Rayner claims Reform will ‘fail women' as she weighs in on online safety row
Her warning is the latest intervention in a row between senior Labour figures and Mr Farage's party over the Act.
Under new rules introduced through the legislation at the end of July, online platforms such as social media sites and search engines must take steps to prevent children from accessing harmful content such as pornography or material that encourages suicide.
Reform has vowed to repeal the law and replace it with a different means of protecting children online, though the party has not said how it would do this.
Among their criticisms of the Act, Mr Farage and his colleagues have cited freedom of speech concerns and claimed the Act is an example of overreach by the Government.
This prompted backlash from Technology Secretary Peter Kyle, who claimed people like Jimmy Savile would use the internet to exploit children if he was still alive, and insisted anyone against the Act – like Mr Farage – was 'on their side'.
The Reform leader demanded an apology, but ministers have been trenchant in their defence of the Act.
Now, the Deputy Prime Minister has questioned how Mr Farage would seek to prevent the 'devastating crime' of intimate image abuse, also known as 'revenge porn', without the Online Safety Act's protections.
Ms Rayner claimed: 'Nigel Farage risks failing a generation of young women with his dangerous and irresponsible plans to scrap online safety laws.
'Scrapping safeguards and having no viable alternative plan in place to halt the floodgates of abuse that could open is an appalling dereliction of duty. It's time for Farage to tell women and girls across Britain how he would keep them safe online.'
Under the Online Safety Act, revenge porn is classified among the 'most severe online offences', the Deputy PM added.
Citing figures from the charity Refuge, the Labour Party claimed a million young women had been subject to revenge porn: either intimate images being shared, or the threat of this.
Some 3.4 million adults in total, both men and women, have been affected, Labour also said.
Ministers have previously had to defend the Online Safety Act against accusations from Elon Musk's X social media site that it is threatening free speech.
In a post at the start of August 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.
Mr Farage has meanwhile suggested there is a 'tech answer' for protecting children online, but neither he nor the Government have outlined one.
He also suggested children are too easily able to avoid new online age verification rules by using VPNs (virtual private networks), which allow them to circumvent the rules by masking their identity and location.
When Reform UK was approached for comment, its Westminster councillor Laila Cunningham said: 'Women are more unsafe than ever before thanks to Labour. Starmer has released thousands of criminals back onto the streets early with no regard for women's safety.
'I am calling on Jess Phillips to debate me on women's safety – she ignored the grooming gangs scandal and now she's wilfully deceiving voters on this issue.
'Reform will always prioritise prosecuting abuse but will never let women's safety be hijacked to justify censorship.
'You don't protect women by silencing speech. You protect them by securing borders, enforcing the law, and locking up actual criminals, and that is exactly what a Reform government would do.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
30 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
DWP confirms when it will start taking payments straight from bank accounts
The new Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill will be introduced from April 2026 and will give the Government power to recover money straight from bank accounts The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has confirmed when a major crackdown on benefit cheats will come into force. The new Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill will be introduced from April 2026 and will give the Government power to recover money straight from bank accounts of those who have committed benefit fraud. The DWP will be able to request bank statements of those who are under investigation, but it will not have direct access to bank accounts. There will be new requirements for banks and building societies to flag where there is a potential breach of eligibility rules for benefits. The DWP will also be able to apply to the court to ban people from driving for up to two years. It is hoped the new powers will save taxpayers £1.5billion over five years. The Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill forms part of wider government plans to save a total of £8.6billion. An estimated £7.4billion was lost to benefit fraud last year. Other measures include DWP organised crime investigators being allowed to apply to for search warrants to seize evidence against fraudsters, including computers and smartphones. The time limit for civil claims against Covid fraud will also be doubled from six to twelve years. DWP minister Liz Kendall said back in March: "The social security system that we inherited from the Conservatives is failing the very people that it is supposed to help and is holding our country back. "The facts speak for themselves. One in 10 people of working age are now claiming a sickness or disability benefit. Almost one million young people are not in education, employment or training - one in eight of all our young people." In more DWP news, pensioners have been told they have until September 15 to opt out of the Winter Fuel Payment worth up to £300. Winter Fuel Payments are being paid this year to pensioners who were born before September 22, 1959 - but if you earn over £35,000 a year, then your Winter Fuel Payment will be automatically recovered by HMRC. This will be done through PAYE, or through self-assessment return. If you earn over £35,000, then there is an option to opt out of getting your Winter Fuel Payment. You can do this by filling out a form on or by contacting the Winter Fuel Payment Centre by post or telephone. The income eligibility is based per person. You can check if your Winter Fuel Payment will be clawed back by HMRC on this page.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Labour will regret its attack on nature
