Wednesday, December 17, 2025
Another slippery slope?
His stance comes following the appalling attack by two gunmen on a Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach in Australia on Sunday, killing 15 people and injuring a further twenty-seven:
The prime minister’s official spokesperson said that while “free speech is an important right in this country, that can’t extend to inciting hatred or harassing others”, saying the police will use their powers “more robustly” to tackle the proliferation of antisemitism.
Starmer and the Chief Rabbi are, of course, absolutely correct that hate speech has often led to unacceptable and horrendous atrocities against Jews, but also against other minorities, and where there is a clear causality then the police need to act.
But at the same time, in enforcing any new rules, care must be taken to distinguish between, for example, rhetoric criticising the actions of the state of Israel, which is not anti-semitic, and language that is clearly discriminatory.
There are inherent risks in asking the authorities to police what people can and cannot say when demonstrating. The ban on supporting Palestine Action for example, has led to hundreds of unnecessary arrests and overreach on the part of the police, with some people being arrested for displaying perfectly legal wording on placards.
The police already have powers to deal with hate speech and incitement. A new directive in which officers are asked to make a judgement call on what is anti-semitic and what is not, could well act as a severe restraint on people's basic democratic rights and lead to more confusion and inconsistencies in the way that peaceful protest is policed.
It would be a further step down a very slippery slope and one that should be considered very very carefully before it is taken.
