A new definition of anti-Muslim hate will not restrict freedom of speech, the communities secretary has promised, as he said “clear expectations” will still be set for newcomers and existing communities in Britain to learn English.
Steve Reed told MPs the government had a duty to act against record levels of anti-Muslim hate crime, but “you can’t address a problem if you can’t describe it”.
On Monday he was updating Parliament on a new non-statutory definition of anti-Muslim hate, which was unveiled alongside a wider strategy on social cohesion.
The three-paragraph definition, published alongside a longer document, does not include a reference to race, which is understood to have been a focus of considerable debate among the five-member working group of experts set up to provide the government with the working definition.
Reed told the Commons: “Today we are adopting a non-legal definition of anti-Muslim hostility. This gives a clear explanation of unacceptable prejudice, discrimination and hatred against Muslims, so we can take action to stop it.
“The definition safeguards our fundamental right to freedom of expression about religion in general or any religion in particular and ensures that concerns raised in the public interest are protected.”
A number of other plans are included in the new Social Cohesion Strategy, including measures to expand powers to combat extremism by establishing a new whistleblowing route for university staff and giving the Charity Commission powers to close charities.
While they were among the components that had been tracked, the newly released document emphasized the role of English as a shared language in bringing communities together.
The strategy pledged to “review English language provision to identify best practice and explore how innovation, including digital delivery, can increase the number of people who can speak English, with findings to be published in autumn 2026”.
Government sources said this was an attempt to address a “piecemeal” approach to English teaching by agencies ranging from the Department for Work and Pensions to councils, and that technology would be harnessed to modernize and expand provision. One result of this would be a move away from in-person classes and more online offerings.
Other parts of the strategy said the government will require citizenship classes in schools, teaching digital literacy and “boost faith and belief literacy in government and society at large.”
In an accompanying foreword, the Prime Minister says: “In a world where so many people – digital fraudsters, hostile states, aggrieved politicians – have a vested interest in division, we must be much more active in affirming British values and the responsibilities of integration.”
One of the five members of the working group set up to provide the government with the working definition of anti-Muslim hate told The Guardian that this was a “defining moment”, which he welcomed but said it was only a first step.
“It is a clear and broad definition, which is important, but it is also a first step towards the real cultural change that is needed when it comes to making people aware of what acceptable everyday language is,” said Professor Javed Khan, chief executive of Equi, a think tank that draws on knowledge of British Muslims.
Khan also expressed concern that the social cohesion strategy did not go far enough to address the growth of far-right extremism and its causes.
“Not enough attention has been paid to the magnitude of the far-right mobilization and protests, which are sinister and orchestrated from within the country or elsewhere. But what we are seeing now are important first steps,” he said.
Paul Holmes, shadow communities secretary, said the strategy lacked ambition and action to deliver tangible change and attacked the government for what he called “mixed messages” about engagement with groups such as the Muslim Council of Britain.
Holmes said the proposed definition still raised serious questions and cited a recommendation from Jonathan Hall KC, the government’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, that any definition should provide examples of free speech that would not be considered anti-Muslim hate.
“It risks impeding freedom of expression under the law and legitimate criticism of Islam,” Holmes added.
