Author Sarah Helm appeared to defend the proscribed group in a post criticising broadcaster Adam Boulton over his remarks about Sally Rooney, prompting a police assessment and a swift distancing statement from Downing Street.
The wife of Andy Burnham’s national security adviser has sparked controversy after appearing to defend Palestine Action on social media, prompting police to assess whether her comments warrant further investigation.
Sarah Helm, a journalist and author married to Jonathan Powell, responded on X to a clip of broadcaster Adam Boulton criticising fellow writer Sally Rooney over her support for the pro-Palestinian movement.
“God help us authors who support Palestine and Palestine Action,” Helm wrote. “Sounds like Adam would have all our books swept off the shelves in a jiffy.”
The post has drawn attention because Palestine Action was proscribed as a terrorist organisation in the UK in July 2025, making membership and certain forms of support for the group criminal offences under the Terrorism Act 2000.
A Metropolitan Police spokesman said officers were aware of the post and were assessing it.
“We have been made aware of an X post on Thursday, 15 October referencing Palestine Action. It is in the process of being assessed to determine whether any further police investigation may be required,” the spokesman said.
No10 moved to distance the government from Helm’s remarks, stressing that her views should not be interpreted as an official position.
“These views are held by an individual who does not represent the Government in any capacity,” a Downing Street spokesman said.
The controversy comes amid an increasingly contentious debate over the boundaries between political expression, support for Palestinian causes and the legal restrictions imposed on Palestine Action.
The group was proscribed under the government of former prime minister Sir Keir Starmer after MPs voted 385 to 26 in favour of the measure. The ban came into force on July 5 2025.
At the time, then home secretary Yvette Cooper said the group had “passed the threshold” for proscription on the basis of “clear national security evidence and assessments”.
She argued that the right to protest and freedom of speech remained fundamental to democracy, but said violence and serious criminal damage had no place in legitimate protest.
The legality of the proscription is now facing a further judicial test. The Supreme Court has granted Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori permission to appeal against the ban, with a hearing scheduled within the court’s October-to-December 2026 sitting period.
Helm’s comments also come as the row over Rooney’s support for Palestine Action has escalated into a dispute over publishing and the financial consequences of the ban.
Rooney, the Irish author of Normal People and Intermezzo, previously said she would direct proceeds from her work towards Palestine Action following its proscription. Her publisher, Faber, has since withdrawn her books from the UK market.
In a statement, Faber said current legislation meant it could not pass UK earnings from Rooney’s work to the author.
“To sell a writer’s work and not be able to pass on earnings is an unconscionable situation for a publisher,” the company said, explaining that it had agreed with Rooney to stop supplying her books in the UK in any format while continuing to publish them in other territories.
The dispute was reignited by Boulton’s criticism of Rooney. In the clip shared by Helm, the broadcaster accused the author of taking a “very strong pro-Palestine, and I have to say anti-Israel and anti-Jewish stance”.
Helm’s response framed the issue as one of artistic freedom and the treatment of authors who express support for Palestine Action. But the reference to the proscribed organisation has placed her post under scrutiny at a time when the legal distinction between political advocacy and criminal support is being contested.
The police assessment does not itself establish that an offence has occurred, and no decision to pursue a further investigation was announced in the statement.
The case nevertheless highlights the growing tension surrounding the government’s proscription of Palestine Action: a policy intended to address national security concerns that has also generated disputes over expression, publishing and the limits of political solidarity.
With the Supreme Court appeal pending, the legal framework governing the group remains under challenge. For now, Helm’s post has become another flashpoint in a debate in which the consequences can extend well beyond social media — into policing, publishing and the relationship between personal views and public office.
Leave a Comment