Points of Order
Debate between Bell Ribeiro-Addy and Caroline Nokes
Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Clapham and Brixton Hill) (Lab)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Since the proscription of Palestine Action last year, I have received hundreds of emails from constituents concerned about the decision, arrests for actions as minor as holding up a sign, and the wider chilling effect on protest rights. I am on record as opposing the proscription. I was a Teller for the Noes, so my position is well documented. With the Court of Appeal upholding the ban this month, much more correspondence has followed. I am genuinely unsure whether I can even explain the view that I held at the time without breaking the law.
An answer to a written question that I tabled gave little clarity, simply citing the Terrorism Act 2000, which makes it an offence to express support for a proscribed organisation. If I write to a constituent, and they post my letter online, did I break the law? Did they break the law? Did we both break the law? There is something deeply wrong here. I can stand in this Chamber and say, or write in a letter, words that could get a constituent arrested, if they put them on a placard. If an MP cannot say with confidence what is lawful, what hope does a member of the public have? Madam Deputy Speaker, can you advise on how MPs can get clear guidance on what we can and cannot say about Palestine Action, especially since the Secretary of State cannot seem to give that advice, particularly in my case, as I would simply be citing a matter of record?
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving notice of her point of order. The House will know that everything that hon. Members say in the course of proceedings in this House is protected by the privilege of freedom of speech set out in article 9 of the Bill of Rights. However, when it comes to what hon. Members say outside this place, that is a question of the operation of the law, and it is not a matter on which I can offer advice from the Chair.
Points of Order
Debate between Bell Ribeiro-Addy and Caroline Nokes
Madam Deputy Speaker
I thank the right hon. Member for his point of order. He is quite right: I have had no notice of a statement on this issue. He can raise it at Health questions and with the Leader of the House. He has certainly done an excellent job of highlighting this matter, as he has done in debates that I have listened to. I am sure that those on the Treasury Bench will have heard him.
Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Clapham and Brixton Hill) (Lab)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Tomorrow is the UN’s international day of remembrance of the victims of slavery and the transatlantic slave trade. The Ghanaian Government’s resolution declaring the transatlantic slave trade a crime against humanity, which is backed by the African Union, the Caribbean Community and a growing global coalition, will be debated. Given our nation’s central role in the trafficking and enslavement of African peoples, a vote against that resolution would be a betrayal of every life it consumed. The House has never debated this. How can we be certain that our UN vote reflects the will of this Parliament and, more importantly, the will of this country? How can we ensure that decisions of such magnitude taken in our name receive the democratic consideration they deserve before a vote is cast?
Madam Deputy Speaker
I thank the hon. Lady for her point of order. As she will know, the Government conduct diplomatic relations at the United Nations under Crown prerogative. Nevertheless, she has placed her concerns on the record, and those on the Front Bench will have heard them. As the House has not debated the issue, she might do well to apply for a Backbench Business debate or a Westminster Hall debate, or raise it with the Leader of the House at business questions.