaponised to silence those who criticise, debate, challenge or mock Islam. Angela Rayner must come clean.

Angela Rayner appointed five individuals with troubling links to Islamist organisations — including the Muslim Council of Britain and MEND — to a Working Group tasked with drafting the Islamophobia definition. The Free Speech Union repeatedly warned that this would have a chilling effect on free speech and be weaponised against those who criticise, debate or mock Islam, its history and its practices. We have been proved right time and again. It has now emerged that Angela Rayner’s Communities Department deleted all responses to the Working Group’s consultation — material fundamental to drafting what has become, in effect, Britain’s Islamic blasphemy law. Why delete all the evidence, contrary to Government data policy? The public deserves answers.