Brian Morrison speaking at a rally at Preston New Road, 29 September 2017. Photo: DrillOrDrop
A Lancashire businessman who had been threatened with arrest for sounding his car horn in support of anti-fracking protesters led a convoy of hooting motorists past Cuadrilla’s shale gas site this morning.
Twenty-eight other cars followed Brian Morrison, honking their horns continuously as they drove past the site at Little Plumpton near Blackpool.
None of the drivers were arrested, although but Mr Morrison said police followed him home and warned him not to organise another convoy.
But he vowed to make the protest a regular event and said he expected more drivers would take part next time.
Mr Morrison made front page news in Blackpool last week when he was told he would be arrested unless he promised to stop sounding his horn on his daily journeys past the fracking protests. He refused and made a formal complaint. Blackpool Gazette
This morning he told a rally outside the Preston New Road site:
“If you are driving towards a group of people you can beep your horn as a message of warning.”
Mr Morrison said he made his complaint against the police officer who threatened to arrest him because she gave colleagues outside the shale gas site a thumbs up and received a round of applause from them.
He urged opponents of fracking:
“Keep beeping your horn. Contact me. Let’s get this convoy regular and stop everything. I am not stopping.
“I am waiting to be arrested. Arrested for what? I am letting you officers know I am coming.”
Link to video by Maple Indie Media: https://www.facebook.com/SmartCard007/videos/1998992980333175/
Local survey: two-thirds opposed to fracking
Today’s rally included people from Northern Ireland, Manchester and Lancaster, along with members of Quakers, Friends of the Earth and local Labour groups.
Gail Hodson, a member of West Lancashire Borough Council, said fracking opponents were conducting an ongoing door-to-door survey of local people as part of a community campaign. In the first three weeks, the results were: 64% opposed to fracking, 24% unsure and 12% in support, she said.
Cllr Gail Hodson, Preston New Road, 29 September 2017. Photo: DrillOrDrop
Miranda Cox, a member of Kirkham Town Council and the community liaison group for Preston New Road, said the world was at a tipping point:
“The fact that we’re having to stand here and put our lives on hold to fight and to resist this industry tells me that there is still some hope, that people are waking up and people will resist and will do what they can for our planet.
“We need to act and we need to take people with us on that journey and wake them up. We need to consider where we’re going in our lifestyles, what life choices we are making and how we are going to encourage this government … and put pressure on any future government to look at policies regarding the use of fossil fuels. There really are sustainable alternatives out there.”
Nick Danby, Preston New Road, 29 September 2017. Photo: DrillOrDrop
Nick Danby, of Roseacre Awareness Group (RAG), said:
“I am absolutely convinced that we are going to win this battle. We have just got to be patient.”
He said opponents of fracking were awaiting the outcome of a legal challenge in the Court of Appeal to ministerial approval of planning permission for Preston New Road. They were also opposing the Ineos injunction against disruption caused by protests at sites across the country.
“We have to fight on all these fronts. But ultimately we will win.”
Barbara Richardson, of Frack Free Lancashire, said opponents of Cuadrilla’s operations had to maintain their presence outside the Preston New Road site:
“We have to be here and get out numbers up. Let’s show [Francis] Egan [Cuadrilla’s chief executive] we will be here as long as he is.”
This report was made possible by individual donations from DrillOrDrop readers
[Correction to show that the injunction to prevent disruption was sought by Ineos]
Categories: protest
DRILL OR DROP? 
It’s worrying to read comments by the antis on here. They always take issue with authority. Unfortunately if they had their way the country would turn to chaos overnight. These types of people would have benefitted from some national service to both toughen them up and teach them the value of authority.
[Edited by moderator]
I and most anti-frackers I know, have no issue with “authority” or “the establishment”, or however you wish to characterise government, when it is fulfilling its democratic function, or the police when they behave within their remit, and only a blinkered fool would suggest that being anti-fracking means you are pro chaos or anarchy.
I really don’t think that sub Daily Express level ranting (it’s a right wing English newspaper Peeny) is helping your cause, but I suppose it is sort of funny.
[Comments removed by moderator]
i worked as a teacher for nearly three decades. That is real national sevice.
Crikey teaching what? PE?
Oh dear, here we go again,
Perhaps “these types” only respect “authority” if it is well deserved and preserves all due rights, laws and freedoms? Authority has to be earned by respect for common law and social justice and upholding those rights and laws in every case. It Is the people of that country that give that privilege with a massive proviso, it cannot be taken by force, self styled authority that is taken by force is not authority at all, that is invalid in every way, it is slavery and subservience and illegal and unlawful.
Perhaps national service to which is referred so readily, would teach those who are forced to submit unquestioningly to authority, that authority is of no value whatsoever without the accompanying respect and knowledge of the individual and the entire community.
Only an fool follows orders without considering the legal, constitutional and social consequences of the resulting actions.
