There was an important
Westminster Hall Debate today on the Online abuse of elected women
representatives. Unfortunately, despite applying as appropriate I
disappointingly was not picked to speak but I have provided my thoughts/views
below:
I was particularly
encouraged by members from across the political divide speaking and sharing
their views and experiences today and I hope that this delivers a powerful
signal to society that Parliament is united on this.
Intimidation and abuse
continue to be experienced by individuals across public life, from all groups
and across the political spectrum and unfortunately candidates who are female
are one of the disproportionately targeted groups in terms of scale, intensity
and vitriol. Quiet words of encouragement have had to be had with many women
candidates that I know. What do I do if it happens to me? How does
it feel? Is it inevitable?
Addressing this
intimidatory, bullying and abusive culture matters. It matters for the
diversity of our public life; it matters as it has the potential to alter the
ways the public can engage with representative democracy; and it matters
because it has the ability to stifle the freedom to discuss and debate issues
and interests.
It is so important that
women are not put off from becoming Members of Parliament or from joining
public joining public life anywhere in the UK or around the world. No matter
what a person’s belief or ideology they should not be put off from pursuing a
career in politics. Please …. let a woman speak – if you disagree with her,
debate her…..do not intimidate her – it might make your argument the dominant
one, it does not make your argument the superior one.
The cross party showing
for this debate clearly shows that this is not a right vs left vs centrist vs
leave vs remain issue. All sides include individuals responsible for the
offensive, sexist, racist, patronising tweets, Facebook comments, emails, phone
calls – Society does not like it – we must address it with some urgency.
Tackling intimidation
would enhance political debate and intensify the scrutiny of elected representatives.
It would allow for freedom of expression to continue to be the cornerstone of
public life: Freedom of expression is a hard won right and is an important part
of a vibrant public life. Our democracy depends on those with different viewpoints
disagreeing well and presenting intelligent alternatives.
Intimidation only aims
to shut down debate – cutting off participation and engagement…
Tackling this
intimidation, far from threatening genuine democratic debate and scrutiny, will
serve to enhance and to protect it. Indeed, in order to represent all
legitimate interests all voices should be heard so that the democratic process
can be maintained.
If this is not
addressed, we could be left with a political culture that does not reflect the
society it should represent.
Locally, I wanted to
draw the House’s attention to an appalling and shocking report in Cornwall’s
local news (credit CornwallLive) this week.
“Students in Cornwall
have said they are afraid to go outside after rumours spread of a group of boys
competing to sexually assault the most women.
Messages on social
media, sent around to students across Falmouth University, told of a rumoured
“national rape day”.
Spreading across
Snapchat, Twitter, Facebook, and direct messages, the rumours claimed that a
group of around 100 male students were going to compete to see who could
sexually assault the most women.
One message said:
“There’s a group chat of 100+ guys on campus, and they plan to rape as many
girls as they can before April 24.
“The guys in the group
chats are being threatened if they tell a soul.”
Falmouth University has
reacted strongly with a ‘zero tolerance’ approach and is working with the local
police. So far, there is no evidence that these posts are genuine, yet
they have had an impact on the female student population in Falmouth.
If they are not
genuine, then why are social media platforms allowing such posts at all?
Yet again, as with the online abuse of women elected representatives, it is
clear that the anonymous and ‘safe distance’ nature of social media platforms
allows such abuse to take place. Offence, insults and threats can be
handed out with anonymity. People, to put it politely, can be far less respectful
than they would usually be if speaking face-to-face.
Accountability for what
one posts on social media must improve dramatically if we are going to save
future women and girls from the vile comments my generation has experienced.
The Online Harms Bill
is a pivotal opportunity to tackle online abuse against women and girls,
including elected representatives. However, there is concern amongst civil
society organisations that the white paper falls short when addressing the
disproportionate levels of online harms faced by women and those with multiple
protected characteristics. The Online Harms Bill must include gender-based
abuse as a priority harm and recognise the compounding harm experienced by
those with multiple protected characteristics, rather than categorisation as
separate issues.
The reports of abuse
that many colleagues have experienced is shocking. Senior colleagues have
been visibly moved by what they have heard from some of the new intake.
Parliament, I believe, is united in wanting to improve discourse in public life
for everyone. We must ensure that it is unacceptable to use the fact that
someone is a woman to direct sexist and violent insults her way, merely because
there is a disagreement over policy.
I intend to use my time
and energy in Parliament to improve this space for women and girls today and
for those who come after me.
