Free speech in peril

WHEN legislation is hastily rushed through to deal with a pressing social problem, it often has grave unintended consequences.

The Dangerous Dogs Act – brought in after a series of attacks on children – is a prime example.

By banning specific breeds rather than focusing on irresponsible owners, thousands of innocent pets were put down while vicious cross-breed dogs that should have been taken out of circulation were largely unaffected. If ministers are not very careful, the ‘online harms’ White Paper threatens a similar farrago.

While the Government is right to impose a tough regulatory system on social media giants that allow child exploitation, terrorist videos and other blatantly criminal material to wash over their sites every day, they must not do this at the expense of free expression.

The White Paper would create powers to ban websites for such nebulous offences as ‘disinformation’ and ‘trolling’ – with the Home Secretary signing off the new regulator’s rules on terror and child abuse.

Imagine such powers in the hands of a Corbyn government. He and his acolytes have already warned they are ‘coming’ for the free Press. This would give them exactly the tools they need to shut down any debate with which they disagreed.

How long would it be, for example, before they pressurised the regulator to ban public discussion of Labour anti-Semitism as ‘fake news’?

This White Paper was framed with good intentions. But without radical rewriting, it could sound the death knell of free speech in this country.