Government ‘must ban far-right hate groups from making media appearances’, report says

Report calls for new list of ‘designated hate groups’ to combat types of extremism that aren’t covered by terror laws

Britain First was among the groups studied for the report (PA)

A list of “designated hate groups” must be created so the government can combat types of extremism that are not covered by current terror laws, a report has found.

The Tony Blair Institute proposed that organisations on the list would be banned from making high-profile media appearances, thus stopping their ideology spreading to new audiences.

Jacqui Smith, the former home secretary and chair of the Jo Cox Foundation, said the government must create a “coherent policy approach” to the links between violent and non-violent extremism.

“What starts as hate-fuelled rhetoric can end in the terrorist murder of a serving MP, wife and mother,” she added.

“Even before these far-right world views morph into terrorism, they are also a contributor to the growth in a toxic culture that is particularly reflected in the intimidation of those in public life, which has grown so quickly in recent years. This is difficult and contested territory, but we cannot simply shelve the arguments.”

The report called for the government to draw up a new law creating a public list of hate groups, which would run parallel to the existing register of proscribed terrorist groups.

Designations would be for set time periods and automatically reviewed by the Home Office.

“Under designation, hate groups would be limited from appearing on media outlets or engaging with public institutions,” the report recommended.

“It would differentiate between legitimate criticism and comment on, for example, Islamist extremism or white supremacy, and the indiscriminate targeting of a group to foster hatred.”

The report also called for the government to create a new definition of extremism that would encompass the far right, and allow public bodies and private companies – including social media firms – to combat groups that do not advocate violence and fall short of terror laws.

The document compared the ideas espoused by the white supremacist terrorist Anders Behring Breivik, who murdered 77 victims in bomb and gun attacks in Norway, with four British far-right groups.

Researchers concluded that Generation Identity England, Britain First, the British National Party (BNP) and For Britain – run by failed Ukip leadership candidate Anne Marie Waters – “promote a worldview that significantly overlaps” with Breivik.

His terrorist manifesto inspired atrocities including the Christchurch mosque shootings in March. That massacre was then cited as an inspiration by the El Paso, Poway and Norway attackers.

Azmina Siddique, a policy advisor at the Tony Blair Institute, said right-wing extremist groups were currently able to normalise their ideas within public debate.

“A lot of these groups are gaining prominence in mainstream media, social media, in grassroots activity and they have a veneer of respectability because they present themselves as legitimate spokespeople for people’s concerns,” she told The Independent.

“Our research shows that actually that’s not the case – we’ve compared their public messaging to that of a convicted extreme right-wing terrorist – Anders Breivik – and found that they had near complete overlap with his worldview.”

Ms Siddique said a government list of hate groups would enable greater awareness and coordination to prevent their messages from spreading online and in the media.

She said that while awareness over Islamist activists who claimed to be non-violent, such as Anjem Choudary, had been largely shut out of mainstream debate, the same had not been seen for the far right.

The recommendations come after the BBC was criticised for broadcasting an interview with the leader of Generation Identity UK after the Christchurch attack, which was inspired by the group’s “great replacement” conspiracy theory.

Groups such as Hope Not Hate and the Anti-Defamation League, which compile lists of hate organisations, are frequently attacked and smeared by the right-wing groups they monitor in an effort to discredit their work.

All four of the groups examined by the new report characterise a wave of social media bans as a free speech crackdown, and attempt to characterise their ideas as representing the best interests of “the British people” against the “elites”.

Ms Siddique added: “It’s important for us to delineate where genuine debate occurs and where there is something that is deeply embedded in extreme-right ideology – if we start helping policymakers draw the line between what is acceptable and what isn’t, without using violence as the only threshold.”

She said that social media giants had been pressured to control the reach of far-right extremists, while their offline activity is allowed to continue unhindered.

“The division between non-violent and violent extremism is difficult and of course there are concerns about free speech and civil liberties to balance up,” Ms Siddique added.

“But we are creating an atmosphere that’s permissive for hatred and we need to have this conversation now.”

Baroness Williams, the minister for countering extremism, said: “Far-right extremism has absolutely no place in our society.

“Our counterterrorism and counterextremism strategies tackle the scourge of both violent and non-violent far-right extremism head on.

“We have also established the independent Commission for Countering Extremism, which provides advice in what is needed to tackle extremism and will be refreshing our Counter Extremism Strategy to ensure we keep pace with the evolving threat.”