Freedom requires responsible attitudes and accountability

As islanders know through bitter experience, freedom is a hard won and cherished value, which can be easily lost if not adequately protected. I fear too many in the West take it for granted, but recent events show we can do so no longer.

We typically speak of freedom in terms of our ability to self-determine our lives without fear or favour. Digging deeper, there are unwritten expectations – such as our automatic assumption that our neighbour will live by the same rules that we do and that the state in which we reside is committed to working for the good of all.

However, hearing the stories of our European neighbours in Ukraine and those of our friends further east in Syria, we are reminded that freedom is something that can be taken by force at any time by those who value power over justice, and might over rights. Given recent rhetoric, it seems that even our allies can be tempted to trample over years of democratic freedom and use bullying tactics to get their way.

This rightly raises the question whether our ‘freedom’ should have limits – either at an international, local or individual level? Can we say and do whatever we like whenever we like, no matter who we are or what role we hold – be that as the most powerful man on Earth or an anonymous commentator on Facebook? Should we, as one fellow deputy has stated, be allowed to say whatever we like – with no checks and balances – in terms of freedom of speech? Can we, as another has done, make comments on individual cases which may then impact the people directly involved?

Freedom, by its very nature, must always come with responsibilities – both in terms of what we say and what we do, otherwise it is not freedom at all, but anarchy. Our freedom to live without fear comes from the knowledge that we expect those with whom we share our physical, social and cyberspace to adhere to the same norms and values that we do. These include respect for and adherence to the rule of law.

As politicians, I believe that we should be the first to model this to our fellow citizens – as such, we should be held to the highest possible standard that those in our society expect of each other under the law. No exceptions, for to do otherwise is to undermine the very trust that makes our society a free and stable place to live.

So, no, we should not have freedom to say whatever we like for we need to be both accountable and responsible. Perhaps a better way of phrasing this is to say we must be wise about what we say, to whom we say things and when we say things – and yes, I am indeed thinking about the role social media can have. For it is not always wise to enter into a spat on a forum that has become in many places akin to the Wild West, where the rule of law is absent and truth is often the first casualty.

It worries me deeply how people appear to be so easily led by those who they think have their best interests at heart, but who are often subtly spinning truth to further their own agendas, as Trump frequently does. Social media has a great potential for good, as I have found during my years of campaigning, however it also has a huge potential for harm, especially in presenting myths as facts and rumours as truth.

One thing is clear in the world in which we now live – the rules of the game are changing, fast. The old World Order where adherence to international law was taken for granted feels like a by-gone era, for which we rightly feel a high degree of nostalgia. Whether this is because we recognise the chaos and uncertainty that is taking its place, or the brutish thuggery that has been unmasked in certain quarters – either way, we do well to think twice before mimicking these new world leaders.

Of greatest concern is that truth has become a relative concept, where it is often contingent on our views of the person speaking. They either play to and confirm our world view, or they are seen as being opposed to it – in which case we tend to dismiss out of hand what they say, without looking at the facts or evidence. My plea is that whatever the issue that finds itself in the media spotlight, islanders take the time to ask themselves – what is the evidence I am being presented with, and has it been scrutinised properly by those with no axe to grind? What lens am I viewing this through and am I sure I have all the facts, given some things might be confidential?

Finally, perhaps a word about the difference between secrecy, confidentiality, privacy and transparency. Each have clear definitions that any dictionary can set out, however each relate to a level of openness about information that can then be misinterpreted or misconstrued, particularly in our work as politicians.

Because we need to be wise, we cannot be transparent about everything we deal with as politicians. We can strive to be transparent about processes, but the detail is often too sensitive for everyone to know. Wisdom – founded on insight and judgement – then steps in, so that we agree certain boundaries and matters that need to be kept confidential. When they relate to an individual’s personal circumstances, they naturally are held to be private. Only if there is a deliberate decision, made with intent, to withhold key information for personal gain should we become worried – as this secrecy is indeed something that needs to be called out. However, even then there may be reasons why the matter may need to remain confidential. The nuanced difference in these words relies on people trusting those who make these judgement calls. This trust must be earned – and that in turn can only be done if there are clear ground rules and accountability.

So, we return to where we started – freedom requires responsible attitudes and accountability. It is not a green light for a free for all, but a value which because it is so precious, has clear constraints that all should buy in to.

I hope that all who serve in positions of power on our island would agree.