Prime Minister Andy Burnham has ordered British security chiefs to create a National Center for Information Defense to identify and disrupt foreign information operations, drawing immediate warnings from free-speech advocates and Nigel Farage that the new body could eventually be used against lawful domestic dissent.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom.
British Prime Minister Andy Burnham announced plans Tuesday for a new government information-security body designed to detect, attribute and disrupt foreign influence operations, arguing before the United Nations General Assembly that Russia has conducted an “industrial-scale assault” on Britain’s information environment and amplified divisive political narratives to weaken public confidence in the country.
The proposed National Center for Information Defense will be developed by Britain’s security agencies as part of a broader effort to counter hostile-state disinformation, including fake websites, bots, falsified news articles and forged institutional branding. Burnham said Britain also has evidence of attempted Russian interference in the 2019 general election. His government says the initiative will focus on foreign actors rather than policing domestic political disagreement.
Burnham framed the issue as a national-security problem extending beyond conventional military threats, arguing that social cohesion itself can be targeted by hostile governments.
“The Kremlin spends about £1.3 billion each year on manipulating information. We’re talking about an insidious campaign that reaches into people’s homes and twists what they feel about their own country and community, creating a narrative of decline, stoking division, and sowing despair… we are going to help our people to strengthen their resilience, because faced with their information warfare, security starts in every home.”
The prime minister said Russian agencies had used “every means at their disposal to spread lies and disinformation and prey on people’s fears,” including bots, fake websites and falsified articles. He also accused them of forging the branding of 28 British organizations, including universities and the BBC, amplifying “far right narratives” and attempting to inflame “tensions and unrest in the wake of horrific events.”
Burnham further argued that hostile information campaigns have helped circulate a “negative, corrosive narrative about life in Britain, which bears no resemblance to reality,” saying the government had allowed too much ground to such messaging during the previous decade.
His speech began by noting that 2026 marks 10 years since the Brexit referendum and describing Britain as having experienced significant political disruption over the intervening decade. Burnham later said the country would use what it had learned during that period to assist other nations confronting foreign election interference and information operations.
He formally announced the new center by telling the General Assembly:
“… we will put in place the architecture to stem this poisonous tide. Today, I am asking our security chiefs in the UK to begin work on a new National Centre for Information Defence. To detect, attribute, and disrupt these kinds of hostile state information attacks. To support and defend democracy. I know this is a shared challenge, so we are going to use our experience in the UK, and the fact we have already been through this shock, starting ten years ago, to help other countries.
“… as more elections approach across Europe more nations are grappling with these issues, some for the first time. So we are ready to share our understanding of how these actors work, and how we can respond, because this is a vital task for our collective security and resilience. To overcome division and instability, we must also find new ways to bring countries together. We know we are at our strongest when we unite with others, when we reach across borders to solve shared problems.”
Burnham said Britain has already helped Moldova protect its elections from Russian interference and intends to share its experience with European countries confronting similar threats. The government has not yet publicly detailed the new center’s full statutory authorities, operational structure or the precise mechanisms it would use to “disrupt” hostile information campaigns.
That uncertainty prompted immediate concerns over free speech and the potential scope of government monitoring.
The Free Speech Union argued that Britain already operates numerous agencies and programs concerned with disinformation, national security, social cohesion and online threats and questioned why another organization is necessary.
“We already have NSOIT, the Government Communication Service, the Media Monitoring Unit, RICU, the Defending Democracy Taskforce, the Joint Election Security and Preparedness Unit, the FCDO’s Information Threats and Influence Directorate, 77th Brigade, NCSC/GCHQ, the National Cyber Force and the Social Cohesion Taskforce. Is that not enough? How do we know this new body won’t be weaponised to silence dissent and chill free speech? Will it reprimand the Government itself?
“… We should remember that more than 62,000 people have reportedly been arrested for ‘speech offences’ in Britain over the past five years — including social media posts… The Government needs to explain exactly what powers this new Centre will have, who decides what constitutes an ‘untrue narrative’, and what safeguards will prevent it from becoming a tool for policing lawful dissent. 2026 Britain is turning more into 1984 by the day. We literally now have a Ministry of Truth.”
Criticism was also circulated by civil-liberties group Big Brother Watch, which highlighted concerns over the new body’s potential reach in a public response.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage likewise acknowledged that foreign-controlled bots attempt to influence political debate but warned that the center could be expanded beyond countering hostile governments.
In a response to Burnham’s announcement, Farage said: “You know what will happen with this government. Already he’s said it will be to stop ‘far right tropes’, etcetera. This will be like George Orwell’s ‘Ministry of Information’. This will be used to clamp down on free speech, and the one lesson I’m learning as time goes on, whether it’s funding of parties, whether it’s cancelling elections, is never, ever trust this authoritarian government.”
Farage acknowledged that bots originating in “Russia, India and elsewhere” attempt to affect elections but argued that government efforts to identify objectionable narratives could blur the distinction between foreign manipulation and domestic political opinion.
Separate video of Burnham’s remarks circulated widely after his U.N. address, particularly his references to “far right narratives,” social unrest and what he characterized as foreign efforts to foster pessimism about Britain.
The criticism prompted senior government officials to emphasize Wednesday that the new organization is intended to target hostile states rather than British citizens who disagree with Labour policies.
Defense Secretary Wes Streeting said: “Russia is just one of a number of malign state and non-state actors that seek to threaten and disrupt our democracy, including through misinformation and disinformation… We’re not interested in policing domestic political dissent.”
Streeting argued that the distinction between Britain and Russia rests partly on the right of citizens to criticize their government, oppose policies and vote to replace political leaders.
He separately told the BBC Today Programme: “What we need to do is not just better co-ordination at the centre of government, but the better mobilisation of the whole of society. And that’s supporting the public to separate fact from fiction”.
The government has presented the center as part of a response to documented foreign information operations rather than an institution empowered to determine acceptable domestic political opinion. Burnham’s official speech specifically described its mission as detecting, attributing and disrupting “hostile state information attacks.”
The debate nevertheless centers on where that mandate will ultimately be drawn.
Burnham explicitly connected information warfare with narratives concerning national decline, political division and unrest following major incidents, while critics argue that those subjects also encompass legitimate political disagreements that can arise independently of foreign interference.
The government says the problem is the covert manipulation and amplification of such arguments by hostile states, not the right of British citizens to hold or express them.
Burnham also linked the issue to artificial intelligence, warning that emerging technology would increase the ability of hostile actors to create and distribute deceptive material. His U.N. speech included a separate announcement of an AI defense partnership with the United States to protect critical infrastructure.
The National Center for Information Defense remains in its development stage, leaving unresolved questions about its legal powers, oversight mechanisms, interaction with social-media companies and existing government agencies, and what safeguards will govern interventions involving information also being shared by British citizens.
Those details will determine whether Burnham’s proposal functions primarily as the foreign-threat detection operation his government describes or validates concerns from Farage, the Free Speech Union and other critics that a body established to fight foreign disinformation could acquire a wider role in domestic political debate.
Original article
Comments