More on Robert Halfon, UK Universities, and Libyan Money

In a post earlier today, I collected Robert Halfon’s Parliamentary statements and some of the reporting which preceded the announcement this afternoon that Liverpool John Moores University has formally threatened him with defamation proceedings.

In this post I want to bring in some further materials, and look at whether a potentially serious curtailment of Parliamentary Privilege is threatened here.

Let’s start by looking again at Liverpool John Moores University’s statement:

As can be seen from the above, the wild press and media speculation about the University receiving huge sums of money from the Libyan Government (originally emanating from a Conservative MP making unjustified statements under the protection of the House of Commons rules) are complete fantasy. In particular, we have no reason to be ashamed of these activities. They have been conducted scrupulously with good partners aiming to improve the situation of the Libyan people and with the full support and encouragement of the UK Government and associated agencies.
LJMU statement on activities in Libya

So what exactly were those “…unjustified statements under the protection of House of Commons rules”? At the time, Halfon appears to have made only one reference to Liverpool John Moores University in Parliament: in a Parliamentary Question asked on 3 March 2011, which we’ll come to shortly.

Prior to this date, Robert Halfon had written regularly about Libya on his personal blog, drawing on his family connection to the country.

In a post dated 22 February 2011, he wrote about his grandfather’s experience:

Events in Libya hold special meaning for our family, as my late grandfather (an Italian Tripolitanian Jew), was one of the many thousands of Jews in Libya who had their property confiscated and businesses appropriated by the Gadaffi regime.
…
Given what he -and thousands of others experienced -I think my grandfather would have been surprised that Gadaffi has remained in power for so long.
…
But, most of all, given his deep attachment to England, he would have never expected that in 2009, one of the most famous and prestigious British universities -the London School of Economics (LSE), would take £1.5 million in “blood money” from Gadaffi’s son in order to fund a “North African Research Centre”.
My Grandfather, Libya and the LSE Blood Money

On 27 February, Halfon posted the transcript of a live webchat he had conducted for the Sunday Times. Several of the questions related to Libya and the LSE, notably this one:

10:20
Mark
Hi Robert, seems like Britain and the world is finally starting to react to the situation in Libya. Why did we appease a dictator there for so long? We have become cowards in the West since Iraq
Robert Halfon
I agree with your sentiments. We appeased Gaddaffi for far too long. My Grandfather was one of the Jews in Libya who was forced to flee because Gadaffi took all the Jews’ homes and businesses. He came to England eventually, after a short spell in Italy. Some of our Universities, like the LSE,have been prostituting themselves to Middle eastern despots for blood money.
Anthony Giddens praise for Gadaffi was a disgrace. Similarly, for far too long, our Foreign office and businesses like BP, have been appeasing Gadaffi in the name of realpolitik. We need a radical reappraisal of our foreign policy.
Online with the Sunday Times

The following day, Halfon was at Prime Minister’s Questions:

Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con): My grandfather was one of thousands of Jews who had to leave Libya because of Gaddafi’s appropriation of Jewish businesses and homes, and he came to this country because of its democracy. He would have been shocked to have seen not only the close relations between the last Government and Gaddafi, but the acceptance by our distinguished universities, particularly the London School of Economics, of more than £1 million from Gaddafi. Will my right hon. Friend take steps to ensure that such a scandal never happens again?

The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend speaks with great power. What I have said about relations with Libya is that, while of course it was right to try to bring that country in from the cold, the question is whether parameters should have been put on the relationship. I think that it is for everyone to ask what agreements they reached. I heard the head of the London School of Economics on the radio this morning trying to justify one such agreement. Let us hope that at least the money that the LSE has can be put to a good use.
Hansard, 28 February 2011

Halfon serves on the Advisory Board of “Student Rights”, which describes itself as:

…a non-partisan group dedicated to supporting equality, democracy and freedom from extremism on university campuses…set up in June 2009 as a reaction to increasing political extremism and marginalisation of vulnerable students on campus.

They have been particularly vociferous in attacking the London School of Economics’ financial links with Libya and with the Gaddafi family, opening a petition against LSE’s actions, and publicising Halfon’s statements on the issue.

