The influence of a public figure can often act as a canary in the coal mine, drawing attention to a distinct societal problem that not only plagues them, but society in general. The problem with this analogy is that the public figure afflicted with a societal ill is often the most prominent of those affected, but certainly not the first. This social phenomenon, widely associated with Charlie Sheen and his impact on HIV awareness and testing, often brings net positive contributions to campaigns and efforts that combat these issues. However, in the case of Nigel Farage, it merely uncovers pervasive racism and Islamophobia that still exists in British society.
Perennial parliamentary candidate Nigel Farage whose ‘row’ with Coutts Bank, a private bank offering wealth management services, brought the nation’s attention to the status of his bank account. Suddenly, conversations over the ethics of Coutts shutting down his bank account over unclear and dubious reasons dominated British media. Originally cited as a purely ‘commercial decision’, Farage’s subject access request revealed a 40-page document of information compiled by Coutts that revealed their professional relationship with Farage held “significant reputational risks of being associated with him” predicated on his political beliefs, his status as a public person, and previous/ongoing controversies associated with Farage (Sky News). In truth, commentators are right to criticise Coutts for closing Farage’s bank account due to his values not aligning with the firms (Sky News). The aftermath of this debacle led to the resignation of significant figures such as the resignation of NatWest CEO Alison Rose and the resignation of Coutts Chief Executive Peter Flavel (Al Jazeera; BBC News). Moreover, the BBC extended its apologies for inaccurate reporting on the matter. It seems, particularly in this case, that there is a massive issue within the banking sector. However, critics of Coutts fail to recognise the wider context in which this controversy has played out.
Nigel Farage’s response to his bank account closure likened the event to being a “non person”. Moreover, he states that the decision may “fundamentally affect [his] future career and whether [he] can even go on staying living here in this country.” (Sky News) Farage’s row with Coutts Bank has raised awareness of the issue of unwarranted bank account closures, with Farage helming the launch of a ‘debanking’ campaign website, believing that the issue is more widespread than anticipated (AltFi). However, these issues faced by Farage are not new, particularly amongst Black and Minoritised community members. Indeed, the Muslim Council of Britain’s Secretary-General Mohammed Kozbar’s statement in direct response to this situation rings poignant: “While it is heartening that our leaders and influencers are now sitting up and taking notice, their objections would be more powerful if their concern extended beyond the rich and powerful” (MCB). Peter Oborne, writing for The Middle East Eye, points towards the Muslim community as the first to have suffered from sudden bank account closures ever since the start of the so-called “War on Terror”. In the experience of those at the receiving end of this discrimination, British Muslims have become the testing ground for ‘sinister authoritarianism’ (The Middle East Eye). The exposure and support provided to Farage over this long-standing problem serves to bring to light a ‘troubling double standard’. (The Middle East Eye)
““Muslims are, in short, the canary in the coal mine.”
”
Britain’s Muslim communities are more than familiar with prejudice in bank access – far more than figures like Farage will ever know. The Chair of the Finsbury Park Mosque, Mohammed Kozbar, states that restrictions in bank access on the basis of protected characteristics has been a ‘longstanding problem’ with British Muslim communities. Muslim Engagement and Development’s Chief Executive, Azhar Qayum, has also highlighted the occurrence of these unexplained bank closures has been happening for many years, with journalist Peter Oborne reporting that several organisations and their members are at the receiving end of these closures. For example, the World Uyghur Congress had their bank transfers blocked; the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign received notices of their bank accounts being closed with no explanation nor opportunity to appeal; Anas Al-Tikriti of The Cordoba Foundation had his bank account closed along with his family’s; and finally, the Finsbury Park Mosque’s bank account was unjustly closed in 2014 – with little public coverage – due to falsely being listed as a terrorist-linked organisation (The Middle East Eye).
The statement by Farage about the effect of having no bank account rings true. Certainly, Peter Oborne describes the impact it had on Muslim-led organisations and their members. He likens access to bank accounts in the modern world as essential as electricity and running water. “Without one you cannot travel overseas, you feel like a criminal and normal life becomes impossible” (The Middle East Eye). The cases of these British Muslims reveal deeper structural prejudices that pervade our society, for they do not have the same level of resources, influence, and public support as Farage. As Kozbar argues: “That’s what happened to us, but no one cared at the time, no one spoke about it and we had to struggle by ourselves and manage our situation.” The same sentiments have been reflected by figures such as Ben Jamal, Director of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, and Azhar Qayum, Chief Executive of the Muslim Engagement and Development. The centre of frustration, therefore, lies in the double standard experienced by these communities who have experienced undue closure of their bank accounts with no recourse to appeal for years. Injustices such as these are examples of pervasive and subtle forms of Islamophobia which operates through “stereotyping, marginalisation, discrimination and exclusion” (Trust for London). The so-called “War on Terror” has been used as a justification for the closure of ordinary Muslims’ bank accounts for the sake of ‘national security’. Indeed, Trust for London reports that in the year ending March 2022, 42% of hate crime reports were those targeted towards Muslims.
As a result of these various cases, a call for legislation to regulate bank account closures has been pushed for – both by the British Muslim communities impacted by years of unjust closures, as well as Farage and those supporting his campaign for ‘debanking’. Ben Jamal states it well when he says: “The principle that I would apply, regardless of his politics, to Nigel Farage is no individual or organisation should be denied access to banking facilities without good reason, proper redress system of appeal, evidence of why there is a concern, what they’re violating in terms of how they’re supposed to be conducting financial transactions.” (The Guardian) What is required is for policymakers, legislators, and financial institutions to recognise these instances of pervasive discrimination and Islamophobia, and provide equal protection under the law for all – regardless of one’s political orientation, personal identity, and deeply-held religious beliefs.
Bibliography
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66328666
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2023/7/26/natwest-ceo-resigns-over-serious-error-in-farage-row
https://www.altfi.com/article/nigel-farage-launches-debanking-campaign-website
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/uk-nigel-farage-row-bank-access-muslims-less-equal-than-others