THE Prevent programme was described as a “toxic brand” at a heated Council meeting this week, where councillors said more focus needed to be placed on right wing terrorism.

Councillors said there was a perception among many that counter terrorism scheme was an anti-Muslim programme, and this made it difficult to have important conversations about extremism with some communities in the city.

During the Bradford West Area Committee, one councillor claimed there needed to be a greater focus on far right radicalisation – pointing out that the gun that killed Batley and Spen MP Jo Cox had come from Bradford, but no one had ever been arrested over this.

Prevent is part of the Government’s counter terrorism strategy, and aims to identify those most at risk of being swayed by extremism.

It has proved controversial, with concerns that it mainly targets the Muslim community.

In recent years there has been more of a focus on preventing right wing terrorism within Prevent.

Danielle King, Prevent Coordinator at the Council, appeared before the committee on Thursday evening to discuss the work being done in Bradford to stop people falling under the influence of extremism.

She told members how work was done in schools, community groups like sports teams and in places of worship like mosques or madrassahs, as well as throughout the wider community.

But members of the committee argued that Prevent is still viewed with scepticism by many.

Councillor Nazam Azam (Lab, City) said: “There is some brilliant work going on, but there is a suspicion around the Prevent agenda, and it remains a toxic brand.

“It is disgraceful the way certain communities have been targeted.

“I don’t think I can advocate for Prevent any longer.”

Councillor Kamran Hussain (Lab, Toller) asked Mrs King whether she felt the local Prevent scheme was working or not.

She replied: “The work we are doing in schools indicates it is working.”

Cllr Hussain said many young Muslims in Bradford felt they were being targeted by Prevent, adding: “We have predominately Muslim children being told about Isis, but no one is mentioning right wing extremism. We need to teach children about all forms of extremism. Children today are more at risk of far-right extremism.”

Mrs King told the committee that the work did tackle all forms of extremism, including far right, far left and “single issue” extremism – where people are motivated by one particular issue rather than a political ideology. The anti-vax and Q Anon movements were referenced in sessions.

Referring to the committees concerns that children were being labelled as extremists for innocuous comments that were taken out of context, she said: “Prevent doesn’t target people for disagreeing with the Government or its policies.”

Her report was criticised for a lack of detail on where the prevent work was taking place, which groups were being targeted and what the results of the interventions were.

Chair of the Committee Councillor Mohammed Amran (Lab, Heaton) said some local schemes seemed to be a “waste of money” and described the programme as “a complete shambles.”

Councillor Safraz Nazir (Lab, Manningham) said: “The perception has been that Prevent was an anti-Muslim agenda, and nothing has been done to negate that image. People feel Prevent is people spying on them, or that there is an agenda against them. That stigma won’t go away. A refresh is needed.

“In the past few years the amount of people being radicalised towards extreme Islam is minute compared to the number of people radicalised by the far right.

“At this moment in time that is where the problem is, but the fact that we’re stuck with an anti-extremism programme that is seen as anti-Muslim makes it difficult for us to have any meaningful conversations.”

Councillor Sinead Engel (Lab, Clayton and Fairweather Green) repeated concerns that Prevent did not focus enough on the far right. She said: “The person who shot Jo Cox used a gun that was sourced from Bradford, and they still haven’t caught the people who sold it to him.

“I’m not sure you’re reaching the people who need to be reached the most.”

The Committee asked the Council’s Prevent team to come to a future meeting with more detail of who was being offered interventions, why these people had been targeted and the results of the Prevent work.