Ban on Palestine Action clears Parliament but faces legal challenge
The House of Lords backed proscribing the group under the Terrorism Act 2000 without a vote.
A short time before, a so-called regret motion proposed by a Green Party peer criticising the measure was rejected by 144 votes to 16, majority 128.
The ministerial order, which has already been approved by MPs, will make it a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison to be a member of the direct action group or to support it.
However, it is unclear when the ban, which needs final sign-off by the Home Secretary, will come into force as the group is mounting a court challenge to try to temporarily block the move with a hearing scheduled on Friday, pending further proceedings.
The Government crackdown comes after two planes were vandalised at RAF Brize Norton on June 20 causing £7 million worth of damage, in an action claimed by Palestine Action.
Four people have been charged by counter-terrorism police in connection with the incident and were remanded in custody following a court appearance.
Home Office minister Lord Hanson of Flint said: 'I will always defend the right of British people to engage in legitimate and peaceful protest and to stand up for the causes in which they believe.
'But essential as these rights are, they do not provide a blank cheque for this particular group to seriously damage property or subject members of the public to fear and violence.'
He added: 'We would not tolerate this activity from organisations if they were motivated by Islamist or extreme right-wing ideology, and therefore I cannot tolerate it from Palestine Action.
'By implementing this measure, we will remove Palestine Action's veil of legitimacy, tackle its financial support, degrade its efforts to recruit and radicalise people into committing terrorist activity in its name.'
But ministers have faced criticism over the decision to outlaw Palestine Action, with opponents branding the move as 'draconian overreach' and comparing the group to the Suffragettes.
The United Nations has also warned against the ban, with experts concerned at the 'unjustified labelling of a political protest movement as 'terrorist''.
In the Lords, Green Party peer Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb opposed the proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation.
Her regret motion argued the ban undermined civil liberties, constituted a misuse of anti-terror legislation, suppressed dissent against the UK's policy on Israel, and criminalised support for a protest group, causing 'a chilling effect on freedom of expression'.
The legislation approved by the Lords also bans two white supremacist groups, Maniacs Murder Cult and Russian Imperial Movement, including its paramilitary arm Russian Imperial Legion.
The Home Office describes the Maniacs Murder Cult as a neo-Nazi transnational and online organisation which has claimed a number of violent attacks around the world.
The Russian Imperial Movement is an ethno-nationalist group which aims to create a new Russian imperial state.
Its paramilitary unit fought alongside Russian forces in the invasion of Ukraine to advance its ideological cause.
It also runs a paramilitary training programme to support attendees to carry out terror attacks, the Home Office added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
High-speed driver busted by police after dangerous chase through London
A high-speed police pursuit through London has been captured on camera after a car was spotted travelling at double the speed limit and the wrong side of a carriageway. The Metropolitan Police has released footage of the police chase which shows officers following the vehicle through the streets of London as the car travels at dangerous speeds on the wrong side of various roads. The police manage to bring the car to a stop by driving up against the vehicle in a tactical move. The force confirmed a driver had been arrested and drugs, cash and phones were also seized. A force spokesman said: "Decisive police action is helping to remove drugs and dangerous drivers from London's streets."
BBC News
28 minutes ago
- BBC News
'I have nightmares about potholes' - Kent Council roads boss
A Kent council cabinet member said he has "nightmares about potholes" as it aims to invest millions into fixing the County Council says it wants to invest £67m into roads in the region, including quick repairs on potholes and preventative measures to stop new issues from in Herne Bay this afternoon, Peter Osborne - who is responsible for highways and transport - said potholes in Kent would be fixed in order of priority, having previously claimed the council had repaired more than 12,000 said: "I have nightmares about potholes. We have all driven over them and I want them fixed." As part of the multi-million pound investment, the Reform-run council says £25m would be used on renewing and reconstructing roads, while £14m would also be sought from the Department for Transport to fund a dedicated pothole patching March, the Annual Local Authority Road Maintenance (ALARM) survey found that fixing the backlog of repairs on roads in the South East would cost about £ Sole, deputy leader of the Liberal Democrat group in Kent County Council, said residents want to "see those potholes being repaired with their own eyes".
