Politics: the coward’s way

By Richard North - May 29, 2024

The fallout from Farage’s comments on Muslims last Sunday continues, with Tory minister Steve Baker, MP for Wycombe being the latest to leap in and add his criticisms. Speaking while on holiday in Greece, he was recorded in the Mail as “slamming” him for being “ignorant and offensive”, accusing him of “clear and intolerable bigotry”.

Baker may be right about Farage, but not for the reasons stated. But then it is hardly a coincidence that he is standing in the general election, defending a majority of 4,214 with an estimated Muslim population of 13,430 (16 percent of the population).

In 2019, Baker polled 24,766 votes fighting against (then) Labour’s Khalil Ahmed who took 20,552 votes. In this coming election, Ahmed has switched to George Galloway’s Workers Party and there is also an independent Muslim, Ajaz Rehman.

The new Labour candidate is Emma Reynolds. She too condemns Farage’s comments about British Muslims, ringing the changes by branding them “offensive and Islamophobic”. The Muslim community in Wycombe, she says, “makes a positive contribution to our local economy and society. I will always stand against Islamophobia and seek to bring communities together”.

Yet, for all that, Farage was back yesterday making an election speech from Dover on behalf of the Reform Party.

There, he claimed that “record migration” was bringing “sexist, sectarian politics to Britain”, remarking on Rayner’s grovelling in her constituency begging a group of Muslim leaders to “please vote Labour”. You’ll have noticed not a single woman in the room (apart from Rayner), Farage said.

But when Farage noted that Polish premier Donald Tusk had said that immigration was now a matter of national security, Indian heritage BBC News 24 presenter, Geeta Guru-Murthy, cut in to introduce another subject, describing to viewers: “Nigel Farage with his customary inflammatory language there…”.

Within a couple of hours, though, it was her turn to grovel, apologising for using language “which didn’t meet the BBC’s editorial standards on impartiality”.

But, in her initial comment, this immigrant-stock journalist had already demonstrated the hazards involved in English politicians commenting on immigration, somewhat reinforced by a black Guardian journalist at the press conference itself who, in the same sentence, accused Farage of Islamophobia and Antisemitism.

For Geeta Guru Murthy, though, this was not her first brush with controversy. On 31 January 2020, while presenting a news programme on the Brexit night celebrations in Westminster, she remarked that the crowd was “very white”.

Furthermore, it seems that disparaging remarks run in the family, with her brother Krishnan, suspended from his job on Channel 4 News in October 2022 after swearing about Steve Baker – of all people – in an “unguarded” off-air comment which was picked up by a hot mike.

Nevertheless, when it comes to Farage, despite his undoubted public-speaking skills he makes a poor spokesman for the cause, eliding the breakdown of integration with the dinghy crisis – with which it is only marginally related.

Even at the press conference, and the BBC interview afterwards, he was not really on the ball, which is not surprising as, on immigration, he is essentially an opportunist. He relied for his main substantive point on the lack of Muslim integration on the JL Partners poll last April, which highlighted the jihadist views of young Muslims since 7 October.

Like many Muslims, Farage takes as his turning point the 7 October massacres – and the subsequent street demonstrations throughout England in support of Gaza. But, as I’ve recalled on this blog, social cohesion in some British cities was breaking down long before this, with integration going into reverse, especially in the younger Muslim generations.

When we see young, evidently British-born men of Pakistani (or Kashmiri) heritage, wearing traditional Pakistani or Kashmiri dress and speaking their native language in preference to English, with the proliferation of women in full-blown niqabs, which are not traditional garb but an affectation by wealthy Arabs, the message these people are sending is unmistakable: they are not our kind and reject British values.

What makes the situation even more alarming is that the Muslim ghetto communities have begun to realise their electoral power, and they are determined to make the weather. As a seasoned observer of the Muslim vote, 5 Pillars writer, Roshan Muhammed Salih, has previously felt that it has been “over-egged somewhat”.

This time though, he writes of seeing “an unprecedented level of self-organisation on the ground, as well as direction from The Muslim Vote organisation”, which he has not seen before. This, he says, gives him real hope that “we will see some big wins in this election in several constituencies, and bigger wins to come in future elections”.

Nor does it seem that Salih is a passive observer. When his own magazine questioned whether Rayner yesterday should have been “allowed through the door” of the meeting she attended, “given Labour’s support for the genocidal Israeli state”, Salih responded in the manner of an activist.

Rayner “is in a marginal seat … with a small majority and a large Muslim population”, he wrote. “We can swing the vote against her and punish her for supporting Israel. Let’s do this, let’s unseat Labour’s deputy leader”.

This is the wider face of Muslim activism and, although Labour has been warned that seats are at risk over the party’s stance on Gaza, it seems that individual candidates have been left to deal with their constituency electorates on their own, without unified party action.

In the main, though – despite a robust response from Tory Foreign Office minister Anne-Marie Trevelyan, who agrees that some Muslims in Britain “want to challenge” fundamental UK values, most individuals seem to be opting for appeasement.

The weak nature of their responses has gone without notice, with one commentator (amongst many critics) telling Emma Reynolds: “What a pathetic and snivelling response to the colonisation of England. You should be ashamed”.

This lack of a unified response – from both parties – amounts to institutional cowardice, a reluctance to call out an abuse of the democratic process and the unwelcome emergence of sectarian politics, as a minority religious grouping aims to exploit the power of its block votes.

But the coward’s way is likely to have its greatest impact on the Labour Party. Although it takes comfort in its high standing in the polls, and the unpopularity of a fading Conservative administration, there are signs that the lead is not quite as firm as the figures have been indicating.

Speaking to the Guardian, “polling expert” Robert Haywood expresses a belief that the Conservatives are getting more support from voters who say they are undecided than is showing up in the polls. He is convinced that a statistical bias exists which inflates the Labour lead.

Anthony Wells, head of European political and social research for YouGov, says it is likely that the differences between different surveys would narrow as polling day approaches. It is reasonable to expect that the differences between pollsters will narrow in the lead-up to 4 July as the number of people saying ‘Don’t know’ falls, he adds.

Right on cue, we have in the Telegraph the latest poll from JL Partners which puts the Tories just 12 points behind Labour. And while Reform is placed third on 12 points, what may be significant is that its vote share has dropped one point. An earlier Survation poll, on a very small sample, puts Reform on 8 points, with no movement.

The point here, of course, is that if Tory support is strengthening and Reform is under-performing, the effect of the Muslim attack on Labour- together with its allies – seems increasingly likely to generate a hung parliament. Starmer will find that appeasement does not pay. But if there is a price for cowardice, we will all end up paying.