Prime Minister Andy Burnham has announced plans for a new National Centre for Information Defence, a government body intended to identify and disrupt what he described as hostile information attacks against the United Kingdom.

The announcement immediately triggered warnings that Britain was creating its own Ministry of Truth.

Burnham unveiled the proposal during an address to the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday.

WATCH:

Gold. Upgraded. Buy real gold from $1. Store it in America. Sell it with one click.

He said Britain has more experience than most Western countries in confronting information warfare and suggested the model could eventually be exported to other nations.

The Labour prime minister devoted much of his broad speech to narratives about modern Britain that clash with his government’s assessment of the country.

Burnham argued that claims of national decline and despair bear “no resemblance to reality” and are being promoted by foreign powers.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

According to Burnham, Britain’s deeper experience with this form of warfare began ten years ago.

He did not specifically name the defeat of progressive forces in the 2016 Brexit referendum, though his timeline began with that period, and he also said Russia had targeted British elections.

Burnham argued there can be “no national security” without a cohesive society.

On that basis, he presented the information environment inside British homes and communities as a matter demanding government attention.

“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 conduct an “industrial-scale assault by hostile actors on the information environment in the UK”.

He accused them of spreading disinformation, exploiting public fears, and amplifying “far-right narratives” after terror attacks and other horrific events.

Burnham also rejected what he called a “corrosive narrative about life in Britain which bears no resemblance to reality”.

His answer is a fresh layer of government architecture charged with determining, attributing, and disrupting foreign information operations.

“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.”

Burnham said the centre would “support and defend democracy” while drawing on the United Kingdom’s experience over the past decade.

He offered to share that experience with European countries confronting similar issues as additional elections approach.

Britain already operates a lengthy roster of information monitoring and security organizations, with that machinery having expanded during the Coronavirus era.

The existing lineup includes NSOIT, the Government Communication Service, the Media Monitoring Unit, RICU, the Defending Democracy Taskforce, and the Joint Election Security and Preparedness Unit.

Other bodies cited by the Free Speech Union include the FCDO’s Information Threats and Influence Directorate, 77th Brigade, NCSC/GCHQ, the National Cyber Force, and the Social Cohesion Taskforce.

The organization questioned why another government centre was necessary and whether it could be turned against lawful dissent.

“How do we know this new body won’t be weaponised to silence dissent and chill free speech? Will it reprimand the Government itself?” the Free Speech Union asked.

The organization also pointed to reports that more than 62,000 people were arrested for “speech offences” in Britain during the past five years, including cases involving social media posts.

It demanded clarity about the centre’s powers, who would define an “untrue narrative”, and what safeguards would protect lawful expression.

Brexit leader Nigel Farage acknowledged that bots from “Russia, India and elsewhere” attempt to influence elections.

But he warned that Burnham’s left-wing government would inevitably use the initiative to control British citizens.

“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.”

WATCH:

References to George Orwell’s 1984 spread after Burnham’s speech, pushing government ministers onto the defensive Wednesday morning.

Wes Streeting, a Burnham ally recently elevated to defence minister, insisted Britain is a democracy and said Russia is among several malign actors seeking to threaten it.

“We’re not interested in policing domestic political dissent,” Streeting told GB News.

He separately told the BBC Today Programme that government needed better central coordination and broader social mobilization to help the public “separate fact from fiction”.

Gold is the oldest answer. SoundMoney makes owning it as easy as the apps you already use.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.