A petition against plans to restrict protests has been signed by more than 600,000 people, the organisers said today.
A coalition of groups, including Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, 38 Degrees, 350.org and Liberty, presented the petition to the UK parliament as the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill began its Report stage this afternoon.
Under the proposals, people could be jailed for up to 10 years for causing “serious annoyance or inconvenience” by taking part in protests.
Police could impose legally-binding restrictions on marches or rallies on the grounds that noise “may result in serious disruption to the activities of an organisation” or may “have a relevant impact on persons in the vicinity of the protest”.
Anyone breaching conditions imposed by police could be arrested and prosecuted, even if they did not know they were in place. Current legislation says it an offence “knowingly” to fail to comply. But the bill makes it possible for someone to be charged with breaking a restriction which they “knew or ought to have known about”.
There are new controls on protests by a single person and powers to prevent authorised encampments.
Since the bill was published in March, more than 30,000 people have written to the Prime Minister to object.
In a letter to the Homes and Justice Secretaries, 245 organisations described the bill as an “attack” on fundamental rights.
More than 700 of the UK’s leading legal academics have called for the protest sections of the bill to be abandoned.
Opposition MPs have been calling for changes to clauses 55-61 this afternoon. A new clause proposes a code requiring police to facilitate peaceful protest.
The Home Office minister, Victoria Atkins, said the protest sections of the bill had been drawn up based on guidance from the police. Yesterday, senior police officers reportedly said they had not asked for new powers to restrict noisy protests.
In a vote on Monday evening, MPs approved the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill by 365 votes to 265. None of the dozens of amendments that had been proposed were approved. The bill now moves to the House of Lords where there will be further scrutiny and debate.
- A separate parliamentary petition against the bill has attracted 253,041 signatures and closes on 16 September 2021. The government has already responded saying: “The public order measures in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill do not erode the public’s right to protest; the Government will not be removing these measures from the Bill.”
Updated 6/7/2021 with paragraphs on the parliamentary petition and the vote to approve the bill
DRILL OR DROP? 
And 53,400,000 didn’t sign the petition……..
Perhaps the reason why is the entities behind it – Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, 38 Degrees, 350.org and Liberty?
Looks like it was voted through the report stage without any amendments last night? Update required please.
https://votes.parliament.uk/
For those who are either uninformed or unaware of the dangers of this draconian bill to suppress your legal right of protest, which is inalienable and enshrined in the Law of the Land, Natural Law, Common Law and the Human Rights Act, not to mention the Geneva Convention, The Helsinki Agreement and the Nuremberg Code.
There are declarations that must be placed before all to see before any such draconian repressive suppression of your god given freedoms to free speech, freedom of action, freedom of protest against wrong-full and illegal suppression of those inalienable rights which no subsequent act can overturn, modify, or reduce in any way whatsoever.
All official employees such as the military Armed Forces, the Police and all government employees are legally urged to disobey all or any illegal or treasonous Act, be that from a high jacked undeclared Parliamentary coup, or any extremist political or excessively destructive internal elements, hidden and secret societies, establishment domestic terrorists, and political or armed forces intent on taking over of the legal and political systems, of undeclared anti democratic militaristic fifth columnist elements from other non democratic, in order to transform a previously free and open government and society into a totalitarian repressive dictatorship regime.
Censorship of any view that seeks to open up debate about any subject that this growing totalitarian repressive dictatorship attempts to hide behind absolute imposed silence of the media under its control and the crushing of democratic debate. That is patently obvious to anyone who takes the trouble to look for themselves at events in the last few years. look at what our country stood for before these events, and what is being done now to destroy those freedoms.
For those however who seek to support and cry from their isolated imposed lock down prisons, that 600,000 people are a minority, it is important to point out that like in any take over and coup of a legitimate government into a totalitarian freedom crushing dictatorship without one single vote from the population to so much as spoken, let alone allowed to vote on matters that are intended to crush any legitimate protest for generations to come. The take over and political coup is always done in secret and hidden in other events as a justification for the intended repression. Just as we see with the pandemic front, under which all our freedoms are supposedly temporarily take away, for our own protection we are told. However, this bill proposes not just permanent removal of all and any protest at the discretion of the Police without even referring to a higher authority. That completly unprecedented power paves the way for far more repressive and draconian restrictions to be passed without any consultation or approval whatsoever.
