Among a large part of the population, ‘Labour’ still means ‘authoritarian’. Over Leveson, it has once again revealed its authoritarian streak.
Padraig Reidy is senior writer at Index on Censorship
Among a large part of the population, ‘Labour’ still means ‘authoritarian’. CCTV, ID card schemes, all the way to the various legal battles over terror suspects and secrecy.
In 2010, in the run up to the general election, I attended a panel discussion hosted by Privacy International. Nick Clegg made much of the authoritarian streak in Labour policies, even offering a Littlejohnish “you-couldn’t-make-it-up!” as he told the assembled digital activists how Labour had even made up a law banning people from detonating atomic devices (for the record, this sounded like an eminently sensible move to me).
Labour were powerless to fight the ZaNu Liarbore narrative, and the election was duly lost.
Step forward to now, and we’re constantly being told that new Labour is nothing like New Labour. Mark Seddon wrote in the Guardian last week of how this was “not the party that went to war in Iraq.” Those bad old days of control freakery and conspiracy are over, replaced by a new spirit of discussion.
All very nice, but Labour’s behaviour over the recent Leveson negotiations has carried the exact same hallmark of scheming and authoritarianism that was supposed to have been left behind.
The attachment of Lord Puttnam’s Leveson amendments to the Defamation Bill was a disgrace. Let there be no equivocation about this.
Here was a bill which had been built by consensus, with popular support. A bill that could go a little way to making this country a little freer. It wasn’t perfect, but it was an improvement.
Lord Puttnam chose to sabotage it. On Twitter on Friday evening, Chris Bryant was telling people that the defamation bill would pass without amendment if Labour got what it wants on Leveson. It is a tawdry political move.
Meanwhile, Labour’s insistence on statutory underpinning for the post-Leveson press regulator revealed that the authoritarian streak is alive and well. Is there a problem? Only another law can sort it out. A new Quango for the people. The party knows best.
All this in spite of the fact that many journalists are already facing prosecution for hacking and other breaches. We have laws for this sort of thing, so what exactly is this new law for?
Labour could have been brave: they could have pointed out that the focus after Leveson is almost entirely on the press, while politicians get off free. They could have said that here we have an issue on a principle of free press, and discussion about principal is not helped by emotive campaigning.
They could at the very least have signalled some interest in free speech by allowing the Defamation bill it had committed to continue on its path unmolested.
The Labour party chose to do none of these things, and in doing so has once again allowed itself to be cast as an enemy of freedom.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
152 Responses to “Leveson: Labour has allowed itself to be cast as the enemy of freedom”
Frankie D.
“they could have pointed out that the focus after Leveson is almost entirely on the press, while politicians get off free.”
The press can make or break politicians. Sort the press out and you go a long way to sorting out politicians.
Jonathan Middleton
Exactly the press needs to be sorted out pronto. Just look at the sort of garbage that the mail and express are peddling about Europe, immigration, muslims. Look at how John O’farrell was smeared as a terrorist sympathizer by the right-wing press
Mick
Aah, poor little Labour, caught in the headlights. So they want the Press to come to the
heel of politicians. Politicians usually bent, so no wonder Tony Blair in his book whined that the papers appeared to hate Labour.
Labour refused referenda on the Euro or Lisbon, but that’s all the media’s fault. Labour allowed such an unsustainable migrant influx that Cooper’s the latest Labour person to admit the Party went too far. But that’s the fault of the Mail as well.
And for Muslims? If so many didn’t have the tendancy to misbehave then there wouldn’t be such cause to report them. (Just Google the percentage of Muslims in prison or drawing benefits. The answers will knock your socks off.)
And for terrorist sympathiser claims? Well, Red Ken said the IRA were ‘freedom fighters’ and never renounced that view, even though the IRA were supplied by the Nazis during WW2. But Kenny boy’s still a Labour luvvie.
NO WAY should stuff be hushed up under left wingers!
Mick
That reminds me of Labour people whining they’ve been traditionally ‘victimsed’ by the Press. It was both loathesome and comedic for Labour Conference speakers to attack the Sun with such venom, just because the paper dared to switch support to David Cameron.
She called Labour people the ‘underdogs’. This from the party crazy about dictating. (Google INDEPENDENT BLAIR’S FRENZIED LAW MAKING A NEW OFFENCE FOR EVERY DAY SPENT IN OFFICE.)
I’ve also read Tony Blair A Journey. In it, he complains that the papers had their knives out for the criminals, PC charlatans, cash-grubbers and moral hypocrites in Labour.
Labour are just riding any public annoyance with some journalists going mad to try and keep any real investigative journalism from their sleaze-addled doors.
VOTE LABOUR for privacy!
Michael Cross
“the press needs to be sorted out pronto”
Most enlightening, thank you.
If you were in power, which bits would you “sort out” – just those you don’t agree with?