Facebook X-twitter Instagram Youtube
Search
Facebook X-twitter Instagram Youtube
Donate
Search
Donate
Facebook X-twitter Instagram Youtube
Search
Donate
Facebook X-twitter Instagram Youtube
Donate

Here you will find blogs that present an expert view on the themes and broader concerns emerging from the use of Prevent in health.

Piles of folders for article on Fulford Inquiry CategoriesLatest Expert Views Community Expert View Education Expert View Health Expert View Our Expert Views

Southport Inquiry highlights how Prevent deprofessionalises public services

The Southport Inquiry embodies our warning that the Prevent duty has created conditions in which teachers, social workers and other frontline professionals are increasingly unable to act on their own expertise, and are required to defer to a counter-terrorism framework, writes Dr Layla Aitlhadj. In January of 2025, then Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, announced there would be a public inquiry into the Southport attack that took the lives of 3 young girls, injured many more and left their families and the nation in grief. Following the trial of the perpetrator, Axel Rudukubana, it had become public knowledge that he had been known to several agencies and referred to Prevent three times. The inquiry was described by the Home Secretary as a way to “get to the truth of what happened and what needs to change”. The next day Prime Minister Keir Starmer re-emphasised the fact that the perpetrator had been […]

By
Prevent duty in Scotland CategoriesLatest Expert Views Community Expert View Education Expert View Health Expert View Our Expert Views

How is the Prevent duty in Scotland implemented and who is standing against it?

Legal guidance compels the Prevent duty in Scotland so public authorities must implement the policy. A closer look at key differences in their approach provides insights for action and directs us to the organisations resisting the Prevent duty in Scotland. By Zara W. Tahir National security, and by extension, counter terrorism, remains a reserved matter in Scotland, and therefore under Westminster control.  However, one arm of the counter-terorrism strategy, the Prevent duty, requires the cooperation of public institutions north of the border, many of which are devolved.  This tension between reserved and devolved powers has led to key differences in how the Prevent duty is implemented in Scotland compared to the rest of the UK, particularly England. Scottish MPs voice concerns with Prevent  In 2015, the Counterterrorism and Security Act was debated for five days in the UK Parliament. MPs raised concerns about its application in Scotland; these criticisms of the […]

By
Picture of fried chicken for a story criticizing the Prevent strategy in the UK and Channel deradicalisation for children with unmet mental health needs CategoriesLatest Expert Views Education Expert View Health Expert View Our Expert Views

Why the Channel programme linked to the Prevent strategy is the junk food of public safety

In 2005, when Jamie Oliver exposed what really went into chicken nuggets on his School Dinners series, parents were horrified. What they thought was a proper hot meal turned out to be processed scraps, stripped of nutrition and bulked out with additives. The same reaction should meet the Channel programme. Promoted as safeguarding against radicalisation, it is in reality a highly processed product: stripped of genuine social care and support, repackaged with the additives of counter-terrorism, and sold back to us as if it were the nourishment required for a healthy society. According to the Home Office statistics, 5,014 individuals have been referred to Channel for ‘de-radicalisation’ since 2015. A Channel intervention is linked to the Prevent strategy in the UK. Out of a total number (58,127) of Prevent referrals as a result of the strategy, just 8.6% are deemed to be at risk of ‘radicalisation’ and deemed suitable for […]

By
CategoriesCommunity Expert View Health Expert View Latest Expert Views Our Expert Views

Prevent Learning Review: Five reasons why the recommendations are misleading

Jump to… The political framing of the Southport atrocity as a Prevent failure ignores the counter-terrorism mechanisms beyond the Prevent framework.  Following the revelation that Axel Rudakubana was referred to Prevent three times between 2019 and 2021, there has been much discussion about Prevent’s role in relation to the atrocity in Southport. Prior to the wider public inquiry under the new independent Prevent commissioner Lord Anderson, a review focused on Prevent had been commissioned by the Home Office and Counter Terrorism Policing, the “Prevent Learning Review: Southport Attack”. Media coverage of its publication reports serious failures in the government’s Prevent strategy. These are associated with the fact that no appropriate action seemed to have been taken, despite Rudakubana having been reported to Prevent three times. The claims are firstly that these should have been treated cumulatively, rather than as three separate incidents. Secondly, it is claimed  that three referrals warranted […]

By
  • Main Menu (Desktop)