Latest news with #Martyn'sLaw
Spectator
a day ago
- Politics
- Spectator
The Online Safety Act and the Left's ‘ancient' institutions
After Reform promised to repeal the Online Safety Act, it didn't take long for Labour to defend internet censorship. 'And get rid of child protections online? Madness,' Labour MP Chris Bryant tweeted. 'Why would anyone want to grant strangers and paedophiles unfettered online access to children?' asked Mike Tapp. Science Minister Peter Kyle went one step further, declaring that anyone opposing the Online Safety Act – including Reform leader Nigel Farage – is 'on the side of Jimmy Savile'. Labour's latest attack ad reads: 'Farage's Reform party would scrap laws keeping children safe online'. The actions of government ministers over the past few days provide a masterclass in left-wing institution shrine-making. Yes, it might seem absurd that the government is treating a week-old policy like a sacred cow, the abolition of which is completely unimaginable. But this is a strategy ripped out of the progressive playbook. The same approach has been taken to the Human Rights Act, Ofcom, the Office for Budget Responsibility and the Supreme Court. We live in a world of Blairite institutions treated as ancient pillars of society. On Sky News, Kyle added that Farage was 'on the side of turning the clock back to the time when strange adults can get in touch via messaging apps with children'. How dare Farage try to turn back the tide of progress like this, returning the UK to the dystopian hellscape of… last week? If Labour are to be believed, the internet before 25 July 2025 – when the act's child safety duties came into force – was a dangerous and terrifying place in which children were constantly at risk of predation. It's completely safe now, though. The fact that the greatest safeguarding scandal of the 21st century – the mass grooming and rape of our children – happened mostly offline seems to have passed the government by. Here's how it works. Step one: diagnose a real problem and propose an institution or law that may do something in a roundabout way to address it. The Online Safety Act latched on to very real fears that children were accessing hardcore pornography and self-harm sites online. Martyn's Law, legislation seeking to improve protective security and organisational preparedness in event venues, responded to the horrors of the Manchester Arena terror attack in 2017. The Human Rights Act of 1998 emerged from a good-natured desire to 'bring rights home'. Nobody could ever object to the prohibition of slavery or torture. It all seemed very reasonable at the time. Step two: give your newly created solution wide-reaching powers that go far beyond the scope of the problem you sought to solve. Consult every 'stakeholder' on the books and add in amendments seeking to cover a whole host of new issues. Quickly, the Online Safety Act became an attempt to age-restrict most of the internet, including 'content relating to': sexual exploitation, illegal immigration and people smuggling, and fraud. Yes, 16-year-olds will soon have the right to vote – but not to watch some speeches in Parliament. Attempts to insulate venues from the threat posed by terrorism left small event organisers with hours of paperwork and online training in order to hold even tiny events unlikely ever to have been the target of an attack. The Human Rights Act became a vehicle for criminals to stay in the country. Finally, once your institution has spiralled completely out of control, object to any and all criticism on the grounds that the world we lived in before was a cruel and dangerous place. Never engage with the realities of the past. Robert Jenrick's campaign for Britain to leave the European Court of Human Rights and abolish the Human Rights Act was met with shock from campaigners. Those who support him are accused of trying to take away human rights – of trying to remove 'the fundamental universal rights we have as all human beings'. Ushering in a world where no one can have a free trial or a family life. Those on the left refuse to engage with the fact that, before 1998 when the act was introduced, Britain was clearly not an authoritarian state. Indeed, freedom of speech was undoubtedly better back then. The same case is made for the Supreme Court, which only came into existence in 2009, and the Equality Act of 2010. Before this, we are meant to believe that the ordinary person was suffering day to day at the hands of evil, woman-hating employers and parliamentary dictators. The same goes for the Office for Budget Responsibility – a creation of Cameron's 2010 government, and one which the Chancellor Rachel Reeves is determined to hand even more power to. Was the Treasury completely out of control before they weighed in with their forecasts? Is a 15-year-old institution that's overseen consistently rising government debt truly beyond reproach? Was the press really much worse before Ipso, the press regulator, was established in 2014? If anything, its existence has made it harder for the press to report on contentious topics, such as the gender debate. There was a world before the turn of the millennium. Britain is held together by the fundamentals of its democratic norms; by its truly ancient institutions: common law, democracy and parliamentary sovereignty have all done great things to protect the individual. The institutions and policies of the last decade have hindered, not helped, this project. Learn from the derangement of the conversation about the Online Safety Act. Don't fall for the progressive guidebook next time they get it out.
