new authoritarianism

When governments can decide what journalists say, we should all be worried

Spread the love

Original article by Peter Geoghegan republished from openDemcracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

OPINION: UK National Security Bill is latest in long line of cynical attempts to maintain secrecy and stifle journalism

Journalism, as George Orwell famously said, is “printing what someone else does not want printed”.

But what happens if the someone who doesn’t want your story printed also has the power to put you in prison?

That sounds like the kind of question journalists in places like Iran or North Korea might have to contend with. But it’s a dilemma someone like me, living and working in the UK, could be asking soon, too.

The National Security Bill currently going through Westminster contains a clause saying that “providing” information that may “materially assist a foreign intelligence service” can be punishable by up to 14 years in prison.

Here at openDemocracy we pride ourselves on publishing stories that the government and others in power would much rather never see the light of day.

We’ve revealed how the Treasury helped Putin’s sanctioned warlord to sue a British journalist in London, how Russian oligarchs have bankrolled the Conservatives, how dark money flows into British politics and more.

Investigative journalists like us at openDemocracy often receive sensitive information. Could our reporting be used by foreign powers to embarrass the British government?

The honest answer is ‘yes’. But does saving our government’s blushes mean the public shouldn’t know that the British army was aware of the dangers of ‘Snatch Land Rovers’, associated with the deaths of over 34 British troops in Iraq and Afghanistan? Or how the UK’s corporate secrecy vehicles are used to hide oligarchs’ ill-gotten gains?

Crucially, Sharpe’s promise that journalists won’t get caught in the security bill’s dragnet will not be enshrined in law

In recent days, Rishi Sunak’s ministers have made some minor amendments to the National Security Bill in the face of organised opposition by openDemocracy and other media outlets. (A huge thank you to the more than 8,000 oD readers who sent emails to their MPs demanding changes to the bill.)

The government has been at pains to say we shouldn’t be worried. In the Lords this week, one minister, Andrew Sharpe, said that it is “almost inconceivable that genuine journalism will be caught within the threshold for criminal activity”.

But it’s the “almost” that should worry all of us.

The National Security Bill replaces older secrecy legislation, and is supposed to counter the activity of hostile foreign powers in the UK. But the bill’s provisions are so wide-ranging that it is not hard to see how journalists – and whistleblowers – could be caught by it.

Crucially, Sharpe’s promise that journalists won’t get caught in the security bill’s dragnet will not be enshrined in law.

Why can’t we just trust our leaders when they say that hacks like us have nothing to worry about?

Well, their track record isn’t good. This is a government that ran an Orwellian ‘Clearing House’ that vetted Freedom of Information requests from journalists and others. When we revealed what was happening, Michael Gove, the minister in charge, smeared us and our journalism.

The Clearing House has now been closed down, but journalism is still under threat.

London’s libel courts are still being used by the world’s rich and powerful to silence public criticism. Last year, Dominic Raab pledged to legislate to end so-called “strategic litigation against public participation” cases, or SLAPPs.

But Raab’s rhetoric has not turned into reality. openDemocracy is currently subject to a SLAPP case, as are many of our journalistic allies.

Rishi Sunak has allotted no parliamentary time for anti-Slapp legislation – which means it’s very unlikely to happen. Should we be surprised when one of Sunak’s own appointments, former chancellor Nadhim Zahawi, issued legal threats against journalists and campaigners who asked questions about his tax affairs?

Sunak and his ministers are fond of saying how much they care about free speech and the freedom of the press. But when the government gets to decide what information journalists can – and can’t – report, we should all be worried.

Original article by Peter Geoghegan republished from openDemcracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

Continue ReadingWhen governments can decide what journalists say, we should all be worried

Starmer’s Labour abstains on vote to protect journalists from state persecution, allowing Tory win

Spread the love

Original article republished from the Skwawkbox for non-Commercial use.

