logo
‘Unless you see it, you can't believe how bad it is': the peer demanding a minister for porn

‘Unless you see it, you can't believe how bad it is': the peer demanding a minister for porn

The Guardian11 hours ago

When the Conservative peer Gabby Bertin arrived for a meeting with the the science and technology secretary, Peter Kyle, earlier this year she startled him by laying out an array of pornographic images across his desk.
'They were screengrabs showing little girls, their hair in bunches, and massive, grown men grabbing little girls' throats,' she says. She had selected images which appeared to depict child abuse, and yet were easily and legally available on a popular website.
'Unless you see it, you can't quite believe how bad it is.' The minister appeared shocked and upset by the images, she recalls, so she quickly tidied them away and later shredded them.
Bertin has noticed that her desire to talk frequently and openly about extreme pornography is not shared by all her Westminster colleagues. 'I've definitely seen people swerve at lunch, not wanting to sit next to me for fear of what they're going to hear coming from my mouth,' she told fellow delegates at the launch meeting of her pornography taskforce this week, prompting a flutter of sympathetic laughter.
Since being appointed by the former prime minister Rishi Sunak to lead an independent review into the regulation of online pornography in December 2023, Bertin has observed how a double taboo has made most politicians extremely reluctant to engage. Some simply find the subject hugely embarrassing; others stay silent because they do not wish to appear prudish by criticising the proliferation of extreme and often illegal pornographic material online.
She is frustrated by this reticence. 'You can't leave the pitch on this stuff just because you're worried about being accused of being too strait-laced,' she says.
The government needs urgently to appoint a minister for porn, she recommends, to ensure that the issue gets the attention it deserves, rather than being passed reluctantly between the Home Office and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. A former adviser to David Cameron, Bertin has gathered cross-party support for her work and says she emails Keir Starmer so regularly about the issue that she has 'practically become his pen pal' (if you can have a pen pal who delegates to officials the responsibility of replying).
'We're really British about it so we don't want to have a graphic conversation about sex and porn,' she says, in an interview in the Westminster office she shares with several other peers. 'But you've got to shout about it as loudly as possible. The reason why we've got into this mess is because nobody has really wanted to talk about it.'
By mess she means a situation whereby online pornography (which is viewed by an estimated 13.8 million UK adults every month) is not regulated to the same degree as pornography watched in cinemas or videos, despite the fact that videos have been redundant for decades and vanishingly few people now visit cinemas to watch porn. The absence of scrutiny has created an environment where much of the content created is, she says, 'violent, degrading, abusive, and misogynistic'.
She also means a situation where a member of her own party had to resign after twice watching porn (perplexingly tractor-themed) on his phone, as he whiled away time on the green benches in the House of Commons.
'People have slightly lost the plot on porn. Would someone 20 years ago have just taken Playboy into the Commons, and had it lying on their lap? It just shows what an extraordinary place we've got to,' she says. 'You can do what you like in your private life – I don't have a problem with that – but you can't watch porn in the House of Commons, and you shouldn't be watching porn at your desk. There's a place for these things and it's not in the office.'
Her review, published in February, made 32 recommendations. Last week the first of these became government policy, when officials announced that pornography depicting strangulation would be made illegal. Her new taskforce of 17 people, bringing together representatives from the police, the advertising industry, anti-trafficking organisations and violence against women charities, will focus on how to ensure harmful online content is better regulated, trying to bring parity between the scrutiny of offline and online content.
She pays tribute to the 'hugely innovative side' of the porn industry, which has long driven technological advances in webcams and internet speeds, fuelled by the sector's enormous capacity to turn profit, but she has not invited any representatives on to the taskforce, wary of anything that might let the industry 'mark their own homework'.
This week Ofcom announced that major online providers, including the UK's most popular pornography site, Pornhub, had agreed to implement stronger age-verification measures in compliance with the Online Safety Act, to prevent under-18s from accessing adult material. Those platforms that do not comply with the measures face being fined 10% of global turnover or being blocked in the UK.
Sign up to First Edition
Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
Ofcom is also responsible for monitoring whether sites distributing user-generated pornography are protecting UK viewers from encountering illegal material involving child sexual abuse and extreme content (showing rape, bestiality and necrophilia, for example). However, other forms of harmful pornography that are regulated in physical formats are not subject to similar restrictions online.
It is this grey, unscrutinised area that Bertin's panel will focus on, as well as calling for better processes to respond to stolen content, working out how people depicted in pornographic videos can request that the clips be removed from sites, and how to build safety mechanisms into AI tools that create sexually explicit content.
Officials at the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) guided her through short clips of extreme material to help her understand the nature of easily available harmful content. She remains disturbed by the material she saw – content designed to appear to be child sexual abuse, set in children's bedrooms – roles played by young girls, who may be over 18 but are acting as children. 'The titles are very problematic, things like: 'Daddy's going to come home and give his daughter a good seeing to' or 'Oops I've gone too far and now she's dead' or 'Kidnap and kill a hooker.'' This content would be prohibited by the BBFC in the offline world, but is unregulated online.
During research for her review, she met representatives from global tech companies, and told them how when Volvo invented the three-point safety belt they gifted the patent to the rest of the industry because staff realised the innovation was so vital to raising safety standards. 'My pitch was that they have a duty and responsibility to double down on trying to get technology that can clean up these situations, and they should share that technology,' she says. 'Taylor Swift can whip a song off a website as soon as anyone tries to pirate it. There's no reason why the firms can't come up with technology to sort this out.'
Posing for photographs, she edges away from a watercolour of Margaret Thatcher hung on the wall by one of her colleagues. 'Let's do it without Thatcher in the background. That's not my doing by the way – I share the office,' she says semi-apologetically, before rapidly adding: 'I mean I love Thatcher, obviously.'
But she may be making an important distinction. In a 1970 Woman's Hour interview, Thatcher said the rise of pornography was a 'frightening' manifestation of a newly permissive society that she believed was undermining family life. Bertin describes herself as a liberal conservative and wants to be clear she is neither anti-porn nor running a moral crusade.
'Consenting adults should be able to do what they want; I have no desire to stop any kind of sexual freedom. But restricting people from seeing a woman being choked, called a whore, and having several men stamp on her – for example – is not ending someone's sexual freedom. This is the kind of content we want to end.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Nigel Farage's Reform UK's rise in London 'a threat to main parties'
Nigel Farage's Reform UK's rise in London 'a threat to main parties'