In fact the right to disobey an unlawful order which contravenes the legal and moral and ethical tenets of the society is enshrined in International Law and the Declaration Of human Rights, following the post nazi regime officers proffered legal excuse that they were “only following orders” in the Nuremberg trials and suffered the consequences.
https://www.thebalance.com/military-orders-3332819
http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
“An order to perform a dangerous mission is lawful because it’s not an order to commit a crime. Under current law, and the Manual for Courts-Martial, “An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate. This inference does not apply to a patently illegal order, such as one that directs the commission of a crime.”
It is always interesting to see attempts by various governments to cease to comply to Declaration Of human Rights, but in effect they apply internationally whether your local government ratifies them or not.
In a fascinating coincidence in timing on BBC Radio 4 Extra there is a program on the Milgram program to get ordinary people to torture people, actors really by electric shock if ordered to do so.
The baseline study is always used as an example of mans inhumanity.
However looking at the total range of experiments, the more the subject interacts with the apparent victim have to face, the more they rebel and refuse to participate to authority.
So in fact the Milgram experiment actually proves the opposit to the popular base line run experiment.
In actual fact people outright ordered to harm anther person refuses point blank to obey a direct order.
Hope for us yet!
I imagine the BBC Radio 4 Extra program will be on listen again if you want to hear it.
Weird coincidence in timing don’t you think”
Lancashire and Yorkshire are not alone in their opposition. The groundswell continues around the world: http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/305198-california-county-votes-to-ban-fracking (California), and https://www.facebook.com/thebentleyeffectmovie/ (Australia)
In California, Oil and Gas are fighting back.
https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/03/07/chevron-aera-energy-sue-block-monterey-county-california-voter-approved-ban-fracking (March 2017)
http://www.protectmontereycounty.org/
http://www.montereyherald.com/article/NF/20170814/NEWS/170819924 (August 2017)
The last report lays out part of the Oil and Gas case to have the ban struck down in court.
Will the Scottish government face similar legal arguments if it attempts a moratorium on fracking in Scotland?
There seems to be some double standards when dozens of vehicles, using fossil fuels are being used at PNR to protest, what? Oh yes, the test drilling for fossil fuels!! And at KM we have a token tractor, fuelled by red diesel, subsidised by the general tax payer being used to protest, what? Oh yes, the test drilling for fossil fuels. And down in Sussex we have a problem with a caravan fire in a layby, that was dragged to that layby by a vehicle burning fossil fuel to protest against the drilling for what? Oh yes, fossil fuels! And we have directions for protestors (“from as far away as Cornwall”) at PNR to park their vehicles at B&Q whilst they join the protest, to protest against fossil fuels!
No wonder the Ineos injunction documents and videos are so extensive. The “H” section alone must run to encyclopedic proportions.
That old chestnut, how quaint? It is interesting to note, however, that no combustion engines run on fracked gas, nor in fact crude oil?
The writer is always careful to say “fossil fuels” not gas or oil, that is avoidance, since UK ohandgee exploration is unlikely, if not ever, be used for the production “cracking” of the extract to produce “petrolium” a product name, “gasoline” the USA term, or the limited use of LPG.
So the argument that we must not object to the dangerous processes of oil and gas extraction because it powers our cars, is simply not the case. It is not true.
Fracked gas is not suitable for heating or cooking gas in it’s extracted state, it has low calorific value and it contains many toxic elements. Fracking gas requires to be processed in an expensive way, both in energy and disposal of toxins, it also requires additional calorific enhancers, I am sure the industry has a nice comfortable term for that.
So, where does that get us?
UK extracted oil will not give us cheap petroleum, and Fracked gas needs processing and does not provide fuel for vehicles.
So two more illusions can be dispensed with.
Injunctions?
That is another story.
Types of oil and their uses
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/A-Detailed-Guide-On-The-Many-Different-Types-Of-Crude-Oil.html
Processes required to turn extracted unrefined natural gas into heating and cooking gas
http://naturalgas.org/naturalgas/processing-ng/
Simple version of the Refining processes to turn crude oil into various products
http://www.planete-energies.com/en/medias/close/why-crude-oil-needs-be-refined
The point of all this?
Is that protesting against fracking and democracy deteriorating ohandgee activities is not in the slightest bit invalidated by driving a car to get there, taking the bus or the train, or flying on an aeroplane to get there, though a Monarch or a Ryan Air flight may cause that to be prohibitive?
Use your car, take the bus, take the train, take a flight, none of that has the slightest relevance to the gross profiteering motive behind the onshore ohandgee industry in the UK and never will.
Have a good day.
Thanks Paul,
Sorry, i just found out what happened in Las Vegas, so i will stop posting.
Ahh the good ‘ol ‘biting’ technique as favoured by a certain type of person…. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-41469684
A few 3 point penalties would sort out a few businessmen. It’s not rocket science.