Environmentalists always feared that Brexit would lead to a weakening of environmental protections, but who would have guessed that it would be a Labour government which would take a bulldozer to legislation acquired through the EU Habitats Directive? Rachel Reeves is reported to be contemplating a second planning bill which would make it far harder for conservationists to hold up infrastructure projects. Reeves has already paved the way – if that is not an unfortunate expression in this context – by saying last month that she cared more about young families getting on the housing ladder than 'protecting some snails'. The ability to use judicial reviews to block projects will be curtailed and the list of creatures offered protection will be shrunk. Reeves is giving these idealistic voters an even bigger incentive to jump from the Labour ship Reeves is right that habitat rules are excessive – even if her party was among the first to scream green murder whenever the Conservative government wanted to build an infrastructure project. Where were she and her colleagues when fracking companies were trying to develop a UK shale gas industry which, by now, could have been producing cheaper energy for UK households? The £100 million 'bat tunnel' on HS2 which so offended Keir Starmer seems to have come as a moment of realisation for the government – that we are becoming a country where it is impossible to build any infrastructure project at reasonable expense thanks to the ability of the green lobby to frustrate and delay. Under existing law even common creatures are granted sacred status. But Labour's about-turn on nature and development is likely to have serious political consequences for the party. The trouble for the party is that many of its voters are already tempted by the Green party, not just for environmental reasons but because it also offers totemic left-wing policies such as a wealth tax, which Reeves and Starmer seem to have ruled out. Now, Reeves is giving these idealistic voters an even bigger incentive to jump from the Labour ship. Nor are Reeves's planning reforms on their own likely to do much to boost the economy. It might help speed up a few infrastructure projects, but they are unlikely to counter the anti-growth effects of other government policies, such as the rise in employers' National Insurance contributions and the Employment Rights Bill. Moreover, Britain, like many countries, has a history of infrastructure projects which are conceived less to boost economic growth than to fulfil some political need. HS2 is a prime example. Its economic case always was weak, based on the false assumption that business people cannot work on trains and therefore would be more productive if they could be sped to their offices a few minutes quicker. The bats in that case would have been better left undisturbed. Does anyone really think that the government will come up with better infrastructure just because Reeves has made it easier for them? It is bound to mean yet more wind farms, solar farms – with their intermittent energy helping to further inflate UK energy prices – more roads and bridges to nowhere. There are many infrastructure projects which will remain difficult to enact even with deregulated laws on habitats. It isn't bats and newts, for example, which have stymied a third runway at Heathrow – it is the government's net zero commitments, which Reeves is unlikely to do anything about. It was carbon emissions on which environmental groups chose to fight to project – successfully arguing in court that the third runway was inconsistent with the government's commitments under the Paris agreement (although that was later overturned in the Supreme Court). The issue of climate change has already steamrollered other environmental concerns. The current government looks likely to take this process further.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Labour 2-0 down but has time to turn things around, says Sadiq Khan
Labour would be 2-0 down were its time in government a football match, one of the party's most senior figures has said, as he admitted its first year in office has been difficult. But Sadiq Khan stressed Labour still had plenty of time to win round the public. Speaking at the Edinburgh festival fringe, the London mayor said Labour supporters would be 'delusional' if they did not recognise the difficulties the party had had since winning power in July 2024. 'It is really important now we really pick things up because I think we are 2-0 down.' Continuing his analogy, he said only 15 or 20 minutes of the match had gone, adding: 'The great news is we have turned it round before; we have won games before where we're 2-0 down, we can do it again.' After taking Labour into Downing Street for the first time since 2010, the party's popularity has slumped in the polls, amid criticism over issues such as changes to welfare. Khan said: 'It hasn't been a great first year. There have been great things that have happened in this first year, around the rights for renters, around the rights for workers, around energy security, and I could go on. But as first years go, it has not been a great first year.' But he said his party had 'another four years to make sure we turn this around'. Speaking at the same event, Khan said he would be 'more than happy' to meet Donald Trump – despite warning that the US president could be 'inadvertently radicalising people' and is 'not a force for good'. He dismissed jibes Trump made against him on a recent visit to Scotland, where the president claimed the London mayor was 'a nasty person' who has 'done a terrible job'. The Labour politician said such remarks were 'water off a duck's back'. But he told the audience it sometimes felt as if he was nine years old again and 'in the school playground'. And Khan hit back at Trump, saying: 'Somebody who has views like he does about black people, about women, about gays, about Muslims, about Mexicans, thinks I'm nasty. Really. He is the leader of the free world, arguably the most powerful man in the world, and really.' He said records showed that, from the date Trump started his term in January up to July, 'there have never been more Americans applying for British citizenship and living in London. So I think Americans have got good taste by and large'. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion He added that he hoped the president would come to London during his state visit to the UK next month, with Khan stressing the diversity of the capital was a 'strength, not a weakness' that made the city 'richer not poorer'. He said: that, 'when President Trump says some of the things he does, it brings from the periphery to the mainstream, views that are potentially dangerous'. Khan added: 'He inadvertently – I'm not going to suggest he does it deliberately – he inadvertently could be radicalising people with views that could lead to them doing things that are dangerous.'