If those who are reticent cant see that, or dont want to address that, because it upsets other apple carts, or seek to surpress and censor that because a tiny minority actually want that dictatorial suppression of freedom for your own political and totalitarian purposes. Then that places them precisely where such totalitarian desires come from. And that is not for the common good and will never be so.
The fact that there are those who always appear regularly to shout for suppression of your god given inalienable freedoms, their voices and actions are at the very least suspect, at worse are intended to usher in a dictatorial regime that will severely curtail any and all freedoms of speech, action, act and deed to the point where anything, and I mean anything, can and will be done to prevent any freedoms whatsoever from being so much as thought, let alone spoken and protested about.
If you want to see what happens to any society that allows the sort of repression that this bill proposes, then you only need to read Nineteen Eighty-Four, A Novel, often referred to as 1984, which is a dystopian social fiction novel by the English novelist George Orwell (the pen name of Eric Arthur Blair).
This bill is one of those disguised steps to that distopian future under the fake banner of “you may have freedom yesterday, and tomorrow, but you cant have freedom today”. The 600,000 who signed the petition are indicative of the growing awareness of hundreds if not thousands times those that signed this particular petition. So as in all petitions, the actual figure that think the same, may well be tens if not hundreds more, should they have been allowed to be aware of these proposals in detail and have been only too distracted by the pandemic fear mongering to have looked closely at this bill. So perhaps closer to 6,000,000.
The argument that only 600,000 have said they object is the sort of typical misrepresentation of the facts that the originators of such comments are only too prolific at saying. As if the ones who stand to protest are the only ones who think as they do. That is both disingenuous and inaccurate. That also ignores all the MP’s that have spoken out against this bill, and all the organisations, pressure groups and people who have spoken out and been censored on the internet, social media and the fact that at least 500,000, and as may as 1 million people have marched in London and elsewhere and barely received a mention on the BBC, or other mainstream media. The figures were batantly artificially reduced down to “tens of tousands” or merely “thousands” to appease their masters in an attempt to minimise and sideline all those people marching and protesting peacefully and with great common will to end this draconian bill and the follow on of covid passports.
The most telling and obvious return to that disinformation, is to ask how many do we see that actually agree with this bill? Judging from what has been said on DoD, only a hand full, in fact barely a hand full at that. The 600,000 if not the 6,000,000 have it.
It may well be said with equal likelyhood, if not certainty, that a tiny minority who evidentially present particular repressive views regarding inalienable freedoms of a people and country on any blog such as DoD. And those views appear to profess and encourage anti democratic desires and actions. And who, from past experience, regularly express disinformation which seeks to surpress and destroy democracy in any country. It may be equally said, that those elements who are clearly defined in present political and domestic extremist circles, by implication and association. Will NOT all be from England. To which i would extend to the entire United Kingdom, since the implied restriction to England alone is not the present political case and hasnt been for centuries. Some of those may even be from or be financially or ideologically influenced by association with non democratic and anti democratic and repressive totalitarian regimes. or perhaps allegence to now defunct extremist polital factions that appear to be on the rise again. These may be from many of those locations and ideological infatuations or even as is suggested from Disney Land themselves, or it may be said, from any other fantasy fiction promoting location with a dodgy history.
It can be said that in order to assess those who express views that appear by word and deed to be detrimental to the security of peace of a nations freedoms and of a democratic people, and of an earstwhile democratic political system. It can be suggested that in order to attempt a political and ideological coup in that country. The evidence should stand out like a sore thumb. One need only judge them as equally by their words as their actions. Those implications, intended to distort and divide their percieved opposition and protest. By analysis of past and present evidence, being weighed carefully and calmly, and found to be wanting in honesty and ideologicall destructive of democratic peace and security. By evidence of expressing totalitarian and repressive views. That being a clear indication of both likely origin and likely detrimental purpose to any country which finds itself being internally disfigured. That evidence may well become obvious and as plain as daylight to those willing to look.