Times
28 minutes ago
- Times
Whining about Scottish ‘austerity' is baseless, absurd and idiotic
Like Christmas and birthdays, the annual GERS festival seems to arrive sooner than you think. Has a year really passed since the last edition of the Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland figures was published? Why, yes it has. This year's numbers are remarkable, best accompanied by an indecently large dram of cask-strength liquor. For public spending in and for Scotland amounted to 52 per cent of Scottish GDP last year. That is lower than in France, Finland, Belgium and Austria but higher than in every other European country. Public spending in Sweden and Denmark, for instance, equals 48 per cent of GDP. In Norway, the figure is 46 per cent. Further afield, other countries with which the Scottish government sometimes likes to compare Scotland contrive to thrive with a much smaller public sector. Public spending in New Zealand is 42 per cent of GDP. This is the context in which to understand the claims made by Scottish government ministers that Scotland is once again enduring some form of 'austerity'. And the thing to understand about this whining is that it is baseless, absurd and idiotic. This is a country of Big Government. If government departments and other agencies struggle to meet their obligations despite this obvious largesse it is because they are inefficiently or incompetently run and because ministers lack the courage to say 'No' to demands for more and more spending. Mercifully, Scottish taxpayers are not required to pay for all of this. In 2024-25, £91.4 billion was raised in taxes in Scotland but government spending amounted to £117.6 billion. This is a notional deficit — notional because Scotland is part of the United Kingdom — of some £26.5 billion. That is equivalent to 11.7 per cent of GDP. John Swinney should pray to the ghost of the late Joel Barnett every night for it is his eponymous formula that grants Scotland its privileged place within the United Kingdom: a relatively wealthy part of the realm funded as though it were a poor one. By way of illustrating the scale of Scotland's deficit, it may be worthing noting that last year Zimbabwe ran a deficit equal to 10.4 per cent of GDP. Indeed, according to data compiled by the International Monetary Fund, the only independent countries running real deficits greater than Scotland's notional one are East Timor, Kiribati, the Maldives and Ukraine. At this point nationalists will customarily enter the chat to say that, look, GERS only tells us about Scotland's current fiscal position and of course an independent Scotland would do things differently. This is true. GERS offers a snapshot of the position from which an independent Scotland would begin life and GERS also makes it very clear that many things would have to be done very differently in an independent Scotland. To start with you would begin with something like £10 billion in tax increases and around another £10 billion in spending cuts. That would still leave Scotland running a deficit like most countries but it would be a manageable one of around 3 per cent of GDP. That, you will also recall, is the price of admission to the European Union. Every existing tax would doubtless be increased and new taxes created (on this front, if few others, Scotland's political class is endlessly resourceful). But to give an indication of the scale of tax hikes required, £10 billion is about half of total income tax receipts in Scotland last year. Swingeing tax increases of this sort would almost certainly encourage capital flight of a sort this country can ill afford. Just 5 per cent of Britain's top-rate tax-payers live in Scotland which is one reason why although Scotland has 8 per cent of the UK population it contributes just 6.8 per cent of income tax revenue. Tax increases of this sort, however, would only get the job half done. You would still need to cut £10 billion of public spending. That is roughly equivalent to 50 per cent of the NHS budget. Good luck winning an independence referendum on that manifesto. • The facts of life are demanding chiels. It is too often and too easily forgotten that in the years after the 2008 financial crisis Scotland's notional deficit was broadly the same as the UK's real one and, in some years and thanks to buoyant oil revenues, Scotland's relative fiscal position was marginally healthier than the UK's. This was unusual and atypical but it allowed Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon to sell independence as a financial opportunity, not, as it obviously is now, a giant leap into an enormous fiscal black hole. Even then, all lilies had to be gilded. As Sturgeon relates in her new memoir, oil prices were then high but Salmond 'spent a lot of time persuading the government economists to push their projections higher, raking them to the outer edges of credibility'. In other words, the Yes campaign suborned officials to present a fantastical vision of the riches an independent Scotland would enjoy. This is something worth remembering. The SNP are doubtless happy to win without lying but why take that risk when untruths may buttress the liberation cause? Economic self-interest does not always prevail and voters may cheerfully vote for their own impoverishment but, even so, this year's GERS festival is a reminder that the appeal of independence is for the time being strictly notional and hypothetical. That imaginary Scotland is a comfortable place to dwell but the nature of today's fiscal realities is such that even SNP politicians might be wary of asking the national question again. This is why, in the end, they are comfortable not asking it, for no amount of creative accountancy can make these sums add up.
