Serious free speech concerns have been raised in the House of Lords regarding the Government’s Online Safety Bill.
During a debate on the Communications and Digital Committee report ‘Free for all? Freedom of expression in the digital age’, Peers welcomed provisions protecting children from online porn, but said the ‘legal but harmful’ duty was “unworkable” and risked ‘mob rule’.
The Bill, rescheduled from the summer, had been set to complete its final stages in the House of Commons on Tuesday, but was again pulled from the parliamentary timetable.
‘Collateral damage’
Reflecting on the Committee’s deliberations, the chairman at the time the report was published, Lord Gilbert of Panteg, said: “a consensus quickly emerged that the ‘legal but harmful’ provisions are unworkable and would present a serious threat to freedom of expression. They should be removed from the Bill.”
The Conservative Peer feared Government plans gave “Ofcom significant definitional power”, and asked “whether consideration has been given to solutions which could include a clear and specific duty” on the regulator “to have regard for freedom of expression in designing codes and guidance and using enforcement powers”.
They should be removed from the Bill.
In relation to online platforms, he stated: “There is no incentive for them to consider freedom of expression, other than some duties to ‘have regard for’ its importance, which are currently much too weak. Legitimate speech will become collateral damage.”
‘Unreasonable’
Free speech campaigner and Director of the Academy of Ideas Baroness Fox of Buckley agreed, saying: “the committee rightly rails against the illiberal notion of censoring ‘legal but harmful’ material, and hopefully the Government will indeed drop that egregious clause”.
Liberal Democrat Baroness Featherstone described the powers afforded by the Bill to the Secretary of State as “unreasonable” and cautioned: “We cannot give the state control over our media”.
Lady Featherstone also said: “If we eradicate words, ideas and subjects that cause discomfort or give offence, we weaken ourselves”. She added: “we must not submit our intellect and freedoms to the mob”.
we must not submit our intellect and freedoms to the mob
Responding on behalf of the Government, Lord Kamall said the debate had “highlighted the arguments and tensions between online safety and freedom of expression”.
David Davis: ‘Govt poorly understands its Online Safety Bill’
IEA: ‘Online Safety Bill raises significant free speech issues’
Lord Frost: ‘PM must prioritise an overhaul of the Online Safety Bill’