I spoke in parliament today to oppose banning the direct action protest group Palestine Action under UK anti-terrorism laws.

We shouldn’t confuse dissent and terror.

I understand what terrorism is. I was in London on July 7thJuly 7th in 2007, and I watched this city being attacked by real terrorists. I decided I was going to Afghanistan to fight the terrorists because I love this country. And I love our democracy, and I want to see it protected. I think today’s proscription of Palestine Action undermines our democracy.

It feels like, to me and many other people, we could be creating a bridge over which future authoritarian governments will travel and have unintended, dark consequences that no one in the Labour Party or this government actually wants.

Read my speech:

Let me first associate myself with the very good comments of the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart).

I agree with the proscription of the two far-right fascist organisations—I think they should be proscribed—but can we as a House accept that there are those of us present who have a different take on today’s proscription of Palestine Action? We do not have to agree with the behaviour or actions of Palestine Action to make the case today that this proscription is wrong. I ask hon. Members to acknowledge that the many of us here today who take a different view on this issue are as much a part of this democracy as those who agree with the proscription.

It is just that our take on the delicacy of our democracy, on what this proscription does and on how it undermines our democracy happens to differ from that of other people.

There are Opposition Members who have repeatedly said that they understand and empathise with constituents who have smashed and vandalised ultra low emission zone cameras and low emission zone cameras. Direct action is not just of the left; everyone in our democracy can partake in it. This is a judgment call about how we best protect our democracy and an acknowledgment that not all threats are external or violent. Some threats are based on the decisions that we take in this place. Sometimes, we might take decisions that fundamentally undermine our own democracy.

I have no doubt that some of us will be called terrorist sympathisers by some who disagree with our position, but that would be wrong. Look around the world and watch as democracy and the rule of law are systematically smashed. Corporations and the wealthy have increasing power and wealth to influence our democracy. Look over the Atlantic at the United States. Our democracies are delicate; our democracies are precious. The decisions we take in this place determine whether those democracies will survive into the future.

I look around the world and around this country—I look at the authoritarian right party that is 10 points ahead in the polls—and I worry about the future of our democracy. This Government—our Government—have to make decisions that take account of the possibility that we might not be in government one day. It may be the authoritarian right who are in government, and they will take this further, faster and deeper than we ever have, so we should be putting in fireguards now, protecting our democracy, and this measure does not do that.

In conclusion, I understand what terrorism is. I was in London on 7 July 2005 and I watched my community—this city—attacked by real terrorists. At that point, rightly or wrongly, I decided that I was going to Afghanistan to fight the terrorists. I went because I love this country and I love our democracy and I want to see it protected. Today’s proscription order against Palestine Action undermines that, and I wish that my Government were not doing this.