The question for anyone reading this may ask, is, do you see any evidence of expressed views like that here?
More from the BBC here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57680917
Still a way to go before the bill becomes law.
I don’t think the number of those who did not sign is of great importance, Paul. As you will know there are any number of possible explanations for this.
In any case, do remember that the army officers executed for conspiring against Hitler were few in number set against the potential numbers of officers, let alone the population of the German Empire at the time. The same is true of the White Rose student movement, equally unsuccessful. I suspect you agree that their motives were laudable.
You will know that good (or of course bad) movements often originate with the discovery or ideas of an individual or small group and that this fact cannot be used as evidence of the moral quality of a position, idea, movement, discovery. I do however think that to recruit such a number in opposition to a policy when the majority are in all probability not exposed to the opportunity to protest is quite an achievement: hence presumably the coverage on DorD, that and of course the threat to democratic principles.
So posts the person who posted that he /she “attended the second vote Brexit demonstrations at Westminster and elsewhere last year travelling “significant distances”. This legislation would make me a criminal because I believed HMG had engineered the result by lying and I was anxious to test the result etc. etc.” (11/3/21)
The “criminal” aspect? Not knowing that NO member of HMG campaigned for Brexit. Anyone who campaigned for Brexit was not campaigning on behalf of HMG! That was widely advertised at the time.
The ideas of individuals or small groups or even masses are not an excuse to cause vast infringements to the majority, when those “ideas” are just fantasy.
Democratic principles. Yes, indeed. I believe plonking something into a manifesto and then letting the voters democratically decide whether they support is pretty sound. Most of them would actually bother to check what they were supporting, and then demonstrate accordingly with a cross.
Not sure about the numbers, with UN stating/estimating the UK population is 68,207,116 on July 1st.
Either way, looks like less than 1%.
Most interesting bit I noticed in last nights debate was Labour explaining why they voted one way when in power regarding minimum sentences and now advocating the opposite-“That was then, this is now”! Conviction politicians? Nope. Opportunists. No one will notice? Yes, they have.
Martin – population of England is 54,000,000. Not sure this new legislation applies to whole of the UK? I expect Ruth / Paul will update the article.
Maybe Paul, but the 600k will NOT all be from England. Some may even be from Disney World!
And, there were certainly non England MPs taking part in the debate.
As for David, well, I would just gently suggest that the vast majority of the public are quite happy with protest, until it is deliberately aimed to impinge upon their rights and freedoms. And, a lot of protests have become just that-attempts to disrupt the lives of others to obtain publicity. (If buses are stopped, who is on the bus? A surgeon on his/her way to the operating theatre?) The media seem to find it “entertaining” doing interviews with individuals whilst a crowd tries to shout them down, when it would be easy to have the interview where the viewers could understand the substance of the questions and answers, but I am not entertained by that and find few who are.
And, of course, no one knows that many who sign petitions are not even doing so with any serious, rational thought?! Remember BoatyMcBF?? Or certain organisations that deliberately try and get petitions signed outside of a coffee shop, as they know many will sign quickly, without thought, to get to their caffeine fix? (Same method used for collections, too.)
Of course, the proposal could always be part of a political party’s proposal at a GE and it could be seen if there was support. Oh yes, it was, and the resulting majority in the Commons will now put the proposal into law. Then, at the next GE it can be seen who may be brave enough to suggest they would reverse. Good luck with that.
Hi Martin, up to a point you are correct that “no one knows that many who sign petitions are not even doing so with any serious, rational thought?!”
But you are quite wrong regarding the quarter of a million people who signed on the ongoing petition direct to the UK Parliament who filled in their name, postcode etc as demanded.