In a post dated 1 March 2011, Student Rights drew attention to Halfon’s comments at Prime Minister’s Questions:

Yesterday, Student Rights Advisory Board member Robert Halfon MP asked the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, David Cameron, about the London School of Economics and the Libyan blood money that they accepted. £300,000 has been donated to the LSE by the Gaddafi Foundation, as part of a £1.5m promise. This followed Saif al-Gaddafi receiving his PhD from the LSE, over which questions are now being raised.

On 3 March 2011, Halfon asked the Parliamentary Question which appears to have been the first time he referred specifically to Liverpool John Moores University:

Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con): Has my right hon. Friend read my early-day motion 1515?

That this House expresses grave concerns about the extent of funding from Middle Eastern dictatorships for UK universities, including the donations to the London School of Economics (LSE) by the Libyan regime; notes that an estimated 75 million was given to the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies by 12 Middle Eastern rulers, including King Fahd of Saudi Arabia; further notes that 8 million was given to the University of Cambridge by Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia, to finance a new research centre for Islamic studies in 2008, and that he gave a further 8 million to Edinburgh University for the same purpose; further notes that 9 million was given to the Centre for Middle Eastern Studies at the LSE by the United Arab Emirates Foundation, and that 5.7 million was given to the LSE by the Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences, to establish the Kuwait Programme on Development, Governance and Globalisation in the Gulf States in 2007; and therefore calls on the Government to establish much stricter guidelines around donations to UK universities, and to put a stop immediately to donations from oppressive Middle Eastern dictatorships with a terrible record on human rights.
My right hon. Friend may also have seen early-day motion 1486, which I tabled.

The motions condemn the extensive financial links between Colonel Gaddafi and at least two British universities, the London School of Economics and Liverpool John Moores, and the links between the progressive left and Gaddafi. Does he not agree that this scandal is akin to that of the aristocrats who appeased and sympathised with fascism in the 1930s, and will he arrange for an urgent statement on, and an independent inquiry into, the funding of British universities by middle eastern despots?

Sir George Young: I understand my hon. Friend’s concern, although I am not sure I would go quite as far as he did in drawing that parallel. Universities, however, are autonomous institutions. As a charity, a university must set its own standards for the acceptance of donations, subject to guidance from the Charity Commission. The LSE has expressed regret at the reputational damage caused by its association with the Gaddafi name, and has announced that the sum received will be used to finance a scholarship fund supporting students from north Africa.
Hansard, 3 March 2011

Interestingly, neither of the Early Day Motions which Halfon had then proposed on this topic refer specifically to Liverpool John Moores University.

GOVERNMENT OF LIBYA FUNDING FOR THE NORTH AFRICAN RESEARCH PROGRAMME AT THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS
That this House condemns the 1.5 million accepted by the London School of Economics (LSE) from the government of Libya in 2009 to fund a North African Research Programme; believes that although the money came from the International Charity and Development Foundation chaired by Colonel Gadaffi’s son, Seif Al-Islam, this does not make it any cleaner; calls on the LSE to donate the money to suitable charities to assist victims of the Gadaffi regime; notes that universities from across the UK have accepted hundreds of millions of pounds from Middle Eastern dictatorships in recent years; and therefore calls on the Government to strengthen its scrutiny of our higher education institutions, and in particular the London School of Economics.
Early Day Motion 1486

MIDDLE EASTERN FUNDING FOR UK UNIVERSITIES
That this House expresses grave concerns about the extent of funding from Middle Eastern dictatorships for UK universities, including the donations to the London School of Economics (LSE) by the Libyan regime; notes that an estimated 75 million was given to the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies by 12 Middle Eastern rulers, including King Fahd of Saudi Arabia; further notes that 8 million was given to the University of Cambridge by Prince Alwaleed bin Talal of Saudi Arabia, to finance a new research centre for Islamic studies in 2008, and that he gave a further 8 million to Edinburgh University for the same purpose; further notes that 9 million was given to the Centre for Middle Eastern Studies at the LSE by the United Arab Emirates Foundation, and that 5.7 million was given to the LSE by the Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences, to establish the Kuwait Programme on Development, Governance and Globalisation in the Gulf States in 2007; and therefore calls on the Government to establish much stricter guidelines around donations to UK universities, and to put a stop immediately to donations from oppressive Middle Eastern dictatorships with a terrible record on human rights.
Early Day Motion 1515

On 10 March Halfon asked this question in Parliament:

Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con): Will the Leader of the House find time for an urgent debate on links between middle eastern dictators and our universities, following my early-day motions 1562 and 1563?

