Cameron outlines plans to exclude returning 'jihadis'
Categories: Latest News
Monday November 17 2014
The Daily Telegraph and The Times newspapers on Friday put proposals outlined in the PM’s speech to the Australian parliament, to temporarily confiscate passports of Britons returning from fighting in conflicts overseas, on the front page (see also Independent, Guardian, BBC News and Sky News)
David Cameron addressed the chamber on the subject of bilateral relations, ISIL, protectionism and democracy.
On ISIL, the PM spoke about the common celebration of ‘shared values’ in the two countries and a determination to tackle threats to national security emanating from an ‘extremist narrative’ on Islam by cementing belief in the rule of law, the ‘fundamental right of individuals to choose and to change their governments’ and ‘open societies and economies’.
Cameron spoke on proposals first raised in his statement to the House of Commons in September on new legislation to be introduced (a) preventing suspects from travelling abroad to join conflicts (b) dealing decisively with those already here who pose a risk on their return to the UK.
In his statement to the House, Cameron said:
“[W]e will introduce specific and targeted legislation providing the police with a temporary power to seize a passport at the border, during which time they will be able to investigate the individual concerned. This power will include appropriate safeguards and, of course, oversight arrangements.
“[I]f there is any judgment that threatens the operation of our existing powers, we will introduce primary legislation immediately so that Parliament, not the courts, can determine whether it is right that we have this power.
“We are clear in principle that what we need is a targeted, discretionary power to allow us to exclude British nationals from the UK. We will work up proposals on this basis with our agencies, in line with our international obligations, and discuss the details on a cross-party basis.
“Airlines will have to comply with our no-fly list arrangements, give us information on passenger lists and comply with our security screening requirements. If they do not do so, their flights will not be able to land in Britain.
In his address to the Australian parliament, Cameron outlined progress made on these fronts stating that the Government will shortly present its new Counter-Terrorism Bill to parliament.
The Bill will contain “New powers for police at ports to seize passports, to stop suspects travelling and to stop British nationals returning to the UK unless they do so on our terms” and “New rules to prevent airlines that don’t comply with our no-fly lists, or our security screening measures, from landing in the UK.”
In a regurgitation of ideas floated in his Munich speech on ‘muscular liberalism’ the PM argued that the ‘root cause’ of al-Qaeda type extremism was ‘not poverty’, ‘not exclusion from the mainstream’, and ‘not foreign policy’. The root cause, he argued, is ‘the extremist narrative’.
The PM went on to outline measures the Government was taking in tackling the ‘extremist narrative’ with a focus on ‘schools, universities and prisons’ and the internet.
In relation to extremist material on the web, the PM spoke of the “pressing challenge [to] getting extremist material taken down from the internet” and the role of social media companies in “strengthening filters, improving reporting mechanisms and being more proactive in taking down this harmful material.”
The PM’s insistence on focusing on ‘schools, universities and prisons’ stands in contrast to the Education Secretary’s admission that despite several Muslim schools implicated in the so-called ‘Trojan horse’ scandal being placed in special measures, there was “no evidence of radicalisation or terrorism or violent extremism” at the schools.
The focus also contradicts the report by the Home Affairs select committee on the Roots of Violent Radicalisation, which stated:
“In terms of the four sectors we explored—universities, prisons, religious institutions and the internet—we conclude that religious institutions are not a major cause for concern but that the internet does play a role in violent radicalisation, although a level of face-to-face interaction is also usually required. The role of prisons and universities was less obvious. Much of the uncertainty relates to the fact that a number of convicted terrorists have attended prisons and universities, but there is seldom concrete evidence to confirm that this is where they were radicalised.”
The idea that foreign policy plays no part in the radicalisation of individuals is plain wishful thinking.
The PM, concluded his address with remarks about inclusivity and racial and religious equality stating, “Yes, the battles for equality of opportunity for every person of every race and creed are not yet fully won.
“But today your country and my country are places where people can take part, can have their say and achieve their dreams. Places where people feel free to say, “Yes, I am a Muslim, I am a Hindu, I am Christian, but I am also a Briton or an Australian too.””
There is no doubt that British Muslims proudly display strong affinities to their religious and national identity. But with pervasive anti-Muslim prejudice in our media and statistics demonstrating the impact of the ‘ethnic penalty’ experienced by Muslims in the labour market, whether it can be said that Muslims “can take part, can have their say and achieve their dreams” is open to question.