Share this post:

The Labour government is quietly introducing a deeply authoritarian measure that could criminalise online dissent — and ministers are hoping you won’t notice.

Tucked into the new Crime and Policing Bill, currently making its way through Parliament, is a power called a “Respect Order”.

These orders may seem harmless but make no mistake: they represent a serious threat to freedom of speech in Britain.

What is a Respect Order?

A Respect Order is a court-issued ban that can prohibit anyone from saying or doing anything at all that the court deems likely to cause “harassment, alarm, or distress” to others — even if no crime has been committed.

These orders can be:

• Issued without a trial

• Based on vague or subjective claims of emotional impact

• Granted without notifying the person targeted

• Unlimited in scope or duration

• Punishable by up to two years in prison for breach

This is not speculation.

Here’s what the bill itself says:

“The court may prohibit the respondent from doing anything described in the order or may require the respondent to do anything so described… on the balance of probabilities that the respondent has caused, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm, or distress to any person.”

In short, this isn’t about punishing wrongdoing — it’s about policing potential future behaviour, including what people say online.

Why this is dangerous

These powers are deliberately vague and elastic, which makes them perfect tools for censorship.

With such a low bar — someone, somewhere might feel distressed — Respect Orders could be weaponised against campaigners, whistle-blowers, local critics, or even journalists.

Professor Andrew Tettenborn, a legal expert, warns:

“This essentially amounts to ‘precrime’. The poster can be compelled, on pain of prosecution, to delete content, stay off social media, and even provide passwords to all their devices.”

And once you’re under a Respect Order, breaking its terms — even unintentionally — becomes a criminal offence.

This is not about tackling violent crime or public disorder.

It’s about giving officials the power to silence inconvenient people, often without public oversight.

Labour’s pattern: power first, scrutiny later

What makes this especially alarming is how Labour appears to be pushing this through — quietly and cynically, without telling anybody or doing anything to encourage public debate.

This is not the only time the Labour Party has done this. Facing defeat on the Second Reading of the Universal Credit Bill, Labour promised to remove clauses involving restricted eligibility and cuts in Personal Independence Payments – but instead inserted retained them, adding caveats that they would not be introduced until after reviews took place (but giving no assurances that those reviews would have any effect on the changes that would be implemented).

The intention was to minimise scrutiny and media coverage – and it seems to have worked, because This Site seems to be the only one making a fuss about it.

Now we can see that they’re doing the same with the Crime and Policing Bill.

There has been no serious announcement about Respect Orders.

No press release.

No front-page coverage.

Why? Because they don’t want the public to know what these powers really mean — or how widely they could be used.

But these orders will soon be available to police, councils, and even social landlords — some of the very bodies most hostile to public scrutiny.

What you can do

• Write to your MP (via www.theyworkforyou.com if you don’t already have their contact details): Demand they oppose Respect Orders and vote against this provision in the bill.

• Share this article: Talk about the issue before it disappears behind committee-stage smoke.

• Watch the Bill’s progress: Follow parliamentary debates and report any attempt to expand or pass these powers quietly.

• Support civil liberties groups that challenge censorship and abuse of process.

The government’s approach here is simple: introduce control quietly, then enforce it loudly.

If we don’t speak up now, we may not be allowed to later.

Share this post: