In Britain today, we have a de facto Islamic blasphemy law, ushered in by the Labour Government’s official “anti-Muslim hostility” definition. It is being enforced by the police, the courts and now the Government’s own counter-terrorism programme, Prevent. A programme tasked with stopping people becoming terrorists is being used by activists and extremists to silence legitimate criticism or mockery of Islam. In recent weeks, comedian @JohnCleese was referred to Prevent and faced calls from Muslim activists to have his Birmingham show cancelled over comments he made about Islam on social media. Reform UK Shadow Chancellor @RobertJenrick was reported to the Metropolitan Police and referred to Prevent after he called radical Islam the biggest threat to our country and called for the burqa to be banned on @danwootton’s show. Robert isn’t wrong, is he? Radical Islam is a threat. MI5 has said that Islamist terrorism is the biggest threat to Britain. Restore Britain leader @RupertLowe10 was reported to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards for linking Muslims and Pakistanis to the rape gangs, despite Baroness Casey’s report concluding that Muslim men of Pakistani heritage were disproportionately involved in these heinous crimes. Conservative Shadow Justice Secretary @NJ_Timothy was reported to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards by Labour MPs, branded “Islamophobic” and faced calls to resign from then Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer after criticising a mass Muslim prayer event in Trafalgar Square. Reform UK was reported to the Equality and Human Rights Commission by 28 Labour MPs over its comments criticising Islam and the same mass Muslim prayer event. It was the Islamist website 5Pillars that broke all these stories. A Home Office unit, RICU, has even labelled the group a “subject of Islamist extremist concern”. These activists know what they are doing. The sinister weaponisation of Prevent will undermine public trust in the programme. We must not let an Islamic blasphemy law take root in Britain. Watch FSU Campaigns Officer @MaxHThompson 👇

Councillor Michael Fife Cook, the leader of the Reform UK group on Devon County Council, raised safeguarding concerns after a large prosthetic penis and literature promoting “chemsex” were displayed at an LGBTQIA+ event in Exeter Library, next to a children’s art and colouring area. The council then punished him for speaking out. Now, with the Free Speech Union’s backing, he is fighting back. The event took place on 19th October 2025 as part of Exeter’s Out There Queer Fest. One mother complained that she had been forced to explain to her six- and seven-year-old children what the prosthetic penis was doing there. A subsequent evidential review identified significant failings in relation to the event. On 28th November, Cllr Fife Cook emailed fellow councillors and council officers to express his concerns about the safeguarding of children. He wrote: “I think this makes it clear our council officers can’t be trusted in safeguarding children.” He also warned that the incident made councillors “complicit in promoting and encouraging sexualisation of children”. Rather than addressing his concerns, two senior council officers lodged complaints against him under the Council’s Code of Conduct. On 29th July 2026, Devon County Council’s Standards Committee found that he had breached the Code, including by bringing himself or his office “into disrepute”, despite the independent investigator not having identified that particular breach. The Committee ordered him to apologise in writing to the officers he had criticised and undergo training with the Council’s Monitoring Officer. He refused — and rightly so. An elected councillor should be free to raise concerns about safeguarding, challenge council officers and hold public authorities to account without facing disciplinary action for expressing an unwelcome opinion. With the backing of the Free Speech Union, Cllr Fife Cook is now challenging the Council’s decision. On 30th September, his solicitors, Sharpe Pritchard, sent Devon County Council a pre-action letter setting out four grounds of challenge: irrationality, a breach of his Article 10 right to freedom of expression, a failure to give adequate reasons and apparent bias. But Michael’s case is part of a much wider problem. Across the country, councillors are facing Code of Conduct complaints for social media posts, criticism of council policies and robust challenges to public officials. Time and again, we hear the phrase “bringing the council into disrepute”. The Free Speech Union has supported councillors including Steve Horner, Kelvin Wright, Dulcie Tudor and John Edwards, who have faced complaints arising from their political speech. Even when these complaints are dismissed, the process itself can become the punishment: months of investigations, legal costs, reputational damage and the chilling effect on other elected representatives who may think twice before speaking out. And the Government wants to give councils even greater powers to punish elected representatives. Under its proposed reforms, councils would be able to suspend councillors for up to six months, withhold their allowances and bar them from council premises. Two maximum-length suspensions within five years could result in disqualification from office. Imagine the consequences if these powers were used against councillors simply for expressing contentious political opinions or challenging the conduct of council officers. The Free Speech Union is supporting Michael’s legal challenge because we believe Codes of Conduct must not be weaponised to silence legitimate political speech. A victory could help protect councillors across England from similar disciplinary action. But litigation is expensive, and Michael will not be the last councillor who needs our help. Please donate to the FSU’s legal defence fund to help us fight Michael’s case and defend the right of elected councillors to speak freely on behalf of the people who elected them 👇

