Local authorities should crack down on MPs for their divisive political antics. Lives are quite literally at stake

With campaigning for elections to the European parliament underway, a diverse group of charities, human rights organisations and community groups has come together under the auspices of the TUC to call on politicians to take a stand against the hate speech that is becoming all too common in today’s Britain.

Amnesty, the Fawcett Society, Citizens UK, the Community Security Trust, Hope not Hate, Stonewall, TellMAMA, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Show Racism the Red Card, and many more besides have urged political parties to “take all necessary steps during the European parliament election campaign to eradicate hate speech and false claims that divide our communities”.

They point to the guidance put out by the Equality & Human Rights Commission (EHRC) on how political parties and candidates should conduct themselves during election periods.

These groups are what one might refer to as the backbone of civil society. It’s because Britain isn’t a very civil place right now that their intervention is timely.

Earlier this week, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick said threats to MPs were at “unprecedented levels” with women and ethnic minorities finding themselves disproportionately targeted.

On the same day, the Electoral Commission was moved to call on all those involved elections – whether as campaigners, candidates or voters – “to engage in mutually respectful debate”.

“It is extremely disappointing to see the offensive and irresponsible abuse which has been directed at Jess Phillips MP,” the watchdog said.

You may remember that Ukip candidate Carl Benjamin “joked” about raping the high profile Labour member for Birmingham Yardley. She was then harassed by a couple of men who made reference to his sick comments, which are now being investigated by police.

Only deeply twisted individuals would defend as “free speech” words designed to muzzle others, or worse still, to incite violence against them. But still they do it.

The statement also calls out the use of false statements by electoral candidates.

We have seen a regrettable rise in the peddling of out and out lies by certain politicians and electoral candidates too. The media, her majesty’s Fourth Estate, ought to play a key role in exposing them for that they are. Sadly, several high profile media outlets have been actively involved in their dissemination.

The authorities are not powerless when it comes to these incidents.

The statement makes note of those local authorities have to issue corrective notes when falsehoods are spread, albeit in limited circumstances.

The EHRC has enforcement powers designed to protect people against serious and systemic abuses of their rights, which can obviously occur during elections.

The police can act in the event of threats to individuals. They may also investigate allegations of the specific electoral offence of making a false statement.

The Cabinet Office did run a consultation on the introduction of a new offence in electoral law of intimidating candidates, but the outcome of this consultation has not yet been published.

That’s a pity. But it’s perhaps not surprising given that none other than prime minister Theresa May could be said to have incited violence against MPs with her infamous “I’m on your side” speech. Indeed, a Labour MP was assaulted in its wake.

May was obviously referring to Brexit, and her continued failure to ram through her dismal deal. A dislike of that is about the only thing that unites both sides of the fraught debate on that issue. It has obviously played a key role in the difficult situation in which we find ourselves.

It’s notable that people who regularly bang on about democracy being “betrayed” by MPs’ refusal to countenance no deal, something that was explicitly ruled out during the EU referendum campaign, have frequently been at the centre of attempts to subvert democracy by resorting to intimidation, abuse, threats, and worse.

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with robust debate.

Some people have got in a right old tizzy about the front of the Liberal Democrat manifesto bearing the legend “bollocks to Brexit”. Coarse? Maybe. Offensive? Only to those looking to get offended.

The Lib Dems aren’t issuing threats or singling out particular groups. They’re simply putting forward their position with the sort of passion and commitment that has sometimes been lacking on the Remain side.

Similarly, the Brexit Party would be within its rights to put bollocks to the EU on its manifesto if it so desired (by contrast to the Lib Dems, it doesn’t really have much else to offer in the way of policy).

There is a world of difference between that, however, and its leader, Nigel Farage, standing in front of a billboard screaming “breaking point” over a picture of a queue of refugees that echoed the sort of propaganda used by the Nazis to demonise Jews in the 1930s, as he did during the EU referendum campaign. That has too easily been forgotten, and forgiven, at least in some quarters.

Any halfway decent country would have said bollocks to the person who engaged in such transparent race baiting and consigned him to the sidelines.

But he’s once again elbowed his way to the centre of this country's stage where he’s up to his old tricks.

If the TUC sponsored joint statement helps with the process of recreating a more civil society, it would be a most welcome development. But I fear it will take more than that to bring some sanity to the current political climate.

The authorities are understandably wary of interfering in elections, but perhaps it’s time for them to make greater and more robust use of the powers that they have.

It’s worth remembering that fascism was birthed in democracies that were too tolerant of the intolerance its adherents spouted, and too reluctant to act in the face of what they were doing.