Why I Abstained from Voting on Palestine Action

Last night, Parliament voted on whether to proscribe and ban Palestine Action under anti-terror laws. This was a complex issue, and after careful consideration, I chose to abstain from the vote. I understand this may raise questions, and I want to explain my decision.

First and foremost, I want to be clear that Palestine Action’s actions, such as vandalising RAF planes and attacking military equipment, are criminal and should face the full force of the law. These actions are serious and harmful, and those responsible must be held accountable. There’s no question about that.

However, the vote last night was not about the crimes themselves. The question was whether we should proscribe and ban a group based on the actions of individuals. More specifically, it was about whether someone who expresses support for those actions should face up to 14 years in jail.

The bar for what constitutes a terrorist organisation is rightly set very high, and that’s why I felt the Government had not yet made a compelling case for proscribing Palestine Action. We’ve heard from numerous experts – including from the UN – who raised concerns about the proposed move. It’s essential that we consider the broader implications of such a decision, as it sets a dangerous precedent for freedom of speech and the right to protest.

While I strongly condemn the criminal actions carried out by some members of Palestine Action, including the attacks on British military bases, I don’t believe the case has been made for banning the group as a whole under anti-terror laws. The Government needs to provide clear, concrete evidence that proscription is necessary. At this point, I don’t believe they have done so.

As the MP for Newbury, where we have Greenham Common – a place that is now peaceful but was once home to cruise missiles – this issue feels particularly relevant. The Greenham Common Peace Women famously broke into the base and attacked jets with hammers. They were prosecuted under criminal law and held accountable for their actions. However, under the legislation being discussed today, their actions could have seen them classified as terrorists, highlighting the high bar we must set before proscribing any group.

On a related note, the security of our MOD sites – including RAF bases – is of paramount importance. No one should be able to breach security and cause damage. The recent events at Brize Norton, which came just weeks after the Strategic Defence Review, highlight significant gaps in our security measures. The Government needs to come clean on how such a serious security breach was allowed to happen and take immediate action to ensure it doesn’t occur again.

Ultimately, my abstention was based on the importance of balancing security concerns with protecting freedoms. I remain committed to ensuring that those who commit crimes face justice, but I also believe it’s essential to safeguard our democratic values, including the right to free expression.

Thank you for your understanding, and I will continue to monitor developments in this area closely.