new internet legislation will give ministers “unprecedented” censorship powers, with significant implications for free speech, warns new research.
The Government is facing calls to “slim down” its Online Security Bill, which is currently being passed by Parliament, amid concerns about its impact on people’s freedoms and privacy, as well as innovation.
The legislation is set to legally require platforms to protect users from harmful content for the first time, with penalties for violating the new rules, including fines that could run into billions of pounds for larger companies.
While the government undoubtedly has good intentions, the bill in its current form could eventually be one of the most significant incidental violations of free speech in modern times.
Cultural Secretary Nadine Dorries said it would make the UK “the safest place in the world for our children to go online”.
But former ministers have argued that the bill “concedes to the view of the constantly insulted”, and could ultimately be “one of the most significant incidental violations of free speech in modern times”.
A new information document from the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) think tank warns that the bill, through the introduction of security duties, puts digital platforms at risk of using automated tools in a “cautious and censored” way against content that “only reasonably illegal”.
It says the legislation will give the Secretary of State and Ofcom “unprecedented powers to define and restrict speech, with limited parliamentary or judicial oversight”.
Privacy risks will also be increased by a requirement to prevent people from encountering illegal or inappropriate material, for example through the general monitoring of user content or use of age verification processes, it claims.
And the brainstorm claims that the legislation will impose “Byzantine requirements” on thousands of companies, hindering innovation.
Two former cabinet ministers have commented in which they have expressed concern about the bill, including Lord Frost, who said the best thing the government can do is reduce it.
This will enable him to “quickly move on to the truly uncontroversial aspects, and send the rest where it belongs – the wastebasket,” he said.
He warned that the bill “concedes to the views of the perpetrators – those who think the government should protect them from ever anything they disagree with,” adding that the Tories “should not apply this view in law” .
David Davis, who was Brexit secretary from 2016 to 2018, added: “While the government undoubtedly has good intentions, the bill in its current form could ultimately be one of the most significant incidental violations of free speech in modern times.”
The Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport was approached for comment.