Leader of right-wing Reform UK Nigel Farage demanded an apology on Tuesday after the head of U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s tech branch accused the conservative Member of Parliament (MP) of “siding” with sexual predators amid clashes over a new online safety law.
In remarks from Reform UK’s headquarters, Farage said accusations levied at him earlier in the day by Technology Secretary Peter Kyle were “disgusting” and “below the belt,” and he called on the labor secretary to retract his comments.
Farage’s demands came after Kyle said the right-wing party’s insistence that they will repeal the law if they gain a majority and sweep No 10 in the next general election, was akin to “turning the clock back to the time when strange adults…[could] get in touch via messaging apps with children.”
BRACE FOR A ‘POLITICAL REVOLUTION’ IN EUROPE, UK’S NIGEL FARAGE SAYS AFTER VANCE’S SPEECH IN MUNICH
“We have people out there who are extreme pornographers, peddling hate, peddling violence. Nigel Farage is on their side,” Kyle claimed in a Sky News interview earlier on Tuesday.
“Make no mistake about it, if people like Jimmy Savile were alive today, he’ll be perpetrating his crimes online,” Kyle added, in reference to a British media personality who was found to have preyed on “hundreds” of victims and sexually abused children.
“And Nigel Farage is saying that he’s on their side.”
Farage questioned “Just how low can the Labor government sink” amid their flagging poll numbers.
Kyle took to social media to refuse to back off his statements and said, “If you want to overturn the Online Safety Act you are on the side of predators. It is as simple as that.”
The clash over the internet-based laws, which Farage has described as “borderline dystopian,” is just the latest spat unfolding in the U.K. over freedom of speech concerns — a fight that has been ongoing for decades after a 2003 law made it illegal to intentionally “cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another” with online posts, reported The Times.
The report found that nearly 3,400 people were arrested for violating the law in 2016, and criminalizing online posts remains a point of concern for many in the U.K.
One such example is the case of Lee Joseph Dunn, who posted three images and comments on his Facebook page in July 2024 which were deemed to be “grossly offensive” and which “risked worsening community tensions.”
The images reportedly depicted Asian men with knives, and Dunn’s comments apparently suggested they could illegally immigrate to the U.K. and move into British communities.
Dunn, who took down the posts and apologized, was sentenced to eight weeks for the posts.
In response to the sentence, Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor for CPS North West Janet Potter said, “This conviction should be a stark reminder to so-called keyboard warriors: online actions have consequences.”
UK MAN ARRESTED FOR PRAYING OUTSIDE ABORTION CLINIC PRAISES VP VANCE FOR BRINGING ATTENTION TO CASE
Concerns over non-internet-based freedom of speech restrictions have also arisen in recent years, as in the 2022 case involving Adam Smith-Connor, who was arrested for quietly praying for his aborted son within a buffer zone of an abortion clinic and forced to pay roughly $12,000 in fines.
Divisions over the Online Safety Act have escalated in recent months after the law, which was first introduced in 2023, put the legal onus on social media companies and online platforms to protect users, particularly children, from criminal and harmful material through algorithm-based policies and age restrictions in March.
However, some have argued the law oversteps and now risks violating freedom of speech by forcing social media companies to “censor” anti-government content.
When President Donald Trump was asked on Monday while sitting next to Starmer whether he was concerned about his own social media platform, Truth Social, Trump jokingly responded, “I only say good things about him and his country.”
Starmer replied to the question and said, “We’re not censoring anyone.”
Failure to comply with the new legal rules could mean any platform or social media company is hit with a fine of up to 10% of a firm’s global turnover or nearly $24 million, whichever is greater.
The U.K.-based fight was renewed this month after new restrictions under the law came into effect that require online platforms to take action to prevent children from accessing content relating to self-harm, dangerous pranks or challenges, suicide, eating disorders, pornography, and violent or bullying-related content.
