Sir Ed Davey has branded Elon Musk a criminal and called for him to be prosecuted for “allowing online harm to children” on his social media platform X.

The Lib Dem leader told Sky News’ Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips the billionaire owner of X, formerly Twitter, is “inciting violence” and his social media platform is actively failing to protect children.

Sir Ed, speaking from the Lib Dem conference in Bournemouth, said Mr Musk could be prosecuted under the Online Safety Act, under which social media companies have a legal duty to protect children from harmful content and their directors are liable for criminal prosecution for breaching it.

Asked if he is calling Mr Musk a criminal, Sir Ed did not miss a beat as he said: “Yes.

“Not just because of the awful things he’s done in inciting violence, and, for example, he says a civil war in our country is inevitable, that our democratically elected government should be overthrown.

“They were bad enough. But on his platform, they’re examples of adverse, pushing people on self-harm, on grooming, even selling videos showing paedophile acts, of child sex abuse acts and I think he should be held to account for them, him personally and his business.

“Ofcom now has the powers under the Online Safety Act.”

He said if Mr Musk comes to the UK, he should be arrested.

Read more:
Lib Dems toughen up immigration rhetoric

Mr Musk was accused of inciting violence during a march organised by Tommy Robinson in London last week.

He told the protest via video link: “This is a message to the reasonable centre, the people who ordinarily wouldn’t get involved in politics, who just want to live their lives. They don’t want that, they’re quiet, they just go about their business.

“My message is to them: if this continues, that violence is going to come to you, you will have no choice. You’re in a fundamental situation here.

“Whether you choose violence or not, violence is coming to you. You either fight back or you die, that’s the truth, I think.”

Sir Ed said it is “shocking” that Mr Musk removed some of X’s child safety teams when he took over Twitter in 2022 and accused him of just being “interested in his bank account”.

“I’m interested in the safety of our children, and it is quite wrong that his business puts on these adverts,” said the Lib Dem leader.

“It’s disgusting and I hope everybody will agree with me and the Liberal Democrats that we should take really strong action against him.”

After Mr Musk acquired Twitter, many of its child safety staff were laid off or resigned, and the platform’s trust and safety council was disbanded.

Child protection experts have accused Mr Musk of leading a “race to the bottom on safety”.

Ofcom, the UK’s independent media regulator, which has the power to prosecute directors of social media platforms under the Online Safety Act, has launched an investigation into X’s handling of child sexual abuse content.

This is not the first time Sir Ed has hit out at the world’s richest man, as he called for the US ambassador to be summoned in February “to ask why an incoming US official is suggesting the UK government should be overthrown”.

Mr Musk reacted by calling Sir Ed a “snivelling cretin”.

Sir Ed is expected to reiterate his call for Mr Musk’s arrest at his conference speech on Tuesday.

He will accuse Mr Musk of being motivated by “his own ego, power and wealth, rather than the rights and freedoms of the British people”.

The Lib Dems will also table a parliamentary motion summoning Mr Musk to the House of Commons “to be reprimanded for his actions”.

Sky News has approached X and Elon Musk for comment, but as of publication has received no response.

X maintains it has “zero tolerance for child sexual abuse material” and claims tackling those who exploit children is a “top priority”.

The UK will formally recognise Palestine as a state, it is understood.

Sir Keir Starmer is expected to make the announcement today after he said in July that the government would make the move unless Israel met certain conditions.

The prime minister had called on Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to take substantive steps to end the “appalling situation in Gaza“, agree to a ceasefire, commit to a long-term sustainable peace, allow the UN to restart the supply of aid, and not annex the West Bank.

The Israeli foreign ministry furiously rejected his statement, with Mr Netanyahu claiming that “Starmer rewards Hamas‘s monstrous terrorism and punishes its victims”.

Ilay David, brother of Hamas hostage Evyatar David, who was seen emaciated in a video last month, said giving recognition was “like saying to Hamas: ‘It is OK, you can keep starving the hostages, you can keep using them as human shields.’

“This kind of recognition gives Hamas power to be stubborn in negotiations. That is the last thing we need right now.”

There has been no ceasefire, and the situation in Gaza has deteriorated, with a declaration of a famine in Gaza City and the expansion of Israeli military operations.

Israel has launched a major ground offensive to seize all of Gaza City and destroy Hamas in an operation which has prompted widespread condemnation, with UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper calling it “utterly reckless and appalling”.

Earlier this month, a UN commission of inquiry concluded that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Israel said the claim was “distorted and false”.

The UK will join 147 of the 193 members of the UN who recognise Palestine ahead of the UN General Assembly in New York on Monday.

Other nations, including France, Australia and Canada, have said they plan to take the same step at the UN gathering as part of a broad international effort to put pressure on Israel.

And the Muslim Council of Britain welcomed the prime minister’s move, but urged that recognition must also come with “tangible action”.

During a joint news conference with the prime minister at Chequers on Thursday, Donald Trump said he disagreed with recognition, and US politicians have urged the UK and other allies to reverse their stance.

Sky News understands that Israel is considering options in response to the UK’s decision, but the strength of that reaction is still under consideration.

Read more:
Palestinian minister says UK recognition of state would be ‘courageous step’
What does recognising a Palestinian state mean?
Gaza could be ‘real estate bonanza’, Israeli minister says

Family members of some of the 48 hostages still in captivity, after Hamas and other militant groups stormed into Israel on 7 October 2023, have written an open letter to Sir Keir, condemning the move.

