Claim: Hope Not Hate are Hypocrites

Accuracy Assessment: Largely True

The evidence demonstrates that Hope Not Hate has been associated with several controversies that undermine its stated mission of combating racism and extremism. The claim that the organisation has employed individuals who committed serious offences is verified - a former political organiser was convicted of child sex offences. The claim regarding communism is partially supported - a senior researcher did praise the Soviet Red Army at a public event. Additionally, the organisation has faced criticism for spreading misinformation during the 2024 UK riots and has been accused of doxxing political opponents. While these incidents do not entirely invalidate Hope Not Hate’s mission, they represent significant ethical failures that support the accusation of hypocrisy.

Key Claims at a Glance

Claim Breakdown

1. “Employed a political organiser convicted of child sex offences”

✅ True — Verified by court records

Liron Velleman (also known as Liron Woodcock-Velleman) worked as a Political Organiser for Hope Not Hate. In January 2026, he pleaded guilty at Highbury Corner Magistrates Court to two counts of child sex offences¹. He had sent explicit messages and videos to what he believed was a 13-year-old girl (actually a police decoy), asking to see her in her school uniform. Velleman had also given evidence to Parliament on the Online Safety Act in 2022, which focuses on protecting children online².

This directly contradicts Hope Not Hate’s stated mission of protecting children and fighting extremism, and represents a significant vetting failure.

Verdict: ✅ True — Employment confirmed; conviction verified

2. “Senior researcher praised the communist Red Army”

✅ True — Video evidence exists

Matthew Collins, Hope Not Hate’s Head of Intelligence, spoke at a 2013 event in London celebrating the Battle of Stalingrad. Video footage shows him standing behind a Soviet flag and declaring: “Comrades, brothers and sisters, HopeNotHate.co.uk, you are our Red Army!”³

The Red Army was responsible for numerous atrocities during World War II, including mass rapes and murders in Poland and Germany. Polish MP Janusz Kowalski described the comments as “Left-wing extremist”³. Hope Not Hate defended the event as marking a military battle, stating that “at the time of the battle, the Russians (and so the Red Army) were allies of the British.”

This represents a significant association with communist symbolism that contradicts the organisation’s anti-extremist positioning.

Verdict: ✅ True — Video evidence confirms the statements

4. “Spread false acid attack claim during 2024 UK riots”

✅ True — Verified by police and media

During the 2024 UK riots, Nick Lowles, Hope Not Hate’s Chief Executive, tweeted that “reports are coming in of acid being thrown out of a car window at a Muslim woman in Middlesbrough”⁴. The post was seen by over 100,000 people.

Hope Not Hate boss apologises for false ‘acid attack on Muslim woman’ tweet

Nick Lowles later apologised, stating: “Hold my hands up if my initial tweet was wrong” after reports of the assault were denied by Cleveland Police⁴. Cleveland Police subsequently stated they had “not, to date, received any formal complaint from any victim or anyone on their behalf” and that no such incident had occurred.

Conservative MP Neil O’Brien described the tweet as “incredibly irresponsible” and “spreading misinformation and pouring petrol on the flames”⁴.

Verdict: ✅ True — Confirmed false; apology issued

5. “Accused of doxxing and creating hit lists”

🟡 Contested — Documented incidents, disputed characterisation

Hope Not Hate has been accused of publishing information about political opponents that critics describe as “doxxing.” The organisation has published investigations into individuals’ backgrounds, including cases where people claim they were incorrectly identified or their information was taken out of context⁵.

In one case, comedian Josh Howie was included in a Hope Not Hate article alongside far-right figures, which he described as a “hit job”⁵. Hope Not Hate maintains its investigations are in the public interest and denies inappropriate doxxing.

The organisation has also been criticized for what opponents describe as creating “hit lists” of individuals, though Hope Not Hate frames this as investigative journalism exposing extremism.

Verdict: 🟡 Contested — Incidents documented; characterisation disputed

6. “Inconsistent stance on grooming gangs coverage”

🟡 Contested — Subject to debate

Hope Not Hate has faced criticism for its coverage of grooming gangs in the UK. Critics argue the organisation has been inconsistent — at times downplaying or accusing others of racism when highlighting the overrepresentation of certain ethnic groups in grooming scandals, while later supporting official inquiries into the same issue.

For example, in 2023 Hope Not Hate criticized Suella Braverman’s comments on grooming gangs as “stirring hate”⁵. However, the organisation has subsequently supported the Government’s Taylor Review into child sexual exploitation, which critics view as inconsistent.

Labour-Linked Hope Not Hate: ‘Racist’ to Identify Ethnicity of Grooming Gangs

Additionally, Hope Not Hate has been described as labelling it “racist” to identify the ethnicity of perpetrators in grooming gangs, despite evidence from multiple official inquiries (including the Rotherham Inquiry) that highlighted the overrepresentation of Pakistani-heritage men in certain cases⁶. Critics note that this position conflicts with established data showing that women and girls were targeted based on race in multiple grooming gang scandals.

Verdict: 🟡 Contested — Criticism relates to perceived inconsistency, not a specific false claim

Summary Table

Overall: Largely True — Multiple verified incidents of hypocrisy, including employing someone convicted of child sex offences, praising the communist Red Army, and spreading misinformation.

References