As many will by now know, I believe that ALL of Britain’s speech restrictions are an abomination. We should be able to speak freely on any subject no matter what it is without fear of intimidation or prosecution by the State. The ability for a British subject to speak on whatever they choose to speak about should not be infringed by the offended feelings of others. Speech should be free or at least as free as humanly possible with the exceptions of gross, damaging and willing libel or credible and immediate incitement to violence.

As Fred de Fossard said in a piece in The Critic Magazine, Britain is in a ‘free speech crisis’ and that repeal or reform of the Public Order Act 1986, the Malicious Communications Act 1988, the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Communications Act of 2003, is needed in order to bring back the speech rights of Britain that have been lost. Mr de Fossard is correct in identifying the primary legislation that gives the government undue powers to interfere with the speech rights of British subjects, but a graver threat to speech in the view of the commentator Matthew Goodwin is the police generated doctrine of ‘non-crime hate incidents’. As Mr Goodwin points on in a magnificent post on the X platform that these non-crime hate incidents don’t only require merely zero evidence but the police are not even allowed to investigate hate incident claims that are made. One malicious person can make an allegation that stays on a person’s record for life but there is no way allowed that would allow that malicious allegation to be challenged.

Mr Goodwin said:

Mr Goodwin is correct. These ‘non-crime hate incidents’ are both oppressive to the ordinary British subject but also show Britain up in an embarrassing light. This power to issue or log ‘non-crime hate incidents’ needs to be removed from police forces and the police get back to policing the streets instead of people’s tweets or other public comments.