16th September 2025
https://www.libdemvoice.org/mathew-on-monday-free-speech-and-its-limits-78290.html#comments
Commentary & Local Watchdog
By Sheila Oliver – Romiley Gazette
In a troubling episode that raises serious questions about free speech, the Romiley Liberal Democrats have made efforts to have me arrested—simply for holding an A4 paper sign outside their local office saying Useless LibDem Councillors when they failed to act regarding the destruction of Local Wildlife Site at Padden Brook and wildlife crime. What makes matters worse: the author of a recent LibDemVoice article blocked me on Twitter for raising the issue of innocent Mr Parnell with him.
What Really Happened
- I stood outside the Romiley Liberal Democrat office holding an A4 sign. No loud megaphones. No vandalism. Just a peaceful protest / demonstration of opinion.
- Someone in or associated with the Romiley LibDems called for the police to arrest me. The justification appears to be that the sign was somehow illegal or disruptive.
- I have attempted to raise this situation with Mathew Hulbert, the author of “Free Speech… and its Limits!” on LibDemVoice, pointing out that what had happened seemed to contradict what his article claims about respecting free speech.
Why This Matters
- Free Speech Under Threat
The right to hold a sign in public—even if someone disagrees with its message—is a basic democratic freedom. Requests for my arrest over something so benign suggest a serious overreach. - Responsibility of Public Voices and Authors
When someone writes about the importance of free speech (as Mathew Hulbert did), there is a certain expectation: that their actions will be consistent with their words. Blocking someone who raises concerns about one’s own community (especially when innocent) seems to contradict that principle. - Chilling Effect
If people fear that simply voicing dissent—peacefully, quietly—might lead to legal trouble, we deter legitimate debate. That’s bad for democracy, especially locally, where every voice matters. - Transparency and Accountability
Who in the Romiley LibDems asked for police involvement? What was their rationale? Were legal grounds properly assessed? These are questions citizens deserve answers to.
What the LibDemVoice Article Says
In “Mathew on Monday: Free speech … and its limits!”, Mathew Hulbert argues that while free speech is essential, it isn’t an unfettered right; laws and cultural norms impose reasonable limits. Liberal Democrat Voice
Yet the incident in Romiley suggests that such “limits” are being enforced in a way that stifles peaceful, legitimate expression. If someone can be threatened with arrest for silently holding up a sign, what remains of “robust debate” in public spaces?
My Questions for the Romiley LibDems & Mathew Hulbert
- Under what legal provision was I supposedly breaking the law by holding up an A4 sign outside the office?
- Who made the decision to request police intervention, and was any law enforcement guidance sought?
- Why was I blocked from Twitter when trying to raise the issue of Mr Parnell? Was this to silence dissent?
- How do they reconcile this action with LibDem (and more broadly Liberal) commitments to free speech?
Local Opinion & Reaction
Some in the community are outraged: many see this as the sort of thing you might expect in less democratic regimes, not a suburban Liberal Democrat office in Romiley. Others are more forgiving: maybe they believe there was miscommunication, or that the LibDems thought the sign might break some rule—though what that rule is remains obscure.
Conclusion
If free speech is more than a slogan, then we must ensure that even the most basic acts of expression—holding a sign—are protected. If not, we risk being in a place where dissent is permitted only so long as it’s comfortable for those in power.
Romiley deserves better: clarity, justice, and protection for every citizen’s voice—not only when it pleases the establishment.
