Lib Dem leader defends free speech as Musk arrest call tests party line amid Bournemouth controversy

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey publicly defended the party’s stance on free speech while escalating a confrontation with Elon Musk, calling for the arrest of the Tesla and X owner over his control of the platform and for Parliament to haul him in to answer for remarks about fighting or dying at a recent anti-migrant rally. In a television interview, Davey characterized Musk as a “criminal” and said Britain should question his conduct, arguing that Musk’s actions require accountability even as the Lib Dems position themselves as champions of free expression.

Davey told Sky News he would support criminal sanctions if Musk visits Britain, saying, “Yes,” when asked whether Musk should be arrested. He added that Parliament should compel Musk to answer for his comments at Tommy Robinson’s anti-migrant march last week. He also pressed for an Ofcom investigation into X and Musk personally for allegedly failing to uphold duties under the Online Safety Act, accusing Musk of inciting violence in the wake of the incident and noting that Musk had retaliated by labeling him a “craven coward.”

The remarks come as the Lib Dems press ahead with their Bournemouth conference, where Davey is expected to address the party’s stance on free speech in a broader context of internal debate over gender-diversity rules. Earlier, trans-sceptic activists were blocked from attempting a vote on amending party rules to limit how many roles set aside for women could be filled by trans women, a move supported by a pressure group asking to alter the phraseology of the 40-per-cent quotas that apply to federal bodies. The group Liberal Voice for Women, led by Dr. Zoe Hollowood, argued the current rules could be in tension with the Equality Act and commissioned legal advice to that effect, but the conference chose to move on without testing the proposal.

Davey sought to balance insistence on free speech with a defense of anti-discrimination commitments. He told the BBC that the party was simply upholding the law and that activists should not assume the leadership was silencing them. “Well, I’m sorry if they are cross, but the truth is what I’m saying: we abide by the law,” he said, noting that the party had already held a full debate on LGBT-plus rights, including trans issues, at a prior conference.

The clash over trans-rights rules comes amid broader questions about how the party reconciles its ideals of open debate with practical governance, particularly as critics within and outside the party have argued that free-speech rhetoric can collide with the rights and protections of transgender people. The governing document requires that at least 40 per cent of positions on federal bodies go to people who self-identify as men or nonbinary and to those who self-identify as women or nonbinary, a framework some activists cited as potentially excluding biological women from roles. While the Liberal Voice for Women argued this should be reworded to ensure explicit gender descriptions, the conference did not vote on the change, instead moving to other business.

In comments broadcast ahead of his speech at the conference, Davey tied the concept of free speech to accountability, arguing that powerful figures, including Musk, must answer for statements that he said could incite violence or harm. He pointed to Musk’s rhetoric about civil conflict and his stance on policies that Davey characterized as promoting harmful content, including self-harm and illegal activities, as well as material that could be used to exploit children. Musk’s response, labeling Davey a “craven coward,” amplified a heated online back-and-forth that has drawn attention to how the Lib Dems frame debate within a larger global tech and governance landscape.

Observers note the episode underscores a broader tension within liberal parties worldwide between defending open expression and protecting vulnerable communities from harmful content. The Bournemouth gathering will continue to test how the Lib Dems translate their free-speech ethos into concrete policy and leadership while navigating internal disagreements over gender-diversity rules and the party’s public-facing stance on social issues.