UK Government urged to reconsider decision to cut cash for peace fund
The IFI was originally set up by the UK and Irish governments as an independent international organisation in 1986.
It delivers a range of peace and reconciliation initiatives across Northern Ireland and Irish border counties, including supporting communities to work towards removal of the remaining peace walls.
Sinn Fein North Belfast MP John Finucane said he is concerned about the move, and said he will raise it directly with Secretary of State Hilary Benn.
'It is extremely concerning that the British Government is to cut funding for IFI,' he said.
'IFI was established to promote peace, reconciliation and a better future for all communities across Ireland.
'Peace is hard-won and hard-fought. It can never be taken for granted, and crucial funds like this must continue to be supported.
'The British Government should be increasing funding in light of the withdrawal of US support, not imposing further hardship.
'I will be writing to British Secretary of State Hilary Benn, calling for his Government to reverse this decision and ensure IFI can continue its vital grassroots-led programmes.'
Responding, a UK Government spokesperson said: 'This Government inherited a very challenging fiscal position, and needed to take difficult but necessary decisions to place the public finances on a sustainable footing.
'As a result, the Government has decided not to continue with the £1 million contribution to the International Fund for Ireland in 2024-25.
'The Government remains supportive of the IFI's aims of promoting peace and reconciliation.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Elon Musk's X says Online Safety Act that requires users to provide ID to show they are over 18 is 'putting free speech at risk'
Elon Musk 's X has warned that the Online Safety Act, which requires users to prove their age, is 'putting free speech at risk'. The new rules, seen by watchdogs as a way to protect children online, have sparked a furious backlash from thousands of users. The act forces platforms like Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and X, along with sites hosting pornography, to implement strict age verification measures to prove users are over 18. But critics are outraged, arguing that age checks are blocking access to large parts of the internet that have no business being grouped with adult content. To use platforms like X, users must surrender personal details such as credit card information, ID, or even facial scans, leading many to bypass the system altogether. X has now joined the chorus of criticism, warning that unless the act is amended to be more 'balanced', 'free speech will suffer'. The uproar has already seen nearly half a million people signing a petition demanding the act be scrapped as the n umber of users searches for VPN surged since the changes came into force. But a government spokesperson has dismissed these concerns, calling the claim that the law compromises free speech as 'demonstrably false,' insisting that it is 'not designed to censor political debate'. Critics argue that age checks are blocking access to large parts of the internet that have no business being grouped with adult content The dispute reached a fever pitch earlier this week when a senior Labour minister accused Reform's Nigel Farage of aligning with 'sick paedophiles' like Jimmy Savile during the ongoing clash over the law. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle went even further, accusing Farage of siding with 'extreme pornographers' over Reform UK's vow to scrap the act. Mr Farage labelled the comments 'disgusting' and demanded an apology, however Mr Kyle later doubled down on his remarks. Now X has joined the list of critics, saying: 'When lawmakers approved these measures, they made a conscientious decision to increase censorship in the name of 'online safety.' 'It is fair to ask if UK citizens were equally aware of the trade-off being made.' The platform claims the timeframe in which they were given to meet mandatory measures had been unnecessarily tight - and despite complying, sites still faced threats of enforcement and fines, 'encouraging over-censorship'. Adding: 'A balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children. 'It's safe to say that significant changes must take place to achieve these objectives in the UK.' Peter Kyle also accused the Reform UK leader Nigel Farage of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers' over the party's pledge to scrap the Online Safety Act Critics including Mr Farage claim that the law is being used to stifle free speech by blocking people from seeing some controversial political statements online Nearly half a million people have signed a petition against the Online Safety Act Ofcom said this week it had launched investigations into 34 pornography sites for new age-check requirements. It comes as Spotify users were left furious after they were told their accounts were at risk of being deleted if they fail to verify their age when trying to access videos marked 18+, with some urging users to stop using it. One user questioned: 'How old do you have to be to listen to music?', while another declared: 'I think I'm deleting payments to any company that ever sends me something like this.' Previously, campaign group, Big Brother Watch, also warned of the 'catastrophic effect on free speech online' that the Ofcom legislation could have with 'intrusive new age checks to access a range of websites'. Xbox have also followed suit, announcing they too will be investing in technologies and tools to ensure players have age-appropriate experiences on their platform, while sending notifications to UK users to verify their age. A Government spokesperson said: 'It is demonstrably false that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech. 'As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression. Failure to meet either obligation can lead to severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global revenue or £18 million, whichever is greater. 'The Act is not designed to censor political debate and does not require platforms to age gate any content other than those which present the most serious risks to children such as pornography or suicide and self-harm content. 'Platforms have had several months to prepare for this law. It is a disservice to their users to hide behind deadlines as an excuse for failing to properly implement it.'
