Angela Rayner’s proposal for an official definition of Islamophobia would hand Reform a 100-seat majority at the expense of Labour, a poll has found.
The Deputy Prime Minister has appointed a panel to draw up a new definition to be applied across the public sector, despite fears it will prevent politicians speaking up about Asian grooming gangs.
Now a survey of 2,000 people has found that Labour polls significantly worse among voters who are told about the Islamophobia plan, with free speech campaigners already vocal in condemning the plan.
Before voters were told about the proposal, Reform polled 29 per cent, Labour 23 per cent, Conservatives 17 per cent, and the Liberal Democrats 14 per cent, reports The Telegraph.
But when the people polled were asked how they would vote if Labour brought in a definition of Islamophobia, Reform rose by one point to 30 per cent and Labour fell three points to 20 per cent.
If replicated at a general election, that would be the difference between a Reform majority of 20 without the Islamophobia definition, and 106 if it were brought in.
Bringing in the definition would cause a loss of one million votes to Labour, and a fall in its seats in the Commons from 155 to 103.
The poll was carried out by J L Partners, whose founder, James Johnson, said: “This polling shows that if Labour introduces a new definition of Islamophobia, it would be like setting off a tinderbox under what remains of their working-class vote.
“With Reform nipping at Labour’s heels in hundreds of seats, that is not something they can afford.”
Critics have warned that some proposed definitions of Islamophobia would make it impossible for people to raise concerns about Asian grooming gangs.
And the Tories have accused Ms Rayner of appointing a committee with “extreme” views to come up with the official definition.
The working group – chaired by Dominic Grieve, a former Tory cabinet minister – is meeting in secret and members of the public will not be able to offer their views.
Mr Grieve has praised a 2019 report which called the discussion of “grooming gangs” an example of “anti-Muslim racism”.
Claire Coutinho, the shadow equalities minister, has said a “culture of secrecy around matters relating to race and religion” was a key factor enabling “gangs of men to groom, rape, and torture young girls with impunity”.
Last month, Baroness Casey’s report on grooming gangs found that hundreds of girls had suffered unimaginable sexual abuse in part because some in authority had not tackled the issue because they feared appearing racist.
Ministers insist the definition of Islamophobia will be written in such a way as not to stifle free speech.
The J L Partners poll of 2,035 British adults was conducted between July 16 and 18.
It found that 37 per cent of respondents felt that protections against hate speech have gone too far – while 28 per cent believed they have not gone far enough, and 19 per cent said they were at about the right level.
Some 30 per cent said protections against Islamophobia had gone too far, compared to 28 per cent who thought they had not gone far enough.
When asked to compare the issue of Islamophobia to other issues facing the Government, 54 per cent said it was relatively unimportant, with 30 per cent saying it is relatively important.
When Labour voters were asked, 45 per cent said it was relatively unimportant.
Across all voters, just 37 per cent said a definition of Islamophobia was necessary in Britain today, and 45 per cent said it was unnecessary.