Robin Grayson MSc FGS
Liberal Democrats
This bill was brought in because the great reset that is coming is going to cause mayhem
Hi Robin,
Ahh, back to the Lib Dem tag after a win!
Enjoy it while it lasts. (Maybe this one will spend a little more time in the chamber than the others?) If you would like to add reversing this section of the law to reversing Brexit at the next election campaign, then as an advisor, you can advise that. However, what David clearly forgets when he mentions 1984-or believes others may have forgotten-was the attempt to stop the presses rolling. [Edited by moderator] Perhaps he was attempting irony, or maybe because “it can be said” then it has to be said, even if it makes no sense?
How do you know they made a serious and rational thought, Robin? That is a number of people to interview individually and determine that, which you have not, so it is speculation. Did the Boaty “rational thinkers” not do the same?
I still liked the “that is then, this is now” line. Bit like Student Fees really. Good job many have good memories.
(Brent Crude now closer to $80 than $70, by the way, so perhaps speculation has limits.)
It has also to be said that those who coveniently ignore what I said, and can only misrepresent and misdirect what I did say. Are trapped in their own false and easily exposed narrative. Misrepresentation only exposes themselves to their own words.
Clearly it can be easily demonstrated that merely resorting to misinformation indicates an unfortunate lack of appreciation how their own words so obviously indicate they have not made any serious and rational thought in their own words and actions.
It also indicates ignorance of the very clear warnings of George Orwells in his novel Nineteen Eighty Four. Ignorance of those warnings can and will only result in ushering in the very political repression in the United Kingdom that will, beyond a doubt, lead to the further destuction of democracy freedoms and human rights in the United Kingdom.
Again I would say that any such move to further institute a repressive totalitarian state by destroying any free speech and rights of protest and action, all of which are treason in a democracy, only serves to indicate just where these actions are intended to take this formerly democratic nation.
As to what external, or internal sources are seeking to destroy freedom, democracy and Human Rights in the United Kingdom by these totalitarian actions, are clearly seen, as i said, by their own words and their own actions.
[Edited by moderator]
To have those same opinions expressed on DoD, just apparently to suppress legal peaceful protest to object to oil and gas operations in order to prevent further climate destruction. Which simultaneously contravenes the governments own climate change policies to prevent further damage. Is insane at best coming up to COP26, criminally negligent in the face of international agreements at worst.
The very recent marches and protests by at least 500,000, if not more than 1,000,000 people in London and other locations protesting against this draconian Police bill cannot be ignored. In spite of attempts to minimise the numbers involved. A clear failure to appreciate the mathematics, if not a failure in counting skills not to exclude the science and physics which present themselves in unprecedented ecological extinctions and deaths from fossil fuel pollution which protests have brought to clear and present clarity.
Those hundreds of thousands up to 1,000,000 or more of ordinary people who participated in those marches in London knew and know precisely why they were protesting and peacefully marching for all to see. Except all the mainstream media who did their best to ignore it. What does that tell you?
I cannot say the same precise knowledge and purpose for the tiny minority of repressive totalitarianists that cannot even speak about the facts without misrepresenting the results of their own thoughts and actions, and can only resort to distorting what was clearly said in all honesty.
And so it is, and so it will always be.
ER and others, through their disruptive actions, have brought this legislation to, and probably through Parliament, into Law. You can waffle on all you want David but if recent protests had not caused significant disruption to law abiding people trying to get to work / do their jobs there would be no need for this part of the Bill. Own goal comes to mind? 1984? It is now 2021. You should try protesting in Belgium or France.
[Image removed due to copyright concerns]
Drill or Drop posted the article, some of us commented on it, we disagree. No need for another 600 word response….
approved.
That is completely wrong and more than a bit funny Paul. No waffle. Though I appreciate the compliment. I only state the truth in sufficient detail considering the importance of this Policing Act. You should try it sometime. Maybe posting comments about number of words is inadequate for the subject of the government working to make the Police act that will make protest a criminal offence.
