PayPal and other finance companies could be banned from blocking the accounts of campaign groups for political reasons under a new law being proposed by MPs. The Telegraph has more.
Conservative backbenchers are considering launching an amendment to upcoming financial legislation in the House of Commons that would ban companies from freezing campaigners’ accounts.
It comes after UsForThem, which campaigned to keep schools open during the pandemic, and the Free Speech Union (FSU), a pressure group, had their PayPal accounts blocked and were accused of violating terms of service.
PayPal has since reinstated UsForThem’s account but the FSU’s three accounts with the U.S. tech giant are still blocked and are not expected to be reviewed.
An amendment to the Online Safety Bill or Digital Markets Bill, which are both yet to be passed in Parliament, could be launched by Tory MPs.
Bit torn here. I do like it but I don't really want government interferring with business. It needs a careful touch and I don't see politicians not wanting to meddle with everything. What they should do is less meddle with Paypal but more enable the infrastructure so that Paypal isn't the only choice.
ReplyDeletePaypal is American, right? Could be difficult
ReplyDeleteDo the Government have the right to dictate which clients a company takes on? I would say no. Or they shouldn't
There are alternatives to Paypal, so if enough customers moved from them, they might change their policy. If not, they won't. Is that not how a market is supposed to work?
I don't think Government interference is the answer (Ever)
As for Truss and sane policies, she's inherited a financial problem created by Government printing money during Covid. Her answer is to print more money.
She's also inherited an energy crisis caused by Government interfering in the market. Her answer is to interfere in the market more.
Time will tell if I'm wrong, but I think she's going to be just the same as all the rest, in the long run
Penseivat
ReplyDeleteNever used Paypal, but Shirley there are alternatives? If the "US tech giant" refuses, why can't the government cancel their licence on the grounds that it violates the government's terms of reference?