Yet another shameful episode from ‘long-time servant of the security state’ Starmer

Image of Keir Starmer, thanks to The Skwawkbox

The UK’s lurch toward fascism continued last night with yet another shameful – and shamefully unsurprising – episode of cowardice and betrayal by Keir Starmer and the shell of the Labour party under his control.

With the Tories’ repressive ‘National Security Bill’ in the Lords last night, the Green party tried to rally support to protect journalists – and investigative journalism and therefore the interests of the UK people – from persecution under a bill widely recognised to be a measure to give the government freedom to act without scrutiny or accountability, turning the UK into a mini-US in its treatment of journalists for doing their job.

Even a handful of Tories in Parliament have pointed out that such vital revelations as the ‘Panama papers’ would not have been possible under the new bill and that the rights of women, minority groups and the wellbeing of citizens are under severe threat from the proposed new law.

So the Greens in the Lords called a vote to protect journalists – for the sake of all this country’s people. It was defeated, because Keir Starmer whipped Labour peers to abstain.

Keir Starmer has been called a ‘long-time servant of the British security state’ and his affiliations have been expressed in votes to protect state agents from even such crimes as rape and murder, his attacks on environmental and human rights protesters, his support for immunity for soldiers who murdered civilians in Northern Ireland and more. So his action in the Lords vote last night should surprise no one, but his decision to whip for abstention and engineer the defeat of the motion rather vote against it directly is another manifestation of his fundamental spinelessness.

He is avidly helping push this country along the road to fascism, but doesn’t have the moral courage even to nail his colours to the mast, instead hoping that telling Labour representatives not to vote at all will lessen the backlash against his betrayal.

Original article republished from the Skwawkbox for non-Commercial use.

Continue ReadingStarmer’s Labour abstains on vote to protect journalists from state persecution, allowing Tory win

Selection AND executive committees of Broxtowe Labour resign over candidate stitch-up (yet another one)

Spread the love

Original article republished from the Skwawkbox for non-Commercial use.

Starmeroids block another popular local candidate – in favour of parachuted Blairites

Original article republished from the Skwawkbox for non-Commercial use.

Two entire Labour committees have resigned after yet another candidate selection stitch-up by Keir Starmer and his drones in the Labour party.

Local favourite Greg Marshall – backed by figures from a wide spectrum of the party – tweeted news that the party had blocked him from the shortlist:

In response to the shameless rigging, the local party (CLP) selection committee resigned and issued a withering statement about London officials overriding local democracy:

Shortly afterward, the entire CLP executive resigned too over the ‘undemocratic’ behaviour of the party and its national executive (NEC):

Meanwhile, Anna Joy Rickard – a literal Blairite – was tweeting her joy at being shortlisted and was admonished by a local figure for her claim, when no shortlist had even been announced:

Broxtowe is just the latest in a series of shamelessly-rigged selections as the Labour right tries to eradicate the left, both in seats that Labour does not hold and in those it does – and a repeat of Labour’s routine tactic of fixing selections by making sure members can only choose from a shortlist of approved Blairites.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

Continue ReadingSelection AND executive committees of Broxtowe Labour resign over candidate stitch-up (yet another one)

Labour members pass motion demanding party stop rigging candidate selections

Spread the love

Original article republished form the Skwawkbox for non-Commercial use.

Motion condemns Starmer party’s attack on democracy

‘Democracy’ in Labour – often rigged before members even start to vote

Members of a Labour front-bencher’s local party passed a motion last week condemning the regime’s shameless rigging of party democracy and demanding to be allowed to select their candidates without interference.

Hornsey and Wood Green members voted strongly for the following emergency motion:

Selection of Candidates

HWG CLP notes the Labour Party’s assertion that it is a ‘democratic socialist party’ (Clause IV). HWG CLP further notes that Keir Starmer stated in February 2020:

‘The selections for Labour candidates needs to be more democratic, and we should end NEC impositions of candidates. Local party members should select their candidates for every election.’