BBC News

time42 minutes ago

  • BBC News

Nigel Farage's Reform UK's rise in London 'a threat to main parties'

Is Reform UK on the rise in London?The party, led by Nigel Farage, says it has quadrupled its membership in the year since the general election, where they won five seats, including one for Farage in UK had the third-highest vote share in the country at the 2024 election - just over 14% - with half a million more votes than the Liberal Democrats. According to polling, London has a smaller share of Reform voters, but it has a higher share of people who say they would consider voting Reform in the future. Not far from the capital, Reform has control of Kent County Council, which had long been UK also has its first London Assembly member, Alex Wilson, who was elected in May 2024. London politics expert Prof Tony Travers told the Politics London programme that the party "could do very well indeed in some of the outer London boroughs, particularly I would say those that voted Leave in the Brexit referendum, so Barking and Dagenham, Havering, Bexley, Hillingdon, even Sutton".He added: "Those are the places I think they could well do a lot of damage to the incumbent parties."Laila Cunningham, a Westminster city councillor who last week defected from the Conservatives to Reform UK, told Politics London that her residents "would always point to how they were let down by the previous Conservative administration and how they wouldn't vote for them".She added: "Honesty, I think, is really lacking in politics now and I just couldn't defend their record." Cunningham said Reform UK were "serious about getting this country back on track, they're serious about cutting immigration, cutting crime, cutting waste, cutting tax and people say that's right wing but that used to be mainstream a few years ago".Deirdre Costigan, Labour MP for Ealing Southall, told Politics London that Reform UK's "key policy seems to be a massive tax cut for the rich".She added: "How are they going to pay for that tax cut? The only way of paying for that is to cut public services. So, we'll have less police on the streets of London and we won't have an NHS."Conservative London Assembly member Alessandro Georgiou told the programme that Farage "is a tax-and-spend socialist, if you take what he says". Watch the full Politics London programme on BBC iPlayer.

Support for Bilston Market traders rejected
Support for Bilston Market traders rejected

