The Defending Democracy Taskforce needs to move further and faster to protect the UK from foreign interference
The Defending Democracy Taskforce needs to move further and faster to protect the UK from foreign interference
With its main objective to “protect the democratic integrity of the UK from threats of foreign interference”, the Defending Democracy Taskforce, and the activities it helps coordinate, are the Government's main shield against attacks from abroad on the UK’s democratic institutions and processes [1].
Incidents like the Electoral Commision hack, which went undetected for several months and has now been linked to Chinese-backed hackers, or the spread of misinformation online, highlight the UK’s vulnerability to foreign interference and the urgency of taking countermeasures.
Since its establishment in November 2022 the Taskforce, supported by independent bodies such as the National Cyber Security Centre, Ofcom, the Metropolitan Police and the Electoral Commission, and chaired by Security Minister Tom Tugendhat, has met at least 11 times [2]. However, its exact working methods, and the progress it is making, are difficult to assess.
Since January, the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy has been conducting an inquiry into the Taskforce’s ability to fulfil its ambitious aims.
This prompted Unlock Democracy to conduct its own review of the threats UK democracy faces from abroad, and the Taskforce’s capacity to keep us safe.
Main threats to the UKs democracy
The primary challenges facing UK Democracy today are online misinformation, especially when it is propagated by AI, hacks, and foreign funding of, and foreign influence over, UK politics.
Spreading false information might not seem as harmful to democratic systems as hacking into the electoral register, however, any attempt to undermine democratic practices or whip up hatred can cause distrust and public unrest by popularising alternative, often more radical ideologies, thereby polarising society.
Misinformation and disinformation spread through social media, news outlets, and other channels, aiming to sway opinions, influence elections, and stoke unrest. The 2023 Freedom House report highlighted the use of AI which could make “the truth easier to distort and harder to discern” [3]. Real concerns exist about the extent to which foreign, partisan, and extremist groups will use automated 'bot' accounts on social media, alongside 'fake news', altered images, and generative AI to amplify disinformation campaigns.
An array of cyber attack techniques have already been used against high profile democracy-related targets in the UK such as the Electoral Commission. State actors have targeted prominent figures, political organisations, electoral systems, and governmental bodies with the intent to acquire information, compromise data integrity, disrupt operations, or influence election outcomes. They may also be using far less sophisticated techniques to obtain kompromat on, and influence over, politicians (should a foreign source be shown to have been responsible for sexting a number of MPs).
Another threat to our democratic institutions is opaque political funding. Recent amendments to electoral legislation in the UK have potentially increased the nation's susceptibility to foreign interference and influence. Loopholes in election spending regulations leave room for foreign entities to sway UK elections by providing financial support to particular candidates, parties, or agendas [4].
Our analysis confirms there are indeed significant threats that can undermine people’s trust in democracy and jeopardise its institutions.
The Taskforce must identify these risks, implement preventive measures, educate the public about potential attacks, and introduce harm reduction protocols to quickly minimise any harm to democracy in the case of a successful attack.
Taskforce action and Recommendations:
What do we know about the effectiveness of the Taskforce?
To combat the listed threats, Security Minister Tom Tugendhat promised that: “We are bringing together experts from across Government, security and intelligence agencies to defend our democracy” [5].
Nevertheless, there is little evidence that suggests a proactive and collaborative cross party approach to finding such solutions. Labour's Lucy Powell MP recently declared in the House of Commons that: “The Defending Democracy Taskforce should have a broader remit to defend democracy from threats within our borders, and that we should take a more cross-party approach as we head towards what is likely to be a very testing general election? [6]”
And it is hard to determine the effectiveness of the Joint Election Security Preparedness unit (JESP), set up to coordinate electoral security and preparedness efforts, because its precise size remains undisclosed [7].
We are suggesting the following concrete steps for government to take to counter threats to democracy more effectively [8]:
Support fact checking, build resilience through civil education and engagement, act to restrict disinformation and attacks on parties, officials or infrastructure, actively engage with political stakeholders and social media platforms.
Introduce a UK Critical Election Incident Public Protocol as advocated by Full Fact [9].
Act on relevant recommendations in the Regulating Election Finance Review by the Committee on Standards in Public Life (CSPL) [10].
Grant Ofcom powers to tackle all sources of disinformation and misinformation.
Give the police a clear mandate in matters of electoral law enforcement.
Reinstate the Electoral Commission’s powers to bring prosecutions against those who break electoral law relating to parties and campaigners.
Incorporate political literacy and democratic education for all in the school curriculum and allocate more funding and resources to educational initiatives.
Collaborate with other democracies to clearly define the issue and parameters around foreign interference.
There is no guarantee that if all of these steps were taken the UK would be immune to outside interference. However, if they were acted on, those who wish us harm would have to work much harder to disrupt our democracy, and if they succeeded in penetrating our defences, we would be much better equipped to respond.
This article was written by Nathan Frank, volunteer at Unlock Democracy
Footnotes
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ministerial-taskforce-meets-to-tackle-state-threats-to-uk-democracy
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2024-01-12.9336.h
Freedom House (2023), Freedom on the Net: United Kingdom 2023. Washington DC: Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2023/repressive-power-artificial-intelligence
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/60e460b1d3bf7f56801f3bf6/CSPL_Regulating_Election_Finance_Review_Final_Web.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ministerial-taskforce-meets-to-tackle-state-threats-to-uk-democracy
https://policymogul.com/parliamentary-record/hansard-content/42268/business-of-the-house?utm_source=share-button&topic-id=none#contribution-71E859CB-9AE4-4315-83E4-76F77955AC54
https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-01-31/12399
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/128861/html/
https://www.canada.ca/en/democratic-institutions/services/protecting-democracy/critical-election-incident-public-protocol.html
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/60e460b1d3bf7f56801f3bf6/CSPL_Regulating_Election_Finance_Review_Final_Web.pdf