HWG CLP agrees with this statement, and strongly believes that it should be the democratic right of constituency members to choose their prospective candidates and regrets that this is not being acted upon.

Keir Starmer’s statement on 15th February 2023 regarding Islington North [where Starmer is blocking former leader Jeremy Corbyn from standing as a Labour candidate], the imposition of shortlists in Wakefield, Bolton North East, and other constituencies, and the suspension or expulsion of very good potential candidates prior to selection processes commencing are all contrary to this democratic principle.

HWG CLP calls on the NEC to confirm that the selection of candidates is the democratic right of local Labour Party members and must be upheld. In Solidarity.

The motion, no doubt cautiously worded because of the regime’s readiness to punish members for speaking out against its misdeeds, triggered ludicrous responses from a few right-wingers – including the husband of one key Starmer adviser, who tried to argue that it was ‘anti-democratic’ for the ‘CLP’ to follow its own standing orders and hold a vote on whether the motion was in order before a vote on the motion itself was held.

Starmer’s lackeys have routinely been put in direct charge of selection processes in areas considered to be likely to select a candidate who isn’t a Starmer clone – and in many cases have rigged longlists to exclude the candidates local members prefer, leaving them with no choice but to choose which of the approved drones will stand for election.

Keir Starmer expects the country to believe that he will push power away from himself and out to the regions – but he won’t even allow Labour members to exercise the democracy to which the party’s rules entitle them.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

Original article republished form the Skwawkbox for non-Commercial use.

Continue ReadingLabour members pass motion demanding party stop rigging candidate selections

Labour bans CLPs from links with string of human rights/peace/health groups incl PSC, JVL, Corbyn’s PJP

Spread the love

Original article and image republished from The Swawkbox for non-Commerical use.

Email to CLPs warns them that any existing affiliations with groups campaigning for abortion rights, minority human rights, disarmament and a fully public NHS are cancelled

Image thanks to The Skwawkbox

The Labour party has banned local parties (CLPs) from affiliating with an array of groups supporting the human rights of ethnic minorities or campaigning for a public NHS, in yet another Stalinist move to limit members’ freedom of expression.

And local parties are being notified by email that any affiliations they already have in place are unilaterally cancelled – and that if a right-wing group is affiliated with the party nationally, they have no say over whether that group affiliates with them locally.

One such email reads:

Organisations that are nationally affiliated to the party are eligible to affiliate to any CLP provided they pay the appropriate fee and the CLP cannot debate or decide on their affiliations.

…The following affiliations are therefore no longer valid and the CLP may not renew its affiliation without approval from the NEC. To do so would breach party rules. These are:

Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Labour Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Stop the War Coalition, Republic, London Irish Abortion Rights Campaign, Jewish Voice for Labour, Somalis for Labour, Sikhs for Labour, All African Women’s Group, Health Campaigns Together, The Campaign against Climate Change Trades Union, Peace & Justice Project.

Yes, you read that right: a group campaigning for peace, human rights, women’s rights, disarmament and to protect the environment are not welcome in Keir Starmer’s Labour party and party member groups risk disciplinary action if they try to associate with them.

The news should come as no surprise in Starmer’s racist, pro-privatisation, pro-apartheid party where his promises to renationalise the NHS and public utilities, protect the climate and empower member rights and democracy were binned almost the instant he got his backside into Corbyn’s office and his claim to be on the side of domestic violence victims masks a shameless cover-up of abuse of them.

And of course, given recent appalling comments by the leadership and its agents, Jews who believe in the human rights of Palestinians are particularly unwelcome – and indeed are being disproportionately targeted by the regime in a campaign of blatant (but ignored by the media) antisemitism and discrimination.

Original article and image republished from The Swawkbox for non-Commerical use.

Continue ReadingLabour bans CLPs from links with string of human rights/peace/health groups incl PSC, JVL, Corbyn’s PJP