ITV News
09-07-2025
- Politics
- ITV News
Southport Inquiry: Can public inquiries lead to real change?
Speaking ahead of the Southport Inquiry Figen Murrary, the mum of Martyn Hett, says the Manchester Arena Inquiry gave her the answers she needed, but it took an emotional and physical toll. The government has so far announced three new public inquiries in 2025, bringing the total of ongoing or announced inquiries to 21. But with more public inquiries than ever - are they working as they should? While public inquiries can be tools for accountability, they are not without challenges. Critics often point to the lengthy durations and substantial costs associated with these investigations and even more crucially the fact they often do not lead to change. A recent report by the House of Lords Statutory Inquiries Committee warned inquiries were perceived as 'frequently too long and expensive, leading to a loss of public confidence and protracted trauma'. Figen Murray OBE, the mother of Martyn Hett, one of 22 people killed in the Manchester Arena bombing, knows all too well the emotional and physical toll public inquiries can take on families. The inquiry into the Manchester Arena Attack lasted more than three years. She said: "Going through an inquiry as a family member who has been directly affected either by death or injury, it is one of the most traumatic experiences I have ever gone through. "Once you see something, you can't un-see it. And when you hear things you can't un-hear them. So people need to appreciate that sitting through an inquiry you see things, you hear things, you go through all sorts of emotions and it's brutal." However Figen maintains the inquiry did give her the answers she needed and helped her campaign for Martyn's Law. Figen Murray said: They're crucially important because they make people accountable and they actually make sure all the facts are on the table and people can examine them and actually make sense of what happened and it puts all the pieces together that are missing. "I think inquiries are absolutely crucial to learning from bad catastrophic events and finding out what can be done to avoid that from happening again." While few will disagree with the need for an inquiry into the Southport tragedy, some remain skeptical as to what it'll achieve. "It had been hoped Southport would be the first to adhere to the Hillsborough Law which would force public officials to tell the truth at inquiries from the outset or face criminal sanctions but the bill's yet to be passed." Elkan Abrahamson, Director of Hillsborough Law Now believes the current inquiry process is ineffective. "There are two big reasons why I think they are ineffective," he said. "The first-is the lack of a duty of candour so it is easy to mislead a public inquiry - certainly in the early stages before an inquiry kicks off and the second is a lack of any oversight mechanism to see that any recommendations are, if not fully implemented, then at least properly considered. "Time and again we have a public inquiry where recommendations are made and just ignored and we have to do something about that." But Professor Lucy Easthope, one of the country's leading emergency planners, believes if done well the Southport Inquiry could bring positive change. "One of the things about the inquiry is there wasn't a trial which many people were relieved about in some ways but it did mean there were a lot of questions unanswered and the inquiry can go much more broadly into other questions as well," she said. "There is no doubt that inquiries done well with the right disclosure and with a very focused chair that demands things of the people giving evidence does inevitably and necessarily change practise. "The sad thing for us is to have to see it being in an inquiry. " So it seems this public inquiry will itself come in for intense scrutiny. The big question, will be whether it'll be able to provide clarity and a degree of closure to the families of Alice, Bebe and Elsie and all the others affected by the terrible events of last summer.
North Wales Chronicle
06-07-2025
- Politics
- North Wales Chronicle
Islamic and right-wing extremism remain UK's ‘biggest threats', says Cooper
On July 7 2005, four suicide bombers targeted the capital's transport network, killing 52 people and injuring more than 770 on three London Underground trains and a bus. A series of attempted bombings followed the attacks, and in the subsequent manhunt for suspects, police shot dead innocent man Jean Charles de Menezes, at a tube station. Writing in the Sunday Mirror, Ms Cooper recalled how news of the attacks had emerged as she headed to a local government conference in her then-role as a junior minister. 'The anti-radicalisation programme Prevent became more important than ever,' Ms Cooper said. 'And communities across the nation were determined that hatred would not win. 'The work done at that time has endured and evolved. Islamist extremist terrorism remains the greatest threat, followed by extreme right-wing terrorism. 'But we also face threats from hostile states, serious organised crime, cyber criminals, and a rise in individuals radicalised online.' Ms Cooper referenced how the approach to tackling terrorism had continued to evolve in the wake of the tragedy. In April, legislation providing greater protection to help prevent and reduce the harm of terror attacks at event venues officially became law. The Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025, known as Martyn's Law, compels all UK venues expecting 200 or more people to be on site to prepare for the event of a terror attack. Larger premises expected to host 800 people or more also have to take steps to reduce their vulnerability to an assault, such as CCTV, bag searches or vehicle checks. Figen Murray campaigned for the law change in memory of her 29-year-old son Martyn Hett, who was killed in the Manchester Arena bombing at the end of an Ariana Grande concert in May 2017. Speaking when the Bill was signed into law, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said: 'Today is a landmark moment for our security as my Government delivers on its promise to introduce Martyn's Law and better protect the public from terrorism. 'Figen's courage and determination in the face of such unimaginable loss is truly humbling, and it is thanks to her campaigning that Martyn's Law means her son's legacy will live on forever.'
