Boris Johnson has committed to bringing the Online Harms Bill back to the Commons “before Christmas” in the first PMQs following the killing of Conservative MP Sir David Amess.
Sir Keir Starmer called on Boris Johnson to bring forward the second reading of the Online Harms Bill by the end of the calendar year in the first PMQs since Sir David’s death last Friday.
In the first meeting of the two party leaders in three weeks, Sir Keir warned: “It is three years since the government promised an Online Safety Bill but it is not yet before the House – meanwhile the damage caused by harmful content online is worse than ever.”
The Labour leader said if the legislation is put in front of MPs before the end of 2021, his party will support it.
The PM thanked Sir Keir for his support and confirmed the Bill will return and “complete its stages” before the end of December.
Advertisement
It had been expected that the Bill – which particularly focuses on how to protect young people online, but also contains plans on how to address terrorism and disinformation – would not return to the Commons until the New Year.
“The safety of MPs, indeed of all public servants, everybody who engages with the public is of vital importance,” Mr Johnson said.
More on Keir Starmer
Related Topics:
“The Online Safety Bill is of huge importance, it is one of the most important tools in our armoury.”
The PM also insisted new internet safety laws will impose “criminal sanctions with tough sentences” on those responsible for allowing “foul content” on their platforms.
The exchange came less than a week after Tory MP Sir David was stabbed to death in his constituency.
Sir David, who represented Southend West in Essex, was holding a constituency surgery at Belfairs Methodist Church in Leigh-on-Sea when he was stabbed multiple times.
Ali Harbi Ali, who is 25-years-old, has been arrested on suspicion of his murder.
The PM told MPs his government are “ensuring that we crack down on companies that promote illegal and dangerous content”, adding: “We’ll be toughening up those provisions.”
Sir Keir called for “tough and effective sanctions” for those responsible for harmful online posts.
“It is frankly beyond belief that as the Mirror reported yesterday, 40 hours of hateful content from Anjem Choudary could be easily accessed online,” the Labour leader said.
Sir Keir urged the PM to bring an end to this “by making it clear that directors of companies are criminally liable for failing to tackle this type of material on their sites”.
He added that there is “a clear need for action”.
Mr Johnson replied that the government is working “with all parties” to tackle violent extremism and said UK has “one of the strongest counter terrorism and counter extremism systems in the world”.
The PM said he is “willing to look at anything to strengthen the legislation”, adding: “We will have criminal sanctions with tough sentences for those who are responsible for allowing this foul content to permeate the internet.”
The debate follows almost a week of MPs raising safety concerns in the wake of Sir David’s death.
A wider discussion has developed over the way politicians are targeted online.
Speaking to Sky News on Sunday, Home Secretary Priti Patel said MPs could be given police protection while they carry out constituency surgeries.
Ms Patel said “immediate” security changes are being offered to MPs after the killing and they are being asked to share their whereabouts with police, but she said she did not think it should change the nature of the relationship between MPs and constituencies.
And Ms Patel did not rule out banning anonymity on social media in a bid to tackle “relentless” online abuse, declaring: “We can’t carry on like this.”
At the beginning of the session, Sir Keir called on all members of the House to work “together” to tackle issues relating to violent extremism.
The calm tone remained for the majority of PMQs, with the PM saying he is “delighted to join forces” on the matter.
Despite the rising COVID cases, there was no mention of the pandemic in the 30-minute questioning.
MPs and peers could be forced to submit to criminal record checks under proposals submitted by a new Labour MP.
In a letter seen by Sky News, Jo White urged the leader of the Commons to examine whether a new committee set up to modernise parliament should force all new members to have checks due to their access to young and vulnerable people.
She suggests in-depth background checks by the Disclosure and Barring Service – commonly known as DBS checks – as the initial stages of introducing MPs to parliament.
Candidates are currently banned from running to be an MP if they have been jailed for more than a year in the UK.