But of course, word counting is your problem, not mine. I will write what is necessary to address the issue, so long as it is within the rules of DoD. Oddly you don’t have any say or control over that at all? Perhaps that is what upsets so much? A bit of an odd attitude, I must say.
Would it not be better to discuss the facts of the peaceful protests and the number of peaceful protesters in detail without resorting to irrelevant side tracking comments about the number of words required to say it? But subjectivity, not objectivity seems to be preferable to those without sufficient words for the job.
That is a great shame. But everyone to their own practices I guess.
The photo you post there is you say Police in Belgium attacking people. It shows the Police are the ones who hold up lawful traffic and prevent people going about their own private business. I see no movement from people other than to avoid the violence of the Police in Belgium. Apparently, some seem to like the imagery of violent police attacking people. Like I said earlier there are those who actually enjoy the prospect of violence and the plunge into a police state and would like to create that in Great Britain by draconian anti democratic treasonous acts. Very Priti Patel-ish.
In Great Britain too, it was the Police, not the people who stopped traffic and stopped people going to work. The Police closed down entire areas and then sought to blame the protesters for the action which the Police themselves took. That action is what held up the traffic and ambulances and stopped people moving. A favourite little wheeze of the Police.
You are also wrong about protest causing the police to react with violence. In every case that has been truly reported, not the mainstream owned media, but genuine independent reporters who filmed the protests. It was the protesters who were provoked and attacked by the Police who acted in a very aggressive manner. There are plenty of videos of that very recently.
The protesters often noted that, as with the recent peaceful marches of between 500,000 to 1,000,000 peaceful families and friends in London. That at Downing Street, where the only incident happened. It was masked and heavily disguised individuals amongst all those families and peaceful marchers without masks, who threw cans at the Police and initiated the violent reaction and arrests. Violence that the protests were blamed for. When it was nothing to do with the vast majority of family peaceful marchers. Those masked individuals were the ones who sought out and targeted peaceful protesters, often specifically young women, another Police wheeze, who forcefully arrested them. The Police infiltrators were then surrounded and protected by a ring of Police who isolated and violently forced people to the ground.
That is what is called “Undercover Police” and there are many infiltrators into groups like Extinction Rebellion and many other groups who have been exposed for doing just that. There were court cases not too long ago where that was admitted publicly. They are policemen who infiltrate perfectly peaceful demonstrations, and deliberately create violence by themselves. That gives the police the excuse to wade in mob handed on peaceful protesters, and crow to the owned media about it just as you see on the photograph you provided.
It is that activity of the Police and actions autorised by Cressida Dick and Priti Patel which is at the heart of the so caled violence in protest demonstrations and it is that, which is the excuse for this latest draconian Policing Act, not peaceful protesters.
But of course you know that. Too many words for some? Not enough for the entire population of Great Britain by all accounts.
[Edited by moderator]
Some would prefer what is used, or as much as possible, is close by where it can be seen to operate to much higher standards and is not hauled half way round the world when it will cause damage to the environment that could easily be avoided. If some want to protest against that and claim it is all to do with helping the environment, then you would not agree from previous comments, and I certainly would not and neither would Greta, from previous comments. So, no, I am not too keen to accept that protest is valid if it impinges upon my freedoms when the reasons given for the protest are nonsense.
“Legal peaceful protest” will NOT be prevented. That is the content of that part of the Bill. All it does is update legislation to deal with the updated means of protest. The current situation where some significant number of protestors feel they can ignore others rights of freedom and that the police should act to protect them from a direct response to that, but can not act to stop them doing it in the first place, will not sustain.
And so it is, and so it will always be. If there was no need to update legislation then Westminster could have closed some long while ago.
In all honesty, it is still, at most, 1% of the population. And, they could always put a proposition to the wider public in a few years-or shorter if the Greens are to be believed- to reverse such legislation, and test that out. Maybe the numbers would swing the result? Don’t think so.
Speaking of numbers, although number counting is the weakest of unsubstantiated arguments and provides no evidence to prove the claim that hundreds of thousands, if not millions more totally oppose this Policing Act. Unless the proposer is acting as a fictional “Mystic Meg” of course, as is so often trotted out in a weak excuse for a comment.