“Hamas has already celebrated the UK’s decision as a victory and reneged on a ceasefire deal,” they said.

“We write to you with a simple plea – do not take this step until our loved ones are home and in our arms.”

Meanwhile shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel accused the prime minister of “capitulating” to his backbenchers to shore up his leadership.

“With the terrorist organisation Hamas still holding hostages in barbaric conditions and glorifying acts of terror, Starmer is sending a dangerous message, where violence and extremism are tolerated and rewarded,” she said.

The UK government is understood to be looking at further sanctions on Hamas, and has demanded the group release all hostages, agree to an immediate ceasefire, accept it will have no role in governing Gaza, and commit to disarmament.

The controversial assisted dying bill is still very much alive, having received a second reading in the House of Lords without a vote.

But that doesn’t tell the whole story. Day two of debate on the bill in the Lords was just as passionate and emotional as the first, a week earlier.

And now comes the hard part for supporters of Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, as opponents attempt to make major changes in the months ahead.

The Lords’ chamber was again packed for the debate, which this time began at 10am and lasted nearly six hours. In all, during 13 hours of debate over two days, nearly 200 peers spoke.

According to one estimate, over both days of the debate only around 50 peers spoke in favour of the bill and considerably more than 100 against, with only a handful neutral.

The bill proposes allowing terminally ill adults in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for an assisted death. Scotland’s parliament has already passed a similar law.

In a safeguard introduced in the Commons, an application would have to be approved by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior lawyer and psychiatrist.

The bill’s sponsor in the Lords, Charlie Falconer, said while peers have “a job of work to do”, elected MPs in the Commons should have the final decision on the bill, not unelected peers.

One of the most contentious moments in the first day of debate last Friday was a powerful speech by former Tory prime minister Theresa May, who said the legislation was a “licence to kill” bill.

That claim prompted angry attacks on the former PM when the debate resumed from Labour peers, who said it had left them dismayed and caused distress to many terminally ill people.

The former PM, daughter of a church of England vicar, had claimed in her speech that the proposed law was an “assisted suicide bill” and “effectively says suicide is OK”.

But opening the second day’s debate, Baroness Thornton, a lay preacher and health minister in Tony Blair’s government, said: “People have written to me in the last week, very distressed.

“They say things such as: ‘We are not suicidal – we want to live – but we are dying, and we do not have the choice or ability to change that. Assisted dying is not suicide’.”

Throughout the criticism of her strong opposition to the bill, the former PM sat rooted to her seat, not reacting visibly but looking furious as her critics attacked her.

There was opposition to the bill, too, from grandees of the Thatcher and Major cabinets. Lord Deben, formerly John Gummer and an ex-member of the Church of England synod, said the bill “empowers the state to kill”.

And Lord Chris Patten, former Tory chairman, Hong Kong governor and Oxford University chancellor, said it was an “unholy legislative mess” and could lead to death becoming the “default solution to perceived suffering”.

Read more:
Paralympian targeted with abuse for opposing assisted dying bill
The assisted dying debate has been politics – but not as we know it

Day two of the debate also saw an unholy clash between Church of England bishops past and present, with former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey claiming opponents led by Archbishop of York Stephen Cottrell were out of touch with public opinion.

While a large group of bishops sat in their full robes on their benches, Lord Carey suggested both the Church and the Lords would “risk our legitimacy by claiming that we know better than both the public” and the Commons.

“Do we really want to stand in the way of this bill?” he challenged peers. “It will pass, whether in this session or the next. It has commanding support from the British public and passed the elected House after an unprecedented period of scrutiny.”

But Archbishop Cottrell hit back, declaring he was confident he represented “views held by many, not just Christian leaders, but faith leaders across our nation in whom I’ve been in discussion and written to me”.

And he said the bill was wrong “because it ruptures relationships” and would “turbocharge” the agonising choices facing poor and vulnerable people.

One of the most powerful speeches came from former Tory MP Craig Mackinlay, awarded a peerage by Rishi Sunak after a dramatic Commons comeback after losing his arms and legs after a bout of sepsis.

He shocked peers by revealing that in Belgium, terminally ill children as young as nine had been euthanised. “I’m concerned we want to embed an option for death in the NHS when its modus operandi should be for life,” he said.

And appearing via video link, a self-confessed “severely disabled” Tory peer, Kevin Shinkwin, was listened to in a stunned silence as he said the legislation amounted to the “stuff of nightmares”.

He said it would give the state “a licence to kill the wrong type of people”, adding: “I’m the wrong type. This bill effectively puts a price on my head.”

After the debate, Labour peer and former MP Baroness Luciana Berger, an opponent of the bill, claimed a victory after peers accepted her proposal to introduce a special committee to examine the bill and report by 7 November.

“The introduction of a select committee is a victory for those of us that want proper scrutiny of how these new laws would work, the massive changes they could make to the NHS and how we treat people at the end of their lives,” she told Sky News.

“It’s essential that as we look at these new laws we get a chance to hear from those government ministers and professionals that would be in charge of creating and running any new assisted dying system.”

After the select committee reports, at least four sitting Fridays in the Lords have been set aside for all peers – a Committee of the whole house – to debate the bill and propose amendments.

Report stage and third reading will follow early next year, then the bill goes back to the Commons for debate on any Lords amendments. There’s then every chance of parliamentary ping pong between the two Houses.

Kim Leadbeater’s bill may have cleared an important hurdle in the Lords. But there’s still a long way to go – and no doubt a fierce battle ahead – before it becomes law.