Calls mount for Prevent counter-extremism reviewer to be sacked after branding own job ‘completely unnecessary’

Calls are mounting for the government to sack a peer appointed to review the Prevent counter-extremism programme.

Critics of the scheme had feared a “whitewash” before Lord Carlile was appointed in the post of independent reviewer.

The barrister has sat on the government’s Prevent oversight board and suggested he was “biased towards it”.

This week, The Independent reported comments in which he called the review “completely unnecessary” and suggested it was based on a “complete lack of evidence”.

Wes Streeting, co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims, called Lord Carlile’s appointment a “poorly judged decision”.

“The review of Prevent should be an opportunity to look afresh at whether the government’s current approach to countering extremism is working in an evidence-based way,” the Labour MP told The Independent.

“It is clear that he has predetermined conclusions that make his appointment entirely inappropriate.”

Labour’s shadow security minister, Nick Thomas-Symonds, has written to the government calling for Lord Carlile’s position to be reconsidered, but the Home Office said he brings a “wealth of experience and skills” to the role.

Appearing at a summit in Canada in May, Lord Carlile said: “I think the appointment of a Prevent reviewer was completely unnecessary, based on fictitious or a complete lack of evidence, and only agreed to because the government doesn’t have a majority in the House of Commons.”

Lord Carlile made the comments before being appointed as the independent reviewer of Prevent earlier this month, when the security minister praised his “independence and rigour”.

The Muslim Council of Britain said the review would “only have any meaningful impact if it is credible”.

“Aside from the deficiencies in the process by which he was appointed, Lord Carlile’s previous views and comments about the Prevent programme make him whole and completely unsuitable for the role,” a spokesperson said.

“We call on the government to rectify their mistaken and damaging appointment now, rather than undertake a process of review that will not in any way meet its desired aims.”

The Home Office announced the review in January after years of dismissing human rights concerns and resisting persistent calls to overhaul Prevent.

Ministers told parliament the post of independent reviewer was not advertised publicly because of time pressures, and said the home secretary would choose a suitable candidate.

During a debate in the House of Lords in December, Lord Carlile said Prevent was “achieving a great deal”, adding: “If we abandoned Prevent, then terrorist acts which we have been able to avoid as a result of that policy would happen.

“I admit I played a part in it, so I may be somewhat biased towards it.”

The Runnymede Trust race-equality think tank said his appointment, and the process used, had “undermined the integrity and credibility of this review”.

“The main reason the government have appointed a reviewer at all is because there has been many concerns raised by human rights, faith and race-equality organisations about the detrimental impact of Prevent on Muslim communities, as well as the extent to which Prevent is evidence based, open and transparent,” said deputy director Dr Zubaida Haque.

“Together with many other third-sector organisations, the Runnymede Trust strongly urges the government to rethink Lord Carlile’s appointment as it appears that he is neither impartial nor independent.”

Lord Carlile, said his experience as the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation from 2001 to 2011 showed “a strong track record of asserting and sustaining my independence of government in assessing the effectiveness of legislation”.

“I look forward in my new role to seeing Prevent work in action and hearing views from supporters, critics and everyone in between to see the evidence of what is and isn’t working,” he said in a quote released by the Home Office. “The review will be strongly evidence based.”

Some campaign groups have accused Prevent of targeting Muslims and setting the barrier for intervention too low, but proponents cite a 36 per cent rise in suspected far-right extremists referred as proof it does not single out one ideology.

Official statistics show that only 3 per cent of people referred to Prevent are flagged by friends and family and 4 per cent by their local community, prompting warnings that the scheme’s effectiveness was being undermined by a lack of trust.

In 2017-18, more than 7,300 referrals were made but 42 per cent resulted in no action being taken.

The Home Office declined to say whether it was considering sacking Lord Carlile, who was made a CBE in 2012 for services to national security.

Officials said there was no requirement for the appointment to follow the Cabinet Office code, but its “general principles” had been observed.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “Lord Carlile brings a wealth of experience and skills to this role. The fact that he has already given serious thought to Prevent will be an asset as he conducts this review.

“In line with other reviews of this type, the appointment is at the discretion of the home secretary and has been considered carefully.”

The review is due to report its recommendations to parliament by August 2020. Lord Carlile declined to comment.