It would be more apt to count the tiny percentage of internal, or externally generated anti democratic ideologically compromised totalitarian supporters of the Policing Act as it stands at present. However as these types tend to hide from public view, and would rather blog at a distance rather than organising their own march in support of the bill. Their odd little numbers game fails at the first hurdle, since they provide no counter march or protest against democracy by which to monitor their tiny minority. Empty streets patrolled by bored Police.
If the evident lack of overt support for an anti democratic rally is anything to go by, the figures representing their ideologically anti democratic are by default many times less than 0.001% and maybe even statistically 0%. But as usual in a political coup, it only requires a few in the government that are either ideologically confused, externally influenced and bribed, or are being blackmailed or brainwashed to vote against any and all democratic principles.
Using some of the much vaunted but never actually provided mathematics that are regularly and falsely trotted out on this blog. Two anti democratic protagonists amongst all the rest of us in this country who actively democratically vote and actively support democracy in Great Britain the mathematics become quite clear.
Incidentally, there is a substantiated “we” for you – similar to “We The People”, a classic state of “we”, and recently “Where We Go one We Go All” for those Republicans who reside in the USA and who have similar problems with anti republican infiltrators and externally generated ideologically compromised domestic terrorists) In Great Britain of course there is the “Royal We” as used in speeches by the Queen of England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales. (not just England) So hang ups about decrying use of the word “we” are essentially anti republican, anti USA Bill Of Rights, and anti Monarchy. So “we” begin to see how fundamentally anti freedom the obsession with the word “we” really is.
Having alienated all those “we’s” across the world, the prospect of any support for silly word blindness and word counting fades dismally into obscurity.
All of the rest of us who wish to preserve hard fought for and hard won freedoms against all the present internally or externally generated attacks by those who wish to plunge this country into a CCP like totalitarian state are by far in the very voluble majority.
The eponymous “silent majority” having been herded into the sacrificial sheep pen leading to the totalitarian Abattoir.
Or perhaps “the silent majority” believe in the democratic process, have no need to “march and protest” (better things to do perhaps?), obey the Law and allow our elected Parliament to do what they are elected to do – govern the Country including introducing, debating and making Laws to Govern with. And then enforcing them. Your main problem David is that you do not have the Government you want; you (and I) have the Government the Country elected. Try again 2nd May 2024? The discussion contributors on this post look fairly even, for and against?
“Two anti democratic protagonists amongst all the rest of us in this country who actively democratically vote and actively support democracy in Great Britain the mathematics become quite clear.” You lost me here – if we don’t vote how did we end up with a Government you presumably didn’t vote for?
Precisely Paul, if you say you “believe in the democratic process, have no need to “march and protest” (better things to do perhaps?), obey the Law and allow our elected Parliament to do what they are elected to do – govern the Country including introducing, debating and making Laws to Govern with. And then enforcing them.”
Then why are you seeking to support the changing the Law regarding protest? Isn’t that hypocrisy?
Incidentally “having better things to do” whilst your and my country descends into totalitarianism is a contradiction in terms, as you may experience in the only too near future if this bill goes ahead unmodified.
You clearly do not have the Government you want at all since you are supporting the overturning of existing Police regulations with the unnecessary Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021 that seeks to introduce more rights to the Police than you have yourself. The present state of the Police is that they are loyal to the Queen, the people and to preserve the present Law. Not to the government unless the Queen approves and ratifies it in Parliament. No such ratification has been made. That makes this bill essentially unenforceable. And that is the way I wish it to remain. Not modified or entirely overturned as you want it.
No, the truth is the reverse of what you say Paul. I am satisfied with the Law the way is, and I would seek, if anything, to enforce the Human Rights Act against further degradation. The Law is fine the way it is, or was before this Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021 was created out of nothing and no reason. I wish to see the present Law regarding Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts maintained as it is.