[That this House believes that there should be a real financial incentive for British universities not to accept donations from foreign dictatorships, especially regimes in the Middle East with a poor record on human rights; and therefore calls on the Government to introduce a mechanism whereby for every £1 that a university receives in donations from a totalitarian or despotic regime, such a Libya, £1 shall be withdrawn from that university in public subsidy.]

As well as the London School of Economics case, it has emerged that Durham university has done deals with the Iranian regime and that the Muslim research centre at my former university, Exeter, was funded by the Muslim Brotherhood. Does my right hon. Friend agree that if a university takes blood money it should lose an equivalent amount of public subsidy?

Sir George Young: As I said to my hon. Friend last week, universities are autonomous organisations and accountable for what they do. I will draw his comments to the attention of my ministerial colleagues at BIS. As he knows, we will have a debate on the middle east at this time next week, when he may want to amplify his remarks.
Hansard, 10 March 2011

Neither of the Early Day Motions referred to Liverpool John Moores University: 1562 is quoted above; 1563 refers exclusively to the University of Durham.

Later that day, Halfon posted to his blog. That entry currently reads as follows:

There are reports this evening that Colonel Gadaffi may be on the verge of taking back Libya. I have no way of verifying if this is true. But, one thing is for sure: If the Dictator does succeed, the sebacks to democratic development will be enormous.

Not only will all the opposition be vanquished – and then massacred – citizens across the Middle East will be wary of overthrowing their repressive regimes. The light of democracy – and the chances of freedom – will be put out, possibly for a generation.

The West have only themselves to blame. Instead of confronting Gadaffi, for the past few years he was appeased and even feted by far too many countries, including the UK,Now, there is hand-wringing about whether or not to implement a no-fly zone. By the time a decision is made, Gadaffi could have retaken control. The free world should be doing all it can to facilitate Gadaffi’s removal.
If Gadaffi wins, the West will be to blame

The post originally continued for several more paragraphs: Halfon’s Parliamentary question of that day was reproduced, preceded by a paragraph from Halfon summarising it. This further text has since been deleted from the post.

The following day, at 1236, Halfon posted this tweet:

I uploaded a YouTube video — Stop the Blood Money http://youtu.be/EznE1UolgWs?a

This video was subsequently embedded in the blog post from the previous day. It has since been removed from Youtube, and the embedding removed from the blog post.

At 2241, Halfon posted about his family experiences again:

Don’t forget that Gaddafi and Co think the country belongs to them, so pillaging money from the Libyan people is seen as perfectly just – and a normal state of affairs. My grandfather would have been deeply shocked at the British establishment’s appeasement of 3Gaddafi, the release of the Lockerbie bomber al Megrahi and the LSE blood money.
My father thinks he shook hands with Gadaffi

It seems reasonable to hypothesise that the removal of the last half of Halfon’s blog post of 10 March 2011, and of the video he posted to Youtube the following day, are related to the defamation proceedings now threatened against him.

If this is correct, it is potentially worrying – because the deleted section of Halfon’s blog post reproduced a parliamentary question, a statement made under parliamentary privilege. Moreover, that question does not refer at all to Liverpool John Moores University – as we’ve seen, only Halfon’s parliamentary question of 3 March does so.

Most of the videos posted to Robert Halfon’s Youtube channel are clips of his statements in the House of Commons. This raises the question: was the deleted video similarly a clip of him asking the parliamentary question which has been redacted from his blog post of 10 March 2011 – a question which does not refer to Liverpool John Moores University?

To have any meaning in the modern world, parliamentary privilege cannot simply be about the freedom of MPs to speak in the Commons chamber; it must incorporate a freedom for people to be told what they have said. Today, that particularly means the ability of MPs and others to report proceedings – even if people object to what they say.