Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Priti Patel wants to ban protest. Bill going through this week.

258 replies

flashbac · 14/03/2021 08:22

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill is some scary looking stuff. 10 year sentence for being at any protest that, amongst other things, causes or is at risk of causing 'serious annoyance'. That's all protests then is it?
The right to protest is the cornerstone of every democracy.
Aibu to be scared about where this is heading?

OP posts:
Original poster
flashbac · 14/03/2021 08:25

This explains some more:
This week’s policing bill adds a further justification for the restrictions: noise. If the noise of the protest “may result in serious disruption to the activities of an organisation” – for instance by distracting employees in a nearby office, then the police can impose restrictions. It goes without saying that this applies to almost any protest at all around parliament, the whole purpose of which is to get the attention of politicians. It can therefore cause “serious disruption” of an organisation.
It also applies to passers-by. If the noise of the protest could have “a relevant impact on persons in the vicinity of the procession”, the police can impose restrictions. The standard for this threshold is very low indeed: If the police believe that just one person nearby could be caused “serious unease, alarm or distress”, they can impose restrictions.

So chanting your protest slogan could get you in trouble Shock

From www.politics.co.uk/comment/2021/03/11/silencing-black-lives-matter-priti-patels-anti-protest-law/?cmpredirect

OP posts:
Original poster
flashbac · 14/03/2021 08:36

With the risk of sounding like I'm going on a rant or that I'm a tin foil hatter, also don't forget the existence of 'Spycops' law, which will allow public bodies, ranging from the police, MI5 to the Food Standards Agency, to authorise agents to commit crimes while undercover. This could mean a protest - if you can manage the impossible feat of holding one that doesn't risk causing any noise or annoyance - is purposely undermined by someone working undercover.

OP posts:
YoniAndGuy · 14/03/2021 08:50

They’re seriously getting to the point where there will be another Poll Tax situation - full on rage and non-compliance. Don’t push people too far. Especially not after the year we’ve had. Although... I kind of hope they do, and the Tories end up as tainted, despised and scorned as they did in the 90s.

Felifox · 14/03/2021 09:04

@YoniAndGuy This made me smile, the theory that all adults contributed was brilliant. They hadn't thought through the practicalities of setting up individual accounts, costs of collecting it and the no of people who fell off the radar.

Mooda · 14/03/2021 09:10

I cannot believe Labour are planning to abstain on this. Keir Starmer is turning out to be a terrible disappointment.

peak2021 · 14/03/2021 09:20

Labour abstain on almost everything nowadays, the non-opposition. They could have said it is for the courts to decide upon application by the police or a local authority, for example, and put forward an amendment.

Original poster
flashbac · 14/03/2021 10:29

As we can see from the police antics at the vigil, we can't trust them.
This forthcoming legislation means we have no way of making our voices heard. Can't criticise Hong Kong or China then...

OP posts:
MildredPuppy · 14/03/2021 10:31

Its a very frightening proposal.

Devlesko · 14/03/2021 10:32

Take a look at the back door laws she's put through during covid. This is nothing in comparison.

dreamingbohemian · 14/03/2021 10:34

It's both frightening and enraging

If Labour merely abstain then what is the point of them

Whatsnewpussyhat · 14/03/2021 10:35

It also stops women being able to protest about their legal protections being removed.

10 years for being at a protest that causes serious annoyance is a fucking joke. A man can murder his wife and only get 5 years.

peak2021 · 14/03/2021 10:39

Please do not hold Priti Patel solely responsible. I would suggest that given Boris Johnson's attempts to dodge scrutiny and wish for anyone other than government to get the blame, it has the hands of him or his advisors all over it.

Chanjer · 14/03/2021 10:42

We're already at that point anyway. We got to that point when we had to ask the police if we could have a protest and we allowed exclusion zones in public areas where protest was illegal

The laws that came in Jan 2020 are a serious discouragement to organising anything that could potentially later be classed as a riot. Given that AP agitators are a known police tactic then any protest could be flipped up into a riot and the organisers given up to 10 years.

Chanjer · 14/03/2021 10:44

Please do not hold Priti Patel solely responsible

Every member of the cabinet at the moment holds those positions because they do as they're told. We don't have ministers for this or that, or a chancellor, they just do what they're told by a spad

Whatsnewpussyhat · 14/03/2021 10:52

If the police believe that just one person nearby could be caused “serious unease, alarm or distress”, they can impose restrictions

Absolute joke.

Donotfeedthebears · 14/03/2021 10:55

This terrifies me. We are truly sleepwalking to a police state. I expect the next elections will be cancelled “for your safety.”

ChloeCrocodile · 14/03/2021 10:55

they just do what they're told by a spad

“Just following orders” is not a reasonable defence. They are responsible for their own actions and should be held accountable. Not instead of Johnson, but as well as him.

Lonelycrab · 14/03/2021 10:59

Appalling that KS is sitting on the fence with this. Sad

aliensprig · 14/03/2021 11:03

@Donotfeedthebears

This terrifies me. We are truly sleepwalking to a police state. I expect the next elections will be cancelled “for your safety.”
My thoughts also. The future looks bleak. I want to believe that there would be mass uproar at this but then realise that most people would probably fall in line of their own volition (if the comments on DM articles are anything to go by, shudder).
Lasttraintolondon · 14/03/2021 11:15

I've found that almost no one I know had heard this bill was coming, and most people seem totally unaware of the damage this will do to our democracy. I suspect the way the met handled the Clapham Common protests last night will mean this bill finally gets the scrutiny it deserves....

Lasttraintolondon · 14/03/2021 11:17

Oh and if labour abstain on one more bloody thing! Honestly, what is the point in having an opposition party that doesn't provide any opposition?

QueenBodicea · 14/03/2021 11:40

I've just heard on radio that Labour is going to vote against the Bill.

Donotfeedthebears · 14/03/2021 12:02

Most Mumsnetters are more worried about reporting neighbours for having a family member or friend visit their house than having civil liberties like the right to protest being eroded.

dreamingbohemian · 14/03/2021 12:07

@Donotfeedthebears

Most Mumsnetters are more worried about reporting neighbours for having a family member or friend visit their house than having civil liberties like the right to protest being eroded.
Sadly I think you're right

David Lammy now saying Labour will vote against thank god

Neron · 14/03/2021 12:15

Most Mumsnetters are more worried about reporting neighbours for having a family member or friend visit their house than having civil liberties like the right to protest being eroded
Quite. Most on here want freedom and civil liberties taken away from those who want body autonomy, so this shouldn't be too concerning for them.