My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

News

Banning orders?????

5 replies

joanofarchitrave · 30/09/2014 19:03

The last time I read about banning orders was reading that biography of Steve Biko by Donald Woods. Banning orders were used in apartheid South Africa to prevent people with seditious ideas spreading those ideas, to the point where they weren't allowed to meet with more than one other person, weren't allowed to write or speak about their ideas. That worked out really well for the regime.

So I turn on the radio today to find the Home Secretary proposing banning orders for the Conservative Party manifesto. Note - the Conservative party, party of liberty and respect for the constitution unless they want to boast about their chats with the Queen

I'm not an idiot, I do know what's being proposed is slightly different. One of the principles seems to be, though, that people who are talking about uncomfortable ideas (like the black flag of Islam flying over 10 Downing Street, apparently) will be banned from spreading those ideas, e.g. on the internet.

Can someone explain to me why this is anything other than oppressive and anti libertarian? What kind of society is this intended to protect? Not a free one?

OP posts:
Report
niceguy2 · 30/09/2014 19:53

I see it more as the modern day curse of MP's having to be seen to be doing 'something'. Doesn't matter what it is....or how effective it is. So long as they're seen to be doing 'something'.

Report
joanofarchitrave · 30/09/2014 20:16

Oh God couldn't they just have a Keep Britain Tidy campaign or something? God knows we need one of those.

I've just written to my MP about something else - will have to pause before writing any more. Might have to join Liberty.

OP posts:
Report
meditrina · 30/09/2014 20:20

Well, unlike 'control orders' these are likely to be legal.

There is precedent (SinnFein banned from airwaves), and they do appear this time to be focussed on acts which incite hate crime. We!ll have to wait for the actual draft legislation before we can assess if there are enough checks and balances.

Report
joanofarchitrave · 30/09/2014 20:21

Shame that certain legal precedents can't be just described as 'crap precedents' Grin

OP posts:
Report
SisterNancySinatra · 30/09/2014 20:25

Because the government is in panic mode,and Cameron has cut security for this country back to it's bare bones . Any protest now scares the life out of the establishment .

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.