Labour promised to tread more lightly on our lives. It hasn't.

Max Thompson, Campaigns Officer

23 October 2026

The Labour Government promised to tread more lightly on our lives when it came to power in 2024.

That was a lie.

Look at what it has done.

1. Plans to curb our ancient right to jury trials

The Starmer Government introduced plans in the Courts and Tribunals Bill to dramatically curb our right to trial by jury. Prime Minister Andy Burnham has since dropped the widest expansion of judge-only trials, but the Bill would still strip defendants of the right to elect trial by jury for either-way offences (those that can be tried in either a magistrates' court or the Crown Court).

Jury trials are a cornerstone of our criminal justice system and a vital bulwark against a repressive state and the militant cancel-culture mob.

FSU research has shown that those charged with speech-related offences are almost twice as likely to be acquitted in a Crown Court with a jury as in a magistrates' court without one. Put simply: more people will be banged up for exercising their right to free speech.

2. The 'anti-Muslim hostility' definition

The Labour Government introduced an 'anti-Muslim hostility' definition, formerly known as 'Islamophobia'.

It has had a chilling effect on free speech and been weaponised to silence those who legitimately criticise, debate, and mock Islam.

MPs, comedians, and private citizens have been reported to Prevent, the police, and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards for criticising Islam.

Police forces, public bodies, and other authorities are adopting this non-statutory definition. The FSU successfully persuaded South Wales Police to shelve its gold-plated version, which required officers to log comments that went beyond 'legitimate' discussion of Islam, after we threatened legal action.

3. The Conversion Practices Bill

The Government is pressing ahead with a draft bill to ban conversion practices, despite the fact that some are already illegal — and even the Government cannot say clearly what it intends to ban.

The bill will criminalise well-intentioned conversations between parents and gender-confused children, as well as religious leaders sharing their faith's teachings with their congregations.

Parents could face up to five years behind bars for trying to persuade their child not to embark on dangerous, irreversible, and life-changing medical pathways before the age of eighteen.

It is one of the most illiberal and invasive pieces of legislation ever to come before MPs. It will divide families and hurt the very people the Government claims to want to protect.

4. The Banter Ban

The Employment Rights Act 2025 — Angela Rayner's baby — will, from 30 October, extend employer liability to harassment by third parties on any protected characteristic, not merely sexual harassment.

That means employers, such as pub landlords, will be responsible for protecting their employees from customers' private conversations, jokes, and remarks.

To avoid expensive legal fees at an employment tribunal, expect landlords to take extreme precautions: a banter bouncer in every beer garden, a code of conduct on every wall — and proof of your EDI (equality, diversity, and inclusion) training before you can order a beer at your local pub.

5. Social media ban for under-16s

The Government has announced that, from March 2027, under-16s will be banned from accessing social media.

Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary, said this was only a 'staging post' towards what must be "a very active interventionist state, policing and regulating the online space so that people are safe".

Notice that she has dropped the word 'children' and moved to 'people'.

The ban is based on the Australian model, which has proved unsuccessful: children have circumvented it using virtual private networks (VPNs). The Government has even consulted on restricting children's use of VPNs. An outright ban would put us in the same league as North Korea, Iran, Iraq, and Turkmenistan.

The ban also comes as the Government proposes giving sixteen-year-olds the vote. How are they expected to make well-informed decisions at the ballot box if their access to news has been restricted?

6. The Watch This Space media green paper

In its recent green paper, Watch This Space, the Government set out plans to require social media platforms to prioritise 'trustworthy' news sources — primarily public broadcasters such as the BBC, ITV, and Channel 4. This would mean other, more critical outlets and independent journalists, such as The Telegraph and GB News, could be demoted.

In what democracy does the Government believe it has the right to decide what counts as 'trustworthy' and what news its citizens can access? The US described this as "censorship" and warned it could become a blueprint for future, more authoritarian governments to crack down on the free press.

7. The National Centre for Information Defence

Prime Minister Andy Burnham used his first speech at the UN to announce the creation of the National Centre for Information Defence.

He claimed it would tackle Russian misinformation, which he said was presenting a false narrative about Britain, interfering in our democracy, and pushing people to the 'far right'.

What it will really be used for is to silence domestic dissent and anyone who disagrees with Burnham's narrative about Britain — or dares to challenge his policies and the progressive orthodoxies he champions.

It is Labour's Ministry of Truth.