Online Safety Act 2023: Online Hate and Racism

Question

Asked by

To ask His Majesty’s Government what progress has been made by law enforcement agencies in pursuing perpetrators of online hate and racism since the Online Safety Act 2023 came into force.

My Lords, online platforms must now protect users from illegal content and activity, including hate crime, under the Online Safety Act. Ofcom can impose strict penalties for non-compliance. The Act safeguards free speech and does not ban legal content even if it is offensive. It also makes threatening communications a criminal offence. Law enforcement will decide whether the threshold is met. We recognise that online hate remains a serious challenge and continue to work with police, prosecutors and regulators to stamp it out.

My Lords, I welcome the progress that is being made. However, given the steep rise in online hate directed at footballers, referees and fans—with reports of online abuse to the anti-discrimination charity Kick It Out doubling this season—what additional action are the Government proposing to take to ensure that football leagues, Ofcom, and the new Independent Football Regulator are taking steps to improve monitoring and reporting of online abuse, and prioritising action against it?

I thank my noble friend for the question, and indeed the long-held interest he has had in not just promoting football but helping to tackle the dark and ugly side of the beautiful game. I repeat: where there is a robust legal framework in place to deal with the perpetrators of racism, and other forms of hate crime, we expect the perpetrators of these abhorrent offences to be brought to justice. The UK Football Policing Unit works closely with football authorities, local police forces and, indeed, Kick It Out to investigate and prosecute online football-related hate crime, including seeking court-imposed football banning orders. The Independent Football Regulator will take racism extremely seriously. If an individual has faced legal, regulatory or disciplinary action related to racism, the regulator must consider it under the owners’ and directors’ test. Under the Online Safety Act, as I said, platforms now have a legal duty to safeguard all UK-based users from illegal content activity, including those around football. Platforms must proactively tackle and remove illegal content, including abuse, threats and harassment. Given the damaging impact that online hate crime has on its victims, those guilty of these offences should not be allowed to attend football matches.

My Lords, does my noble friend the Minister agree that if we are to tackle hate we must tackle the causes of hate? That requires a whole-government—indeed, a whole-nation—response. Given the truth of the African proverb, “A goat that belongs to everybody starves to death”, can he reassure me that there will be the necessary co-ordination, measurement and impetus to ensure that the necessary action is taken?

I thank my noble friend for the question and for making a very important point. This is a societal problem, and it requires societal solutions. From a government perspective, this is something that reaches across government. While the Online Safety Act is a DCMS instrument and Ofcom is responsible for enforcing it, the Government have made very clear our expectations of Ofcom in producing that enforcement regime.

At the same time, when we see more traditional forms of hate, we will not be afraid to act. That is why, for instance, in the wake of the terrible attack at the Heaton Park synagogue on Yom Kippur, the Prime Minister said that we must, as a country,

“come together and wrap our arms around”

the Jewish community. Personally, I very much welcome that. It is the spirit that we as a whole society need to act in tackling hate and providing reassurance to frightened communities. That is why we will not rest there. In the Crime and Policing Bill, which starts Committee on Monday, after Recess—I look forward to seeing noble Lords there—we will be introducing new public order measures that protect people and communities from egregious protest.

My Lords, a friend of mine in the other place resigned from being an MP because her daughter was threatened with being killed. Do the Government think they are doing enough to look after MPs?

The noble and learned Baroness raises a really important point. We know from the Speaker’s Conference that the security of MPs, and indeed candidates and other representatives both running for and elected to office, is a concern. Concern about that is at an all-time high. Among MPs who have experienced abusive language and insults, 93% have experienced this online. The Local Government Association’s latest survey found that 52% of councillors have had untrue or misleading information spread about them, and 64% of councillors have experienced abuse online. That is why, in the Crime and Policing Bill, public officeholders, including MPs, Peers and local councillors, will be better protected from harassment and intimidation in terms of restricting protests outside their houses.

My Lords, there has been considerable improvement in recent years within the police in combating racism, but recent reviews and some events have shown that there is some way to go. Does the Minister agree that successful enforcement of the Online Safety Act and other legislation in this area needs a complete commitment to diversity and equality throughout all enforcement agencies? Can he describe what training is in place in the enforcement agencies to ensure this?

I agree completely with the noble Lord’s point. It is impossible without proper training, guidance and an understanding of diversity in an organisation and as experienced by a whole organisation, for effective and correct enforcement of harassment and discriminatory abuse offences. I will have to write to him with detail of the regimes undertaken by Ofcom, but I can say, for instance, on the police, that there is an authorised professional practice guide produced by the National Police Chiefs’ Council in conjunction with the College of Policing. It sets out the latest expectations around policing protests. The protest operational advice document is regularly updated and helps those people on the front line enforcing our expectations of protecting communities—what is race hate and what is not race hate?

My Lords, phone snatching increased last year by 150% and shoplifting to the year ending March 2025 increased by 19%. Do the Government really believe that, important though it is, police pursuit of online hate crime is a proper use of resources?

In short, yes, because an offence against a person online can be as serious as an offence against someone in person. That is why we are introducing in the Crime and Policing Bill—which will not only tackle incidents of retail crime, for instance, which is obviously a crime against the person—new measures around policing public order, which, again, is directly in person but has an impact on communities and the way that they feel that they are safe in this country. But if we leave online hate unpoliced and unenforced, it will only grow. We have been shown this, and this is why we are absolutely clear with Ofcom that we will not hesitate to build on the Act if it is not doing enough to keep UK users, particularly our children, safe online.

Are the Government taking account of the level of misogyny online that seems to be an inbuilt bias? I was speaking to unions last week, which were saying that, for instance, if you put down that your hobby is netball, you will get marked down because you are clearly a woman. Now that AI is taking over so much of health, the health basis has been based on male bodies. It still tells you that if you have a pain in your left arm, you are going to have a heart attack. This is completely not true for 50% of the population. This bias is absolutely inherent and very difficult to get at. I applaud many of the measures going through the Bill, but we need to talk about this. Are the Government doing anything to tackle it?

The noble Baroness makes a very important point. Of course, that inherent bias against women was present in society long before the internet was invented. That is something that we must always struggle to combat, whether online or offline. The illegal harms duties under the Online Safety Act regime came into effect earlier this year in March. That means that services now must now risk-assess for illegal content and have procedures to detect and swiftly remove illegal content—whether it is terrorism, child sexual abuse material, intimate image abuse or other misogynistic abuse.

Tomorrow evening, Aston Villa will be playing Maccabi Tel Aviv. What steps are the Government taking to monitor the possible antisemitic statements that may appear in the press and, obviously, online?

Obviously, the police will have operational independence in the way they both monitor and police the game. We have been very clear from the Front Bench that we have arrived at a sad point when travelling fans of any team cannot go and support their football team in safety, wherever that match is held. We are saddened by the decision from Maccabi Tel Aviv to turn down its ticket allocation, but we respect its right to do so. The police will do their job and they will do it well.