South Wales Guardian
27 minutes ago
- South Wales Guardian
Government defends Online Safety Act after X claims it threatens free speech
In a post titled What Happens When Oversight Becomes Overreach, the platform, formerly known as Twitter, outlined criticism of the act and the 'heavy-handed' UK regulators. The Government countered that it is 'demonstrably false' that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech and said it is not designed to censor political debate. Under rules that came into effect on July 25, online platforms must take steps to prevent children accessing harmful content such as pornography or material that encourages suicide. This includes a new duty for online providers to reduce the risk that users encounter illegal content as well as age verification measures in the UK to access pornographic content. 'As a result, the act's laudable intentions are at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach. Without a more balanced, collaborative approach, free speech will suffer,' X said. It accused regulators of taking a 'heavy-handed approach' and said that 'many are now concerned that a plan ostensibly intended to keep children safe is at risk of seriously infringing on the public's right to free expression'. Ofcom said this week it had launched investigations into 34 pornography sites for new age-check requirements. The company said 'a balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children'. A Government spokesperson said: 'It is demonstrably false that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech. 'As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression. Failure to meet either obligation can lead to severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global revenue or £18 million, whichever is greater. 'The Act is not designed to censor political debate and does not require platforms to age gate any content other than those which present the most serious risks to children such as pornography or suicide and self-harm content. 'Platforms have had several months to prepare for this law. It is a disservice to their users to hide behind deadlines as an excuse for failing to properly implement it.' Technology Secretary Peter Kyle became embroiled in a row with Nigel Farage earlier this week over Reform UK's pledge that it would scrap the Act if the party came into power. He said the Reform UK leader of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers'.
North Wales Chronicle
29 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Government defends Online Safety Act after X claims it threatens free speech
In a post titled What Happens When Oversight Becomes Overreach, the platform, formerly known as Twitter, outlined criticism of the act and the 'heavy-handed' UK regulators. The Government countered that it is 'demonstrably false' that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech and said it is not designed to censor political debate. Under rules that came into effect on July 25, online platforms must take steps to prevent children accessing harmful content such as pornography or material that encourages suicide. This includes a new duty for online providers to reduce the risk that users encounter illegal content as well as age verification measures in the UK to access pornographic content. 'As a result, the act's laudable intentions are at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach. Without a more balanced, collaborative approach, free speech will suffer,' X said. It accused regulators of taking a 'heavy-handed approach' and said that 'many are now concerned that a plan ostensibly intended to keep children safe is at risk of seriously infringing on the public's right to free expression'. Ofcom said this week it had launched investigations into 34 pornography sites for new age-check requirements. The company said 'a balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children'. A Government spokesperson said: 'It is demonstrably false that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech. 'As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression. Failure to meet either obligation can lead to severe penalties, including fines of up to 10% of global revenue or £18 million, whichever is greater. 'The Act is not designed to censor political debate and does not require platforms to age gate any content other than those which present the most serious risks to children such as pornography or suicide and self-harm content. 'Platforms have had several months to prepare for this law. It is a disservice to their users to hide behind deadlines as an excuse for failing to properly implement it.' Technology Secretary Peter Kyle became embroiled in a row with Nigel Farage earlier this week over Reform UK's pledge that it would scrap the Act if the party came into power. He said the Reform UK leader of being on the side of 'extreme pornographers'.
