Lib Dems signal opposition to curbs on social media networks

Amendment tabled for autumn conference urges party to oppose additional powers for police or government to restrict access to internet or social media The Liberal Democrats will oppose David Cameron’s proposal that people suspected of inciting violence during social unrest could be banned from social media networks. An amendment is being tabled for the party’s autumn conference that, if voted through, would put pressure on the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, to resist Cameron’s plan. Signs of increased tension between the coalition partners emerged as the acting Metropolitan police commissioner, Tim Godwin, told the home affairs select committee on Tuesday that he had considered asking the authorities to switch off social media networks. He said he had considered the step because, although they were often a source of information, the sites could also be misleading. Details of the conference amendment came as Clegg sought to propose his own policy response to the riots, with the different philosophies of the coalition partners beginning to come to the fore. On Tuesday morning, he announced a “riot payback” scheme to make looters and arsonists face their victims, along with support to help ex-offenders find jobs. The scheme would mean looters carrying out community service in riot-hit neighbourhoods. They are to wear orange suits to make them visible, and money is being provided to enable victims who want to do so to confront the people who torched their homes or looted their businesses last week. The announcement contrasted with some of the policies, including the clampdown on social media networks, floated by Cameron in the aftermath of the riots. Differences between the coalition partners surfaced at the weekend as senior Lib Dems urged an end to “kneejerk” reactions by politicians. The party’s deputy leader, Simon Hughes, insisted long-term solutions lay in supporting communities by offering opportunities and redistributing wealth, not slashing help from the state. In the past, Cameron has made the positive and liberating effect social liberating media can have central to his vision of the “post-bureaucratic age”. Texting and BlackBerry Messenger were critical in planning the riots and, in last week’s recall of parliament, the prime minister said users of social media networks such as Twitter, Facebook and BlackBerry Messenger, could have their access to services blocked. He said he had instructed the intelligence services and police to explore whether it was “right and possible” to cut off those “plotting violence, disorder and criminality”. On Monday, the Chinese government official news agency, Xinhua, welcomed the suggestion, saying it marked an improvement from Cameron’s comments in February. Then, he had urged Egypt and other north African nations to allow freedom of expression after they tried to restrict the operation of social media. Xinhua said: “For the benefit of the general public, proper web monitoring is legitimate and necessary. “We may wonder why western leaders, on the one hand, tend to indiscriminately accuse other nations of monitoring, but on the other take for granted their steps to monitor and control the internet.” Evan Harris, the vice-chair of the Lib Dems’ ruling federal policy committee, will table an amendment at the party gathering. At this spring’s conference, a vote on a Lib Dem amendment presaged a U-turn on NHS policy as Clegg came under pressure to reflect the views of the Lib Dem grassroots. The amendment, entitled “Protecting the essential freedom of the internet”, calls for “additional safeguards for online freedom of speech to be in place”. It reads: “Oppose additional powers for the police or the government to restrict access to the internet or to social media or to order its suspension. “[We should be] making it clear that the government will not allow a two-tier internet, and will hold to the principle of net neutrality, if necessary through regulation.” The amendment is likely to get broad support. On Monday, the backbencher Julian Huppert also wrote against blocking any contemplation of shutting down social networks. He said: “Some people in parliament and elsewhere have chosen to focus on the use of social media in these riots. And David Cameron has responded by announcing a review designed to explore whether it would be ‘right and possible’ to turn off social networks or mobile phone services during times of civil unrest. “Even if we look at these riots in isolation – always a dangerous approach to policymaking – the idea that we should prevent communication via these networks is patently ludicrous. “The brilliant response to the riots on Facebook, Twitter and the wider internet, embodied most clearly by the website Riot Clean-Up, has arguably done more to bring communities together than anything else. “There is little evidence to suggest this is a problem that needs to be tackled, and yet the government seems to be seriously considering curbing freedom of communication in a manner which would make it far harder for the good things that have come from this unrest either to continue or to happen again. “This authoritarian knee-jerkery is a reminder of the bad old days. Those who cherish liberty, in all parties and none, must now defend these important new forms of communication.” UK riots Crime Police Liberal Democrats Liberal-Conservative coalition Social media Internet BlackBerry Twitter Mobile phones Allegra Stratton guardian.co.uk

Posted by on August 16, 2011. Filed under News, Politics, World News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.