However, there is no requirement for DBS checks, something most other jobs require when applying for positions working with vulnerable people.
Ms White previously submitted an early-day motion on this issue, with cross-party signatures including 13 other Labour MPs supporting her motion.
In her letter to the committee, the Bassetlaw MP writes: “It is a privilege that, as parliamentarians, we can work with local schools, care homes and hospitals, but we must be proactive in preserving this trust.
More from Politics
“Implementing a mandatory check would protect both the people we visit and ourselves. It would be key to maintaining public trust and high workplace standards across the estate and in our constituencies.”
DBS checks are standard practices for GPs, nurses, teachers and other professions. They let potential employers know if a candidate has a criminal record or is banned from working with children or vulnerable adults.
Many local authorities already run DBS checks on elected officials but it’s not standard practice in parliament.
Prospective MPs can stand for election despite having a criminal record or appearing on the child-barred list or adult-barred list unless they have served a prison term over 12 months.
In fact, they do not need to disclose any criminal behaviour to the public prior to becoming a candidate.
The main vetting process before entering the House of Commons is done through political parties, who set their own rules for carrying out any such checks.
None of the Reform UK MPs have signed the early-day motion and leader Nigel Farage said last election there was “no vetting” of candidates.
The creation of a modernisation committee was a Labour manifesto promise and now sits as a cross-party group tasked with reforming House of Commons procedures and improving standards.
The committee said it would not be commenting on submissions until it’s had time to fully consider all options, but is due to publish an initial report early this year.
Nigel Farage has said Tommy Robinson “won’t be” joining Reform UK after Elon Musk showed support for the jailed far-right activist on social media.
The billionaire owner of X, who has spoken positively about Reform UK and is reportedly considering making a donation to the party, has been critical of the government’s handling of child sexual exploitation across a number of towns and cities more than a decade ago.
Mr Musk endorsed the far-right activist and claimed Robinson was “telling the truth” about grooming gangs, writing on X: “Free Tommy Robinson”.
Speaking to broadcasters ahead of the start of Reform UK’s East Midlands Conference tonight, party leader Mr Farage did not directly address Mr Musk’s comments, but said: “He has a whole range of opinions, some of which I agree with very strongly, and others of which I’m more reticent about.”
He went on to say that having Mr Musk’s support is “very helpful to our cause”, describing him as “an absolute hero figure, particularly to young people in this country”.
He continued: “Everyone says, well, what about his comments on Tommy Robinson? Look, my position is perfectly clear on that. I never wanted Tommy Robinson to join UKIP, I don’t want him to join Reform UK, and he won’t be.”
Later on GB News, Mr Farage added that Mr Musk “sees Robinson as one of these people that fought against the grooming gangs”.
“But of course the truth is Tommy Robinson’s in prison not for that, but for contempt of court,” he said.
Mr Farage added: “We’re a political party aiming to win the next general election. He’s not what we need.”
How did Elon Musk become involved?
The online campaign from Mr Musk began after it emerged that Home Office minister Jess Phillips had denied requests from Oldham Council to lead a public inquiry into child sexual exploitation in the borough, as the Conservatives had done in 2022.
In a letter to the authority in Greater Manchester, Ms Phillips said she believes it is “for Oldham Council alone to decide to commission an inquiry into child sexual exploitation locally, rather than for the government to intervene”.
An Oldham Council spokesman previously said: “Survivors sit at the heart of our work to end child sexual exploitation. Whatever happens in terms of future inquiries, we have promised them that their wishes will be paramount, and we will not renege on that pledge.”
Mr Musk posted on X multiple times about the scandal, and claimed Sir Keir Starmer had failed to bring “rape gangs” to justice when he led the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). In 2013, Sir Keir introduced new guidelines for how child sexual abuse victims should be treated and how a case should be built and presented in court.
The SpaceX and Tesla boss also endorsed posts about Robinson.