Leader Live
06-07-2025
- Politics
- Leader Live
Islamic and right-wing extremism remain UK's ‘biggest threats', says Cooper
On July 7 2005, four suicide bombers targeted the capital's transport network, killing 52 people and injuring more than 770 on three London Underground trains and a bus. A series of attempted bombings followed the attacks, and in the subsequent manhunt for suspects, police shot dead innocent man Jean Charles de Menezes, at a tube station. Writing in the Sunday Mirror, Ms Cooper recalled how news of the attacks had emerged as she headed to a local government conference in her then-role as a junior minister. 'The anti-radicalisation programme Prevent became more important than ever,' Ms Cooper said. 'And communities across the nation were determined that hatred would not win. 'The work done at that time has endured and evolved. Islamist extremist terrorism remains the greatest threat, followed by extreme right-wing terrorism. 'But we also face threats from hostile states, serious organised crime, cyber criminals, and a rise in individuals radicalised online.' Ms Cooper referenced how the approach to tackling terrorism had continued to evolve in the wake of the tragedy. In April, legislation providing greater protection to help prevent and reduce the harm of terror attacks at event venues officially became law. The Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025, known as Martyn's Law, compels all UK venues expecting 200 or more people to be on site to prepare for the event of a terror attack. Larger premises expected to host 800 people or more also have to take steps to reduce their vulnerability to an assault, such as CCTV, bag searches or vehicle checks. Figen Murray campaigned for the law change in memory of her 29-year-old son Martyn Hett, who was killed in the Manchester Arena bombing at the end of an Ariana Grande concert in May 2017. Speaking when the Bill was signed into law, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said: 'Today is a landmark moment for our security as my Government delivers on its promise to introduce Martyn's Law and better protect the public from terrorism. 'Figen's courage and determination in the face of such unimaginable loss is truly humbling, and it is thanks to her campaigning that Martyn's Law means her son's legacy will live on forever.'
South Wales Guardian
06-07-2025
- Politics
- South Wales Guardian
Islamic and right-wing extremism remain UK's ‘biggest threats', says Cooper
On July 7 2005, four suicide bombers targeted the capital's transport network, killing 52 people and injuring more than 770 on three London Underground trains and a bus. A series of attempted bombings followed the attacks, and in the subsequent manhunt for suspects, police shot dead innocent man Jean Charles de Menezes, at a tube station. Writing in the Sunday Mirror, Ms Cooper recalled how news of the attacks had emerged as she headed to a local government conference in her then-role as a junior minister. 'The anti-radicalisation programme Prevent became more important than ever,' Ms Cooper said. 'And communities across the nation were determined that hatred would not win. 'The work done at that time has endured and evolved. Islamist extremist terrorism remains the greatest threat, followed by extreme right-wing terrorism. 'But we also face threats from hostile states, serious organised crime, cyber criminals, and a rise in individuals radicalised online.' Ms Cooper referenced how the approach to tackling terrorism had continued to evolve in the wake of the tragedy. In April, legislation providing greater protection to help prevent and reduce the harm of terror attacks at event venues officially became law. The Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025, known as Martyn's Law, compels all UK venues expecting 200 or more people to be on site to prepare for the event of a terror attack. Larger premises expected to host 800 people or more also have to take steps to reduce their vulnerability to an assault, such as CCTV, bag searches or vehicle checks. Figen Murray campaigned for the law change in memory of her 29-year-old son Martyn Hett, who was killed in the Manchester Arena bombing at the end of an Ariana Grande concert in May 2017. Speaking when the Bill was signed into law, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said: 'Today is a landmark moment for our security as my Government delivers on its promise to introduce Martyn's Law and better protect the public from terrorism. 'Figen's courage and determination in the face of such unimaginable loss is truly humbling, and it is thanks to her campaigning that Martyn's Law means her son's legacy will live on forever.'