BBC News

timean hour ago

  • BBC News

Support for Bilston Market traders rejected

A motion to financially support displaced market traders in Wolverhampton has been defeated. Traders said they had suffered financial loss as well as ill health since Bilston Outdoor Market relocated last year to make way for a £5.2m upgrade of the site.A plea for financial support, asking City of Wolverhampton Council to "step in immediately" was defeated at a full council meeting this week. A statement from the council said major projects were rarely completed without "some level of disruption". Anita Stanley said two traders had suffered ill health and another had quit. The Reform UK ward member for Bilston North said traders had also been informed improvements would not be completed until 2026, rather than before Christmas, as originally motion called on the council to put together a financial package to offset trader's losses, freeze rents, and issue an apology letter - but it was defeated at a full council meeting. Cabinet Member for Resident Services, councillor Bhupinder Gakhal, said the Bilston market scheme had "been shaped" by the people who use it - and the council had positive feedback from traders and residents throughout the said: "I want to be absolutely clear we will not cut back on our ambition for Bilston. I see the new market as a key development, the catalyst for even further investment in and around it."Major, multimillion-pound projects are rarely completed without some level of disruption. "We know from talking to market traders and local businesses that the current situation has created some positives and some negatives. "We will continue to listen to and work with them to make this is as pain-free as we can, whilst preparing them for the bigger prize and opportunities the scheme will create."After listening to traders' ideas in March, the council said phase two of the project would find a way of "better connecting footfall" from the bus station to the indoor market. Gakhal said the council was also announcing a £15,000 fund to increase footfall through events in the area. "I am determined to ensure that traders have a big say in how this is used but I'm clear that it will benefit both the indoor and outdoor markets and the wider town centre", he said. Follow BBC Wolverhampton & Black Country on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.

Reform the NHS, not our shopping baskets
Reform the NHS, not our shopping baskets

Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Telegraph

Reform the NHS, not our shopping baskets

This week, the NHS will publish its 10 Year Health Plan. The most we can expect from this exercise in Soviet-style planning is tinkering around the edges of an edifice that was erected when Joseph Stalin ruled in Moscow. By 2035, the end date of this 10-year plan, the country will almost certainly be unable to afford the NHS in its present form – if, indeed, it hasn't collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions by then. Unable to address the fundamental problems of the NHS, the dirigistes of Whitehall have come up with a new plan to direct us how to lead our lives – telling us what we should or shouldn't be allowed to choose to put in our shopping baskets. Supermarkets will be expected to cut 100 calories from the average shopping basket by limiting sales of sugary and salty snacks or other 'junk food'. Ever since Napoleon Bonaparte sneered at England as 'a nation of shopkeepers', we have worn his insult as a badge of honour. We are proud to be a people who earn our living by trade and we cherish the liberties that are the glory of a commercial society. Even those of us who are not shopkeepers are at least customers. So little does this Labour Government know the British people that it is about to resort to distinctly Napoleonic measures to punish both retailers and consumers. Yet previous attempts to control consumption have never succeeded in changing enduring patterns of behaviour rooted in human nature. It is outrageous that officials feel empowered to tell us what we can, and cannot, eat. The public is being infantilised and robbed of agency. Centuries have passed since Parliament abandoned sumptuary laws that prohibited the lower orders from imitating the luxurious dress of the aristocracy. But the bureaucratic mind is obdurate in its disdain for popular tastes in food and drink. Combined with Labour's instinct to meddle, along with its insatiable fiscal appetite, it is no surprise that, as we report today, a modern version of the sumptuary laws is about to land on an unsuspecting nation. Obesity is a genuine and growing problem, but, hitherto, all attempts to address it by fiscal means have failed. The latest obesity tax – supermarkets will be fined if they don't reduce the nation's calorie intake, and this will inevitably be passed on to consumers – now emerging from the bowels of the Health Department and the Treasury, claims to be aimed directly at our waistlines. In reality, like all its predecessors, it will target our wallets. There is a certain grim irony in the fact that this policy should have been adopted at the same time as the decision by the NHS to prescribe the weight-loss drug semaglutide (contained in Ozempic and Wegovy). It is fairly obvious that the underlying rationale of the new regulations is less about obesity than about the Government's failure to control spending. No doubt figures will be trotted out about how many lives will be saved by cutting consumption of ultra-processed foods or any other category of comestible that attracts the ire of the health bureaucrats. But the truth is that new rules are being concocted because the Government is running scared of its own MPs, who have effectively imposed a veto on cuts in welfare spending. What would genuinely make a difference to life expectancy and health outcomes would, of course, be a radical reform of the NHS, a more active population, and a reduction in the numbers wasting their lives on benefits. Rachel Reeves has just poured another £29 billion into the health service, without any clear cost-benefit calculation. Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, is intelligent enough to know that he has inherited an obsolete behemoth that is crying out for root-and-branch reform. But building a new consensus for a new NHS would require the Labour Party to rethink its assumptions about the social contract, as well as the role of insurance and individual responsibility. The original 1946 NHS Act created 'a comprehensive health service designed to secure improvement in the physical and mental health of the people of England and Wales'. Today, the nation's health is not safe in the hands of a dysfunctional Labour Party that would rather do anything – even introducing an assisted-dying service – than take on the overdue task of making the NHS fit for purpose. These new directives are at best a displacement activity, at worst an act of fiscal condescension. A nation of shopkeepers deserves better than to be bossed around by its own government.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store