Skip to content
Wednesday 2 September 2026London --:--Frankfurt --:--Zurich --:--
NewslettersSearchEN · DE · FR
MorningWire

European business, markets and politics

FTSE 100
10,789.28
-0.32%
DAX
25,970.11
-1.10%
CAC 40
8,301.85
0.00%
STOXX 50
6,368.98
-0.80%
  • Europe
  • Markets
  • Business
  • Economy
  • Regulation
  • Politics
  • Opinion
More
GermanyFranceEU InstitutionsCompetitionPublic AffairsBankingTechnologyEnergy
  • Germany
  • France
  • Europe
  • Markets
  • Business
  • Economy
  • Regulation
  • Politics
  • Opinion
  • DE
Wednesday 24 October 2012 8:00 pm  |  Updated:  Thursday 30 May 2019 12:26 pm

The public order act needs reform: It is an insult to British free speech

By: KCS-content

Add as a preferred source on Google

DISGRACEFULLY inadequate”. “Jobless scroungers”. This is just a small sample of the insults thrown around yesterday morning. And that was just in the national newspapers. A quick venture onto Twitter would reveal thousands more, many unprintable on these pages.

We might disagree or feel offended. But expressing insults (and being on the receiving end of them) is part and parcel of life in a free society.

Of course, even free speech has its limits. In Britain it has long been illegal to behave in a manner which is threatening, disorderly or which constitutes harassment. That is right. However, the law as it stands – section 5 of the Public Order Act – also bans “insulting” language. That is a step too far.

An insult is in the eye of the beholder. What one person finds offensive another will laugh at or ignore. Who hasn’t, at some point in their lives, offended someone without knowing it or without meaning to?

Worse still, you can be arrested under section 5 for being insulting even if you do not offend anyone. This is a crime that can be committed without a complaint being filed or a victim being identified. The police have only to decide that somebody in the general vicinity could have been offended if they had heard what was said.

This ludicrous degree of latitude has seen a teenager fined for saying “woof” to a dog, a protestor charged for calling Scientology a “cult” and a student spend a night in the cells for calling a horse “gay”.

These stories are almost too daft to believe. That is why they received the media attention and public ridicule which eventually forced the authorities to drop the charges. But for those arrested, such heavy-handed action is a stressful ordeal. And what about those less media-friendly examples which go unnoticed?

Put simply, cracking down on threatening behaviour is a vital duty. Punishing mere insults is a serious restriction on free speech.

Take another example. A Workington street preacher said gay people were sinners. He was arrested and fined £700. Even gay rights activists thought this was over the top. Peter Tatchell described the arrest as “an outrageous assault on civil liberties.” No doubt the preacher annoyed – perhaps even offended – passing shoppers. But in a free country offensive opinions should be challenged or ignored, not criminalised.

So how do we solve this problem? It is simple – remove the word “insulting” from section 5 of the Public Order Act. This campaign has huge support, and not just from MPs of all parties.

Many authors, actors and journalists, who risk a call from the police if they say or write something too controversial, are also on board. Rowan Atkinson and Will Self have backed the campaign. And when Christian groups and the National Secular Society unite to oppose a law, you know that law must be misguided.

We need to get a grip on this problem now. Twitter and Facebook have shown how a media storm can be unleashed by an outcry from the “Outrage Industry” – those individuals or organisations eager to take offence at even mild criticism. Every day thousands of Brits swap news, ideas and insults online. The last thing we want is the police spending their days checking Twitter for “insulting language” rather than catching real criminals.

Some have expressed concern that vulnerable people will receive less protection if the law is changed in this way. They need not worry. Even with the word “insulting” removed, section 5 would still forbid harassment and threatening or disorderly behaviour.

Last October the government launched a consultation on the Public Order Act, including whether the word “insulting” in section 5 strikes a good balance between freedom of expression and the right not to be harassed, alarmed or distressed. They were supposed to have responded by April. We have not heard a word from them.

The best way forward is clear. By removing the word “insulting” from section 5, the government can at a stroke end the confusion and controversy over this law, still protect individuals from genuinely unacceptable behaviour, and stand up for free speech and common sense. Nobody likes being insulted, but we must remember the law is there to protect our safety, not spare our feelings.

David Davis is Conservative MP for Haltemprice and Howden.

Share this article

  • Facebook
  • X
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Email

Similarly tagged content:

Sections

  • Opinion

Categories

  • Opinion

Related Topics

  • NULL

Trending Articles

  • Vodafone and Deliveroo look to patch up Reform ties after Yusuf prison threats

  • Jaguar reveals the Type 01’s screen-free interior

  • Trio of firms poised to quit London Stock Exchange as exodus gathers pace

  • Easyjet’s over-60s recruitment push is economically necessary

  • As it happened: FTSE 100 slides as bound rout deepens; Oil jumps as Trump vows more strikes on Iran

More from Morning Wire

  • Energy discount scheme for homes near new pylons branded ‘bribe’ by Reform

    Energy
    Pylons standing tall against a clear sky following Engies acquisition of UK Power Networks, symbolizing energy sector growth.
  • On this day: the birth of press freedom

    Opinion
    Black and white illustration of the Crown v. Zenger trial, featuring lawyers and observers in a courtroom.
  • Silence Therapeutics Announces Proposed Public Offering of $150 Million of American Depositary Shares

    Business Wire
  • The Debate: should we release female prisoners to make space for men?

    Opinion
    Brick prison wall with barred windows, razor wire, and a security camera.
  • Silence Therapeutics Announces Pricing of Upsized $175 Million Underwritten Public Offering

    Business Wire
  • Silence Therapeutics Announces Closing of Upsized Public Offering and Full Exercise of Underwriters’ Option to Purchase Additional ADSs

    Business Wire
  • Fed chair Kevin Warsh faces Jackson Hole D-Day

    Economics
    Kevin Warsh, former Fed Governor, in a suit and blue tie, attending Jackson Hole meeting.
  • ‘Social value’ procurement rules are an absurd waste of time and money

    Economics
    Tunnelling for the Euston link finally kicks off this week.
MorningWire

Independent European business, markets and political news for decision-makers.

Morning Briefing

Europe

  • Germany
  • France
  • EU Institutions
  • Europe

Business

  • Markets
  • Business
  • Economy
  • Regulation
  • Competition
  • Public Affairs

Editorial

  • Opinion
  • Editorial Policy
  • Corrections
  • Contact

Company

  • About Morning Wire
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Policy
© 2026 Morning Wire Ltd · Published by Morning Wire Media, Bahnhofstrasse 65, 8001 Zürich, Switzerland
Privacy · Terms · Cookies · Facebook