MCDONALD'S AND CENSORSHIP (No. 2)

Motion Text

That this House opposes the routine use of libel writs as a form of censorship, particularly by US multinationals taking advantage of the United Kingdom's more repressive libel laws; notes that McDonald's has threatened or initiated libel actions against numerous organisations including the BBC, Channel 4, The Guardian, Today, Scottish TUC, Green, vegetarian and labour movement groups and individuals; notes that apologies and damages have been obtained under false pretences after McDonald's lied about their practices, e.g. by denying using beef reared on ex-rainforest land; believes that as McDonald's spends over $1 billion annually on advertising and promotions it should expect public criticism and should not seek to suppress it; further notes that the House of Lords recently ruled that in the interests of freedom of speech governmental bodies would not be allowed to sue their critics for libel; and believes that this ruling should logically be extended to cover immensely powerful, wealthy and influential multinational corporations.