Further attempts at modification giving draconian rights to the Police Commissioner to (and I quote) Replace and Modify Common Rights and replace them with new statutes. Which is the first attempt at entirely dispensing with Common Law as it exists now, and the intent is to further degenerate Common Law, and the Law Of The Land once this bill has been enacted.
So you see how wrong you are. it is you who seek to overturn the present Law, and it is myself and maybe millions of others who wish to preserve the Law exactly as it is.
Now you may withdraw you misdirected comment and redirect it back to yourself in this matter can’t you.
It is a fake narrative, Paul, that you refer to in your last para.
Democracy is achieved by the majority who vote ending up with the Government they voted for. I believe you have stated that, so have I. (There will be comments about the UK voting system which will ignore that has also been put to the voters and they seem, still, to prefer what there is.)
I have lived through many a Government that I did not vote for but did not resort to blaming that on some sort of anti democratic process. To try and claim that currently, when the margin of “victory” was the largest for many years, is an attempt to rewrite history where the ink is hardly even dry. And, same approach adopted by others. I know it is very fashionable to try and rewrite history but it may be better to concentrate on it from a little further back where people’s memories are out of the equation. But, that is also Starmer’s problem to deal with, and he has run from it, so, he is disliked for it and for doing that, and that will not change. Too late now. He could buy a ferret, and some racing pigeons, swap Arsenal for Portsmouth, and it would still not change. So, I suspect David will have to put up with something he doesn’t like for some time yet.
To put the fake narrative in context, I have voted at every election I have been eligible to vote in. One of my sons had never voted until he approached 40, as he believed manifestos would not be followed, so no point. However, he did vote for Brexit, and when the result was announced, I recall him speaking with his Grandad about how this result would be followed “because that is democracy”!! He was shocked to hear that was not going to be the case, due to the “establishment” and that is what followed. On top of that, he now has to endure others nonsense about it was NOT democratic and they need to march to demonstrate that, because it was the “establishment” that was to blame, simply because it would not be acceptable to say the voters were to blame. Some have tried that, and found that was soon stamped upon.
There are plenty of things to demonstrate about which may have some merit, if done with consideration of others freedoms being impacted, but far too many being adopted where the merits have to be accompanied by a fake narrative. Opinions can always differ, but a fake narrative is not an opinion, it is just a fake narrative.
Can’t see that changing, so it will be controlled. Those who want to remove such controls can offer that to the voters next time, but I suspect they will have done the same type of research as will be behind this Bill and will be aware of public opinion, rather than rely upon petitions.
Did Boaty happen? No.
[Edited by moderator]
The object of this discussion, such as it has become, is to establish why those who claim to be democratic and to support democracy and free speech and peaceful protest, are so all fired up to strangle those very age old and respected institutions and to attempt to support the overturning of Common Law Rights, Free Speech, Freedom to Protest, Human Rights, and established Law which are inalienable, god given and cannot be modified by man, changed, overturned or superseded by subsequent statutes such as the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021 clearly states that is what it is intended to do. The thin end of the wedge, throwing the peaceful democratic baby out with the Common Law bathwater into the all consuming fire of bleak repressive and empty totalitarianism so to speak.
If these people say they are democratic and are happy with the Law as it stands, why are they so all fired up intent on destroying that very Legal Law Foundation of the Law in such a blatant manner? Does that make sense? No, of course not. It is however deeply hypocritical.
If that is not hypocrisy then these people clearly do not understand the meaning of the word democracy and the establishment of Law to protect the Queen and country and the Law of the Land.
Logic appears lost to those who drastically twist and turn on their own fake narrative in order to fabricate something which doesn’t exist in order to falsely label others who do respect the Law. However there are far more important issues at stake with this Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021 which render all that fake narrative inconsequential and little more than irrelevant to the issues involved.
If these people cannot see the consequences of their own fake narrative in their own words and actions, then what hope is there for them and the rest of us?
