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
Times
13 minutes ago
- Times
Homeowners could pay new property tax instead of stamp duty
Homeowners with properties worth more than £500,000 could have to pay annual property taxes under radical plans to replace stamp duty. The Treasury is reportedly considering a proportional property tax in the budget this autumn, according to The Guardian. Rather than paying stamp duty (which ranges from 2 per cent on the purchase price between £125,000 and £250,000, through to 12 per cent on the portion of the price above £1.5 million) anyone buying a home worth more than £500,000 would face an annual tax. For years there have been calls to overhaul stamp duty, which raised £13.8 billion for the Treasury in the 2024-25 tax year but has been criticised for putting homeowners off moving. There are no firm details to the proposal, but it was reported that the Treasury was looking at suggestions from the centre-right think tank Onward, which would involve homeowners with properties worth more than £500,000 paying a 0.54 per cent annual tax on any value above £500,000. Professor Tim Leunig from the London School of Economics, who came up with the proposals last August, said: 'The way Britain taxes households is both impractical and unfair. Stamp duty raises transaction costs, preventing people from moving for new job opportunities, and undermines growth.' Any home worth more than £1 million would pay 0.81 per cent on the portion of its value over that threshold. Onward's proposals were that the new tax would not be applied retrospectively but would be paid by anyone who bought a home after it was introduced. The 5 per cent stamp duty surcharge for additional homes would remain and those owners would not pay annual levies. Leunig also proposed scrapping council tax and replacing it with a 0.44 per cent annual property tax levied by local authorities on house value between £800 and £500,000 (a maximum of £2,196 a year). Then you would pay 0.54 per cent on the portion above £500,000 to the government, instead of stamp duty. Someone with a £650,000 home would pay £3,006 a year — 0.44 per cent of £499,200 (the maximum £2,196) to their council and then another £810 a year to the government. • Read more money advice and tips on investing from our experts Treasury officials are reportedly considering a local property tax 'in the medium term' according to the Guardian, while replacing stamp duty could come earlier. The campaign group Fairer Share is calling for the abolition of stamp duty and council tax and for them to be replaced with a flat 0.48 per cent annual property tax. Andrew Dixon from Fairer Share said the reported plans would be a 'step in the right direction'. 'We look forward to working closely with the government to deliver long-overdue reform — creating a modern property tax system that supports local services, reflects real property values, and shares the burden more fairly across homeowners,' he said. The Times reported in May that 83 per cent of homeowners in England would pay less under a 0.48 per cent annual property tax than they did under the council tax system. The biggest losers would be those in London and the south east according to the estate agency Hamptons. House prices in those areas have gone up the most since April 1991, when council tax bands were set based on property values. Dixon said: 'By taxing property transactions, stamp duty discourages homeowners from moving — be it an older couple downsizing or a growing family upsizing. Removing it would lead to a more effective use of housing.' Some 85 per cent of homeowners in England and Wales were 'under-occupiers' with one or more spare bedrooms, according to a survey of more than 4,300 by Barclays. Of those, 73 per cent were over 45, and 37 per cent were over 65. The proportion of homebuyers who were 45 or older has fallen from 45 per cent in the 2015-16 tax year to 39 per cent in 2023-24, according to the estate agency Savills. Some 41 per cent of 2,000 homeowners aged over 55 polled by the estate agency Jackson-Stops said they would downsize within two years if stamp duty was reduced or removed. David Fell from Hamptons said: 'Who is better off will come down to how closely the government chooses to follow any recommendations. But I think in response to the general principle, the shift would probably cut the cost of buying the most expensive homes, but add to the annual cost of ownership, particularly given the artificially low levels of council tax charged by many places that have the most expensive house prices. 'The impact of a change to the system would probably depend on the level at which the rates were set, and the length of time it takes for the higher ownership charges to outweigh existing stamp duty and council tax bills.' The Treasury said it did not comment on speculation about the budget.
The Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
Larger families could gain more than £20,000 if Labour scraps two-child benefit cap
Tens of thousands of families with multiple children could receive thousands of pounds more in annual payments if ministers scrap the two child benefit cap, according to official figures. More than 70,000 households would be entitled to over £18,000 a year in child benefits if the policy is lifted, with the largest families gaining more than £20,000 compared with the current system. The cap, introduced under Conservative welfare reforms, blocks parents from claiming the child element of Universal Credit worth £292.81 a month for a third or subsequent child born after April 2017. Figures released in response to a parliamentary question show 71,580 families with five or more children would benefit from its removal. That includes nearly 15,000 families with six children, almost 5,000 with seven, and more than 400 with ten or more, who could be eligible for the child payments. Labour MPs are pressing Sir Keir Starmer to deliver on his pledge of fairness by abolishing the cap, which they argue is punishing children growing up in poverty. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has previously estimated that ending the policy would lift around half a million children out of hardship. But Conservatives insist the cap is a matter of fairness for taxpayers, arguing that it prevents families on benefits from receiving packages worth more than the minimum wage. Nigel Farage has also called for it to be scrapped, leaving the Conservatives increasingly isolated in defending the measure. The prime minister must find around £3.5 billion to fund the move. Chancellor Rachel Reeves is weighing proposals, including a push from Gordon Brown to raise gambling levies. Helen Whately, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said: 'Without a cap, Labour will end up giving households thousands of pounds in extra benefits — a top-up worth more than a year's full-time pay on the minimum wage. Not only is this unaffordable, it's also unfair. If you're in work you don't get extra pay for another child, so it doesn't make sense for parents on benefits to get more.' She added: 'Working people shouldn't see their taxes go up to fund uncapped payouts to others who've opted out of work but opted in to multiple children.'
Rhyl Journal
2 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
Government working ‘at pace' to bring Gazan children to UK for medical care
Sir Keir Starmer's official spokesperson said a cross-government task force is 'up and running', but warned that it is a 'sensitive and complex process'. His comments come after the BBC reported that the first group of critically ill and injured Gazan children, said to be between 30 and 50 patients, will be arriving 'in the coming weeks'. It is understood that the children will come from hospital with family members via a third country, where biometric data will be collected, and that some may enter the asylum system after completing treatment. The Number 10 spokesperson said: 'We're not going to get into a running commentary on numbers or the exact process. 'Exact numbers are going to depend on clinical need and various factors.' He added: 'We continue to take all those plans to evacuate more children from Gaza, who require urgent medical care in the UK and specialist treatment. 'Obviously, it's sensitive and it's a complex process, and the wellbeing of patients and their families is our top priority. 'There's a cross-government task force working together to deliver this new scheme and we'll obviously provide an update as and when we've got them.' The spokesperson continued: 'There's a task force up and running to deliver this (as soon) as possible. 'Patients will obviously be assessed on a case-by-case basis, some will be brought to the UK if that's the best option for their care. 'We obviously continue to provide significant support in the region as well, for evacuations within the region, to support people desperately in need of care. 'And that is on top of the significant aid that we're providing to the region to address the ongoing humanitarian crisis.' He said the Government will give updates on the plans 'as and when we can', but said: 'We are working at pace to deliver it.' More than 50,000 children are estimated to have been killed or injured in Gaza since October 2023, according to Unicef. A small number of children have so far been brought to the UK for specialist medical care via an initiative by Project Pure Hope, and they are being treated privately. The Government's plans, coordinated the Foreign Office, Home Office and Department of Health, is set to see children treated by the NHS. Last month, a cross-party group of 96 MPs wrote a letter to the government urging them to bring sick and injured children from Gaza to the UK, warning that they are at risk of imminent death due to the 'decimation' of the healthcare system. Labour MP Rachael Maskell, who signed that letter, has insisted that there must be 'no delay'. She told the PA news agency: 'There should be no delay in getting children from Gaza the healthcare they need. 'I have met regularly with clinicians on their return from Gaza, who have shared the most distressing stories of the challenges of providing services to children without the equipment and medication that is needed, and in inadequate facilities where they are daily having to make life and death decisions, when in the UK, they know that they would be able to treat and save so many more lives. 'It is vital that we do everything to provide healthcare at scale and more so, do everything to stop the killing in Gaza.'
