One of the most hysterical reactions to the speech was to the proposed ban on ‘conversion therapy.’
July 17 marked the first King’s Speech under a Labour government for 15 years. King Charles III delivered the address amidst the traditional pomp, announcing new employment rights, plans for nationalisation, and reforms for the House of Lords.
The 40 separate pieces of legislation, received critical support from the unions and much of the UK left. Sharon Graham, general secretary of Unite, said that the King’s Speech ‘shows why Britain needs a Labour government’, but warned about the government becoming ‘straitjacketed by self-made fiscal rules.’
But for right, the agenda was notably, and unsurprisingly, met with disapproval. Andrew Griffith, the shadow science secretary, criticised the speech, describing it as a “smorgasbord” of “socialist greatest hits.” The Tory press didn’t hold back either.
The following day, many of the nationals dedicated their frontpages to outcry over Starmer’s ‘Red Revolution.’
“How will these new burdens on firms help growth?” asked the Mail’s lead story, which laid into the ‘radical’ set of employment rights, that will see more power for unions and rights to work from home.
The Express argued, “The King’s Speech shows just how radical Keir Starmer really is.”
The article lashed out at the government’s planning reforms, arguing that they would “take power away from residents and make it almost impossible for them to stop developments in their area.”
True to its reputation for questioning the scientific consensus on climate change and downplaying environmental issues, the right-wing tabloid melodramatically claimed that “pylons and windfarms will be thrown up across the countryside as part of the government’s energy reforms.”
Attempting to rouse nationalistic sentiment among readers, the newspaper also had a dig at Labour’s plans to introduce “French-style workers’ rights,” arguing that these measures would “hamper businesses still recovering from the impact of the pandemic.”
Another hysterical reaction to the King’s Speech was to the proposed ban on ‘conversion therapy,’ a practice aimed at changing LGBT+ individuals’ sexual orientation or gender identity. Widely condemned as pseudo-scientific, discriminatory, and in extreme cases, akin to torture, the ban was broadly welcomed by LGBTQ+ campaigners, who said it was “well overdue.” But the Tory press painted it as perilous. The Telegraph, citing obscure critics like Sex Matters, framed the ban as something feared by parents.
There was also criticism over Labour’s decision to bury the controversial Rwanda bill.
“Sir Keir has also confirmed that the Rwanda deportation scheme is being axed, despite signs it was already having a deterrent effect,” wrote the Daily Mail, in its article about Labour forging a ‘Red Britain’ in the King’s Speech.
The claim that the Rwanda bill acts as a deterrent contradicts a research report from the Refugee Council which concluded that the Illegal Migration Act and Rwanda Plan will not act as deterrent to ‘stop the boats’ and is already leading to refugees disappearing from contact with support organisations.
The report was based on research with 40 organisations supporting people in the UK asylum system including those working with people in northern France. It found that the Rwanda plan and the new legislation are more likely to result in people taking journeys that are even more dangerous, will drive vulnerable people underground, and are having a severe negative impact on people’s mental health.
Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is a contributing editor to Left Foot Forward
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That’s why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward’s work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