No, it is not hypocrisy at all. That again is a fake narrative, supported by a lot of words which do not make sense to many who are indeed capable of seeing the reality and when the numbers are finalised are not irrelevant or deluded. Voters being irrelevant is not democracy, that is anarchy.
The reality is that all political parties put forward to potential voters what they will support and what they wish to change. I have yet to find one, even the one who may be in power, to put forward no change. A great deal of money is spent making all of that public, and those who want to can acquaint themselves. It probably means more today than it ever has with far fewer being wedded to voting in one direction, but changing their vote according to who they feel will do what they want, locally as well as nationally.
Laws are continually changed to reflect current opinion. Very rarely will such change get everyone onside, otherwise the death penalty would not have been changed in UK, and just about any other Law would stay as first drafted.
Once this Bill becomes Law, then in a few years it can all be changed again. Will it be? I suspect not, and the excuse will be “that was then, this is now” and probably stated by the same individual(s). Of course, for those who do not like the new Law they can always behave in the interim in a manner that would suggest there was no need for the Law to have been changed and that may convince the voters to support some party who then makes that proposal. I suspect two will be even more unlikely than one, with some desperate to do the opposite and show to the relevant electorate that the change in Law was needed and might not have gone far enough. No, that is not defining me, it is just the way I suspect it will go.
[Edited by moderator]
Getting back to reality, considering the fundamental importance of the attempt at overturning Democratic Laws in favour of undemocratic and dangerous new rights for the Police which it is stated, attempt to overturn, replace and dispense with the Common Law rights of every person in the country.
Those can only be changed by a matter of lawful consultation and a lengthy examination of all the benefits and pitfalls in a fully functioning Parliament and go through all the legal and social commentaries and amendments from the House of Lords and then be re-examined in Parliament subsequent to that. Until everyone agrees that they are the best compromise that preserve all existing rights of everyone if not improve upon them, and can be achieved at present without fear or favour.
That can only be done in the full light of day with an open and fully functioning government with extensive publication for every person to see and digest whose rights are in jeopardy and every citizen who has an interest or argument for or against what is proposed.
But, what prevents that process from even being attempted, is free and open examination by all is prevented by the present pandemic of unprecedented lock downs and closure of courts, limited numbers in Parliament, electronic communications that are time limited, the people locked up and unable to participate in the discussion and make their case known and acted upon.
Not only that but this present pandemic has been declared a national emergency measures of the Covid Act that are are still in place. The effect of that has stopped any meaningful democratic process from being operated without the severe constraints that are only too obvious, if not preventing any lawful changes in their entirety.
Prime ministerial decree is not legal unless it is discussed without restrictions in Parliament and to the people and in the House of Lords.
It has been said on more than one occasion by MP’s that law changes that fundamentally change the rights of everyone in the country cannot be legally proposed or adjudicated while this pandemic continues. The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021 has been forcefully constructed in a time of emergency and cannot be released for consultation until this pandemic is over and done with and the functioning of Parliament and the House of Lords and the Courts of Law and the people released from restrictions and are returned to full functionality.
Therefore the very operation of this Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021 has been largely compromised away from everyone’s purview and should never have been pushed so hard and so fast under the restrictions under this present pandemic and cannot proceed as the implications of overturning existing Laws are so dangerous to democracy Rights under Common Law, Human Rights and the established long and hard fought for rights to protest which are now in so much danger of being overtuned by this government.
Democracy:
“A system of government by the whole population, or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.”
One sentence, not too many words. All in order in this situation.
If it requires thousands of words to redefine such a simple concept, then it doesn’t.
The Bill is passing through the normal democratic process. Voting is being conducted at each stage, for the Bill and Amendments. Remote voting is being facilitated. The results may not be liked by some, but that is life in a democracy.
When passing through immigration and asked the purpose of your visit, then “business”, “holiday”, “visiting relatives” are advisable examples of answers. A detour to War and Peace, or 1984, is not likely to fool too many and further examination is guaranteed.
No, still nothing there. Must be due to one of those imaginary Roman Croaking devices so raved about? AKA, a convenient Italian lamp post.