Photo credit: www.theguardian.com
Concerns Raised Over Government Vetting of Speakers
The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has been urged to investigate recent practices of government vetting that have reportedly led to the exclusion of speakers from official functions due to their critiques of government officials.
Two specialists have expressed alarm over findings indicating that civil servants have scrutinized years’ worth of social media content to classify certain individuals as “unsuitable” for addressing conferences, a practice they believe to be both secretive and illegal.
This situation escalated following a legal challenge initiated by Dan Kaszeta, a chemical weapons authority who was uninvited from a 2023 Chemical Weapons Demilitarisation conference. Although the Cabinet Office has since retracted its guidance for review, it has not yet disclosed the results of that examination.
Legal representatives for both Kaszeta and Ruth Swailes, an educational consultant claiming censorship related to an event connected to the Department for Education (DfE), have called upon the ICO to investigate these vetting procedures. They argue that these practices may contravene data protection regulations.
A document issued in February 2023 outlined directives for “due diligence checks” on any individual or group collaborating with government networks, with the intent of identifying candidates who engage in political advocacy or campaigning activities. It further implied that “overt criticism of government could compromise our impartiality as civil servants.”
Although the guidelines were said to be limited to select civil service networks, the letter indicated that similar practices appeared to have been widely adopted across various departments. Requests for information revealed multiple versions of this “due diligence” policy were created by several departments, including the Treasury, the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Health and Social Care, and the Ministry of Defence, among others.
Reports indicate that government departments conducted online investigations into potential speakers, searching for any material that showed “criticism of government/prime minister” or “criticism of government officials or policy.” These investigations required the examination of a “minimum of five to ten pages of search results” covering a span of three to five years of both professional and personal social media, encompassing platforms such as Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and LinkedIn.
Swailes expressed uncertainty about the scope of these vetting processes or whether they continue today. She advocated for greater transparency in the situation, stating, “I would like them to admit what they’ve done is wrong.”
Swailes, an early years education expert, faced a sudden disqualification from speaking at a government-supported event in March 2023 aimed at enhancing the education of young children in Manchester. Just two days prior to her scheduled appearance, she was informed that the DfE deemed her and a colleague as “unsuitable” for the event, which forced them to present via video link while also censoring parts of their materials.
“I was simply going to discuss child development – it was absurd,” Swailes said. “We were left in the dark about the allegations against us and felt our reputations were being unjustly tarnished.”
A subject access request revealed that the DfE had indeed conducted a review of her social media activity.
“I posted a proud moment about my daughter’s prom on Twitter, which was flagged in the findings,” Swailes shared. “It was unsettling to see them comb through everything I’ve shared online. I thought to myself, ‘This is not right.’”
While reflecting on her critiques of the government’s approach to Covid and its repercussions on children, she asserted there was nothing contentious in her remarks. “It’s tough to find anyone who hasn’t expressed criticism of the government in the past five years. This seems exceedingly heavy-handed.”
Kaszeta, who is also an author and defense consultant, recounted his experience during an interview with BBC’s Newsnight in May 2023. Although he received an apology following the retraction of the Cabinet Office guidance in July 2023, a promised review has yet to materialize.
“If these practices are ongoing, how can anyone know they are affected?” he questioned. “My knowledge of this situation arose only because someone informed me I was uninvited to speak.” Kaszeta was scheduled to present at the Chemical Weapons Demilitarisation conference in May 2023 but was later dropped due to perceived criticism of the government found on his social media accounts.
“I’m unsure what drew this scrutiny,” he remarked, noting his previous support for the Liberal Democrats and critiques of figures like Jacob Rees-Mogg and Nadine Dorries on X. “What relevance does that hold for discussing international chemical weapons regulations?” He expressed a desire for a public acknowledgment that these practices were inappropriate, rather than just a review being promised.
Josh Munt, an associate solicitor at Leigh Day, denounced the vetting checks as “intrusive and surreptitious,” claiming they suppress diverse opinions. “Our clients are optimistic that the information commissioner will act decisively and clarify that the government’s scrutiny of external experts based on their political stances is illegal,” he added.
A spokesperson from the Cabinet Office stated, “This guidance was retracted over a year ago under the previous administration. There is no unified government guidance on vetting speakers for departmental events.” Meanwhile, an ICO spokesperson confirmed the receipt of a complaint and mentioned they are reviewing the details provided.
Source
www.theguardian.com