The FCO's dubious Prevent grants
John O'Connell 2:06pm
A few weeks ago I wrote for Coffee House welcoming the Government’s decision to scrap
Prevent grants administered by local authorities. In that article, I cautioned that scrapping something should actually mean scrapping it, not just moving resources around. Today, the
TaxPayers’ Alliance has released research showing that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) also distribute funds through
Prevent. Again, money has gone to projects of questionable value in the fight against extremism, violent or non-violent.
One of the more dubious projects was a “mobile cinema for justice”. What’s worse is that it was administered by an American charity called the International Research and Exchanges
Board. Why is that bad? Because they have a £38 million budget of their own, and the Foreign Office felt compelled to give them £22,000 for a project that – let’s face it
– most taxpayers would find laughable.
Well-funded public bodies also received money from the FCO. The British Council – recipients of £200 million in grant in aid in 08/09 – received almost £1 million more to
carry out Prevent projects in the same year. The BBC’s well stacked coffers surely didn’t need a top-up of £200,000 to carry out a media project for the FCO, did they? Well, they
got it, for a “Woman’s Hour” project in Afghanistan. You can debate the merit of such a project but the BBC World Service are funded by the FCO – if this programme was such
a good idea then it could have been supported from existing budgets.
When we released our study on local government Prevent grants it was the first time that a full survey had been completed of where the
grants had gone, and the list was comprehensive. However, the FCO chose to redact some information when requested a list of their grants, and that might seem reasonable as adverse effects on
defence and international relations are two of the four grounds on which they chose to hold back information. These kinds of exemptions are understandable if national security is likely to be
affected, but Prevent is supposed to stop people from becoming terrorists in the first place with projects that are aimed at the grassroots and at communities. The BBC grant supported a
television programme, how secret could it be? Our request for information did not seek to uncover the details of delicate intelligence operations. The result of the FCO refusing to answer our
request fully is that taxpayers have little idea of where their money is going.
All in all, the Prevent scheme is one that has proved divisive, simultaneously frustrating and alienating different faith groups and entire communities. It should be scrapped immediately. Both the
Home Office and DCLG believe that Prevent is “flawed, ineffective and counter-productive” and hopefully the FCO will come to the same view too.
John O’Connell is Deputy Research Director of the TaxPayers’ Alliance
Previous
Carroll Barry-Walsh
August 6th, 2010 2:45pm Report this commentYou could do worse than read the article in today's DT by Andrew Gilligan where he correctly points out that the Government's policy of cosying up to Islamists in the belief that this will somehow moderate their views or protect Britain is wrong, morally, strategically and tactically. The right way is to shun all these so-called community leaders and groups and simply deal with individual citizens as citizens not as members of some "Muslim community".
In2minds
August 6th, 2010 4:41pm Report this commentCarroll Barry-Walsh @ August 6th, 2010 2:45pm -
"You could do worse than read the article in today's DT by Andrew Gilligan".
I've done that, I also agree with what he says, so -
"the Government's policy of cosying up to Islamists in the belief that this will somehow moderate their views or protect Britain is wrong, morally, strategically and tactically".
But I think we both know the Nucoalition will carry on doing just that. It's a bit like the EU, you could say the Government's policy of cosying up to the EU in the belief that this will somehow moderate their views or protect Britain is wrong, morally, strategically and tactically.
And they go on with that too, it's a fact, our government is stupid.
David Ossitt
August 6th, 2010 4:52pm Report this commentCarroll Barry-Walsh
“The right way is to shun all these so-called community leaders and groups and simply deal with individual citizens as citizens not as members of some "Muslim community".”
Carroll Barry-Walsh is right.
Until the so-called community leaders acknowledge and condemn those of their faith who practice terrorism in all of its forms, they should be ostracised.
Until they declare that so called honour killings are barbaric they should receive nothing from the public purse.
Whilst they remain silent and make no criticism of those men who mutilate their wives, and sisters by cutting off various bits of their anatomy as a punishment, they should be mocked and treat with utter contempt.
While ever they plead for unique treatment or seek to be given any form of special privilege that is not extended or available to the rest of the community they should be ignored.
The fact that a BBC news program could mention that nine men had been jailed for the sexual misuse of a white teenage girl, and in the process turned her into a prostitute, without actually mentioning that the nine evil men were all Pakistani, just illustrates how the authorities are kowtowing to these so-called moderate community leaders.
It is high time we faced up to the problem.
J Wright
August 6th, 2010 6:19pm Report this comment4.52 D Ossitt Totally agree. The coalition government have had time to stop this.I have today sent a donation to the Tax Payers alliance.
Verity
August 6th, 2010 6:46pm Report this commentIn2minds writes: "it's a fact, our government is stupid."
No, it's not a fact at all.
The government is malign.
They hate Britain.
They are working for the destruction of our national identity, our enterprise and our wealth. I am sure Fraser Nelson will be highlighting this point when he posts his promised piece on Neathergate.
In2minds
August 6th, 2010 7:43pm Report this commentDavid Ossitt @ August 6th, 2010 4:52pm - "Whilst they (the so-called community leaders) remain silent etc...."
Yes indeed. Silent? Sort of but not inactive, they tend to support Nulabour and quite loudly too.
David Blackie
August 6th, 2010 10:14pm Report this commentThe British Council is supposed to be a charity (for it is registered as such) but here is yet again a case of the organisation being expressly used an instrument of government policy. The FCO turns a blind eye to one side of this while the Charity Commission turns a blind eye to the other. Mainly of course it is an organisation that gets lots of money from lots of sources in order to look after itself.
AY
August 7th, 2010 7:17am Report this commentThird year of no TV and no hearing BBC radio, whatsoever, - and life is much cleaner. One thing is bothering though - an acute sense of pity to those who still swallow that poison.
Derek Pasquill
August 7th, 2010 10:11am Report this commentYou could do worse than read the report by Martin Bright published in 2006 but still as fresh as a recently-dropped camel turd.
"When Progressives Treat with Reactionaries: the British State's Flirtation with Radical Islam"
http://issuu.com/ufuq.de/docs/islamism_in_gb
Back to top