🚨Councillor Michael Fife Cook, the leader of the Reform UK group on Devon County Council, raised safeguarding concerns after a large prosthetic penis and literature promoting “chemsex” were displayed at an LGBTQIA+ event in Exeter Library, next to a children’s art and colouring area. The council then punished him for speaking out. Now, with the Free Speech Union’s backing, he is fighting back. The event took place on 19th October 2025 as part of Exeter’s Out There Queer Fest. One mother complained that she had been forced to explain to her six- and seven-year-old children what the prosthetic penis was doing there. A subsequent evidential review identified significant failings in relation to the event. On 28th November, Cllr Fife Cook emailed fellow councillors and council officers to express his concerns about the safeguarding of children. He wrote: “I think this makes it clear our council officers can’t be trusted in safeguarding children.” He also warned that the incident made councillors “complicit in promoting and encouraging sexualisation of children”. Rather than addressing his concerns, two senior council officers lodged complaints against him under the Council’s Code of Conduct. On 29th July 2026, Devon County Council’s Standards Committee found that he had breached the Code, including by bringing himself or his office “into disrepute”, despite the independent investigator not having identified that particular breach. The Committee ordered him to apologise in writing to the officers he had criticised and undergo training with the Council’s Monitoring Officer. He refused — and rightly so. An elected councillor should be free to raise concerns about safeguarding, challenge council officers and hold public authorities to account without facing disciplinary action for expressing an unwelcome opinion. With the backing of the Free Speech Union, Cllr Fife Cook is now challenging the Council’s decision. On 30th September, his solicitors, Sharpe Pritchard, sent Devon County Council a pre-action letter setting out four grounds of challenge: irrationality, a breach of his Article 10 right to freedom of expression, a failure to give adequate reasons and apparent bias. But Michael’s case is part of a much wider problem. Across the country, councillors are facing Code of Conduct complaints for social media posts, criticism of council policies and robust challenges to public officials. Time and again, we hear the phrase “bringing the council into disrepute”. The Free Speech Union has supported councillors including Steve Horner, Kelvin Wright, Dulcie Tudor and John Edwards, who have faced complaints arising from their political speech. Even when these complaints are dismissed, the process itself can become the punishment: months of investigations, legal costs, reputational damage and the chilling effect on other elected representatives who may think twice before speaking out. And the Government wants to give councils even greater powers to punish elected representatives. Under its proposed reforms, councils would be able to suspend councillors for up to six months, withhold their allowances and bar them from council premises. Two maximum-length suspensions within five years could result in disqualification from office. Imagine the consequences if these powers were used against councillors simply for expressing contentious political opinions or challenging the conduct of council officers. The Free Speech Union is supporting Michael’s legal challenge because we believe Codes of Conduct must not be weaponised to silence legitimate political speech. A victory could help protect councillors across England from similar disciplinary action. But litigation is expensive, and Michael will not be the last councillor who needs our help. Please donate to the FSU’s legal defence fund to help us fight Michael’s case and defend the right of elected councillors to speak freely on behalf of the people who elected them 👇

The Free Speech Union is making progress in its efforts to discover who the Working Group on “anti-Muslim hostility” consulted while drafting the non-statutory definition. We are increasingly concerned that extremists may have had the opportunity to influence the definition — which has already had a chilling effect on free speech. When Shadow Justice Secretary @NJ_Timothy submitted an FOI request, the Communities Department initially said it had deleted all the consultation responses. The FSU then threatened the department with legal action, arguing that destroying records from an important public consultation may be unlawful. The department has now told both the FSU and Nick that it still holds the responses — but refuses to release them. What a stunning admission. Were the documents simply lost in the backlog, or was there an attempt to cover up the possibility that extremists had been involved in the process? The next battle is to make the department release the responses. Slowly but surely, we are making progress. The British public deserves to know the truth. Watch the Free Speech Union’s General Secretary, Lord Young, below 👇