Council backs motion supporting free speech

STUDENTS at a school in the borough ‘sought to legitimise’ the killing of American influencer Charlie Kirk, it’s been claimed during a council debate on freedom of speech.

A Notice of Motion was proposed by party group leader Alderman Matthew Magill and seconded by his party colleague Councillor Jeannie Archibald-Brown came before a full monthly meeting of Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council on Monday night.

It moved that: “This council notes with grave concern recent politically motivated violence and attacks on free speech. Acknowledges that free speech and expression, within the law, are foundational to any democratic system and that violence can never be justified.

“Reaffirms this Council’s commitment to upholding such fundamental human rights and commits this Borough to be a welcoming place for open debate and the free exchange of opinion across the political and social spectrum, inclusive of views that may be considered by the majority as contentious, unsettling or otherwise unpopular.”

Alderman Magill said he wanted to highlight ongoing concerns on the subject and wanted to provide the chamber with an opportunity to ‘send a clear message that we stand for freedom of speech, no what would be our own personal or majority view’.

He said that since the days of Magna Carta and the Glorious Revolution, the nation and its citizens have enjoyed free speech and warned against ‘cancel culture and de-platforming’ of those who did not express opinions in keeping with the majority view.

He said that terms like ‘though police’ and ‘chill effect’ should ‘alarm all of us’.

Alderman Magill alleged that there had been a concerted effort to ‘remove faith and those of faith from the public square.”

“As a young person in school I was often sneered at, ridiculed and mocked, sadly cancel culture exists in many quarters and is aimed at diverse groups.

“I was alarmed to hear of conversations recounted to me by a young person who lives in the borough and attends a local school.

“During a lunchtime chat about the dead of Christian apologist Charlie Kirk, some were almost seeking to legitimise his murder because of his views.

“Different and divergent debate should be promoted

“Debate is the lifeblood of democracy and should not be feared, when people stop talking, that's when you get violence, violence can never be the answer, it is wrong, it was unjustifiable then and unjustifiable now

“No one should be murdered for their opinions, we need to debate those we do not agree with, including on issues like morality, immigration and the role of the state

“In a society caught up in feelings, we need to defend freedom over feelings and fight for ‘ others right to say things we don’t agree with and even to offend us.

“We are a welcoming borough, so let's promote debate and freedom of speech within it.”

Seconding the motion, Councillor Archibald-Brown said that she had a ‘deep sense of urgency and conviction’ that no one should be ‘shouted down, cancelled or threatened’.

“Let me be clear, violence no place in politics, we are seeing the steady erosion of free speech, and those with traditional, conservative or dissenting views are being shouted down and told they are racist or bigots, simply for speaking their mind.

“There is a fear, among young people who are now afraid to ask questions or listen to alternative viewpoints.

“Freedom of expression within the law is not a threat, it is a strength, and robust, respectful debate in our communities, schools and online in communities, schools, online is healthy and how we learn and grow, if we silence debate, we don't create harmony, we create fear.

“This is not just a statement, it is a call to action, to defend the freedoms that generations fought for.”

Airport Sinn Fein Councillor and Sinn Fein Group Leaderm Maighréad Ní Chonghaile said that she had listened carefully and ‘agreed with a lot’ but said she was conscious that there needed to be a differentiation between ‘free speech and hate speech’ and that there had been negative influence on young people.

She said that she wanted to add an amendment to the final paragraph, saying that the Borough should be a welcoming place ‘for everyone, to celebrate the diversity of all identities, regardless of religion or non, sexual orientation, gender, disability, age, or ethnic origin’.

She said this would broaden the scope of the original motion and make it more ‘free and fair’.

Alderman Magill said that the motion applied to ‘all Section 75 groups’.

He said: “I don't think we have any issue with that, to highlight the issues in relation to free speech, free speech is for everyone, as we articulated in our verbal comments that debate with whom we disagree as much as whom we agree, strikes at the heart of all Section 75 groups.

“I would have hoped that's already clear.”

However he said he had no issue if the chamber backed the amendment.

Sinn Fein Dunsilly Councillor Henry Cushinan seconded the amendment.

He said he found it confusing that the chamber had earlier ‘approved some hate expressions which were very explicit in July’.

“I second the amendment and we have to make it very clear that hate speech and expression is not acceptable.”

The chamber agreed without need for a recorded vote.

Ulster Unionist rep Robert Foster said it was ‘heartening’ to see the chamber support ‘civil and religious liberties’ as espoused by the Orange Order.

He hit out against ‘trial by social media’ and added: “There is not a party in this chamber that has not been touched by political assassination.”

He pointed to his party colleagues Reverend Bradford, Norman Stronge and local man Edgar Graham.

Sinn Fein Councillor Lucille O’Hagan said that she was ‘very upset’ by some of the elements of the motion and said she was ‘disconcerted’ by the mention of freedom mattering more than feelings.

She asked if: “The freedom to demean and dehumanise people is more important than the freedom to feel safe?”

She said that she and her brother were subjected to daily name-calling and that her brother was beaten up because of their religion and they were called ‘Jehovas’ when attending an Antrim high school.

She said her schoolmates ‘didn’t understand’ and added: “I don’t think freedom of speech means freedom to insult.”

She also asked Councillor Archibald-Brown what she mean by ‘a call to action’ and Councillor Archibald-Brown repeated the relevant paragraph of her speech for clarity.

Speaking after the meeting, Councillor O’Hagan welcomed the inclusion of the amendment, saying that her party felt that the motion lacked focus on addressing ‘widespread unease over the use of free speech to encourage hate’.

Reflecting on the debate, the Antrim Town rep said: “Free speech is a fundamental human right, but with that comes responsibility.

“It must not be used as cover to encourage hate towards migrants or any Section 75 groups, or to antagonise, intimidate, or instil fear.

“History has taught us the dangers of allowing false propaganda and hatred to spread under the veil of freedom of speech.”