Article
Eyewitness: controversy, criticism and challenges for the Met
Chris Hobbs witnesses some chaotic policing at the Farmer's protest on budget day.
I was aware of the Farmer’s protest due to take place in Westminster but based on their previous, good natured gatherings where relations with police were amicable, I opted to remain at home. These protests are in relation to the government’s proposal to impose an inheritance tax on farms and farming land.
I also knew that there was a protest in support of Palestine Action at the Royal Courts of Justice, where a hearing in respect of the legality of the group’s proscription as a terrorist group was taking place. I anticipated that this was simply a gathering to exert a degree of pressure upon those due to make that decision. Just the day before, pro-Palestine Action activists staged an ‘arrest me’ protest outside the Home Office. Police duly obliged.
My ‘threat’ assessment concerning both Wednesday events proved to be hopelessly wide of the mark and the first indication of that fact came when I stumbled upon an ‘X’ post which showed a farmer being arrested. This prompted a storm of criticism directed at the Met. Accordingly, I headed for central London.
Tractors banned
It transpired that shortly before 5.30PM on the eve of the farmer’s event, the Met issued an edict saying that they were imposing a condition which banned tractors from being involved in the protest:
Tractors had been very visible during two previous protests much to the delight of tourists; hundreds of photographs were taken yet the traffic kept flowing. Indeed, the disruption was much less than is seen during major pro-Palestine and Unite the Kingdom protests.
It was clear that officers policing the event were less than impressed with the short notice given to the farmers which meant that many arrived in London with tractors completely unaware of the recently imposed restrictive conditions. Apparently, the Met had planned the policing of this protest over a period of three months with full consultation having taken place with the farmers’ representatives. There had been no restrictions placed on tractors.
Thus, those arriving on tractors who were unaware of the restrictions including some who had completed significant journeys, were expected to turn around and leave.
Alternative arrangements
The question was therefore being asked as to why Met commanders couldn’t have arranged for the tractors to be safely ‘parked up’ on Horse Guards Parade or along The Mall. On previous occasions most tractors were parked by arrangement in Whitehall which was, as is frequently the case, closed to traffic.
There was speculation that the late decision to ban tractors was due to concern that on budget day the ‘photo-opportunistic’ journey from Downing Street to Parliament could have been deliberately or accidentally obstructed by tractors. That risk could have been obviated by parking tractors elsewhere, as suggested above or by the judicious use of barriers across Whitehall by Downing Street.
On Thursday morning, a picture of a tractor on a low-loader after darkness fell, was across social media together with widespread criticism of the police who were held responsible.
Despite the controversy, there has been no comment/explanation from the Met since the morning of the protest when they reinforced the conditions imposed with threats of arrest. The number of arrests made are, at the time of writing, unknown.
Whilst the Farmer’s protest saw a significant number of officers involved in the policing operation, a larger police presence could be found a fifteen- minute walk away at the Royal Courts of Justice where, as stated above, the hearing in relation to the proscribing of Palestine Action was taking place.
The large police presence was clearly the result of an accurate police threat assessment that a number of those attending would engage in some form of ‘direct action.’ The action replicated that already seen in that protesters sat down, displayed support for Palestine Action thereby offering themselves up for arrest. These individuals were then duly carried off to police prisoner transport.
Arrests were still being made as I left but there has been no statement from the Met as to the events outside the court including the number of arrests.
A return to Trafalgar Square saw tractors in the Strand and more tractors driving around Trafalgar Square.
Stop the Hate withdraw cooperation
The above public order operations followed a controversial pro-Palestine protest on Sunday centred on the St. Johns Wood Synagogue. A music/emigrate to Israel event drew the attention of pro-Palestine activists. ‘Late notice,’ public order incidents are frequently problematic to police and so it proved.
Conditions were imposed keeping protesters from both sides at a distance from the Synagogue. Pro-Palestine protesters were escorted by police away from the event but officers were criticised for not making arrests and for not banning the protest. Basic research will show that ‘banning’ events is normally not an option but that similar results can be obtained by imposing conditions.
However, a short-notice protest and/or march can present challenges for officers in that there will be no policing plan and fast time decisions will have to be made by the senior officer on scene. In this case, the priority will be to ensure that there was no physical disorder and no individual was injured.
Several pro-Israelis were reportedly arrested by TSG officers in circumstances which are not clear but the Met reported just two arrests and, it would seem, no injuries.
This incident appears to have been the catalyst involving the pro-Israeli Stop the Hate (STH) group who have issued a statement that, in essence, withdraws future cooperation with the Met.
“Stop the Hate’ normally organises static counter protests when the large Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) marches take place. The static counter-protests occur on the route of the march and both sides hurl abuse and insults at each other but are kept apart by a combination of PSC stewards, barriers and a cordon of police.
Police tactics and the ‘Jew pen’
STH are complaining that they have had enough of being forced into a ‘Jew pen.’ I have observed every PSC protest since the 7/10 massacre and never ever heard of the segregated area allocated for the STH protest referred to as a ‘Jew pen.’ The practice of separating rival groups is common to police forces across the world be the issue linked to politics or football. The Commissioner recently observed, that as it would be folly to allow Spurs and Arsenal supporters to mingle it would be an equal act of folly to allow rival political activists, traditionally hostile to each other, to come together.
The war in Gaza has been ongoing for two years as have PSC marches and there has been no complaint in respect of STF conducting their protest from a safe space protected by police. Their numbers at these counter-protests are relatively small, normally around 400, due probably to the fact that PSC marches take place on the Saturday which, of course, is the Jewish Sabbath: The numbers attending PSC marches can vary from 10,000 to 100,000
The width of the sterile area varies according to the route of the march but it doesn’t inhibit the STF and their supporters from getting their points across. Their powerful sound system dwarfs the hand-held megaphones carried by some of the PSC protesters and drowns out their chants.
The rights of the ‘Inserts’
The comment relating to ‘unaffiliated Jewish activists’ along the route, refers to the Inserts; a very small group of pro-Israeli activists who deliberately place themselves in the midst of the pro-Palestinians attempting to provoke a reaction. They regard this as their right in terms of ‘freedom of speech’ and ‘freedom of expression’ It follows a well-publicised incident involving the Chairman of the Campaign against Anti-Semitism who was prevented by a police sergeant from placing himself in the midst of a pro-Palestinian protest. Much criticism was directed towards the sergeant until a full filmed version of the incident was broadcast by Sky.
It’s also worthy of note that during the large pro-Israeli rallies, which take place on Sundays, the efficient and professional CST (Community Safety Trust) security staff are constantly looking for threats, which include pro-Palestinian ‘inserts.’
The same principles of segregating rival groups apply at these pro-Israeli events with police and CST moving quickly to deal with pro-Palestinian provocateurs.
STH will be aware, that if pro-Palestinians wanted to stage a counter-protest to a pro-Israeli Sunday march, identical conditions would apply in terms of keeping the rival groups apart.
Concerns and today’s march
The STH seems to be encouraging pro-Israeli activists to cause disruption anywhere along the march route. They state the following; “We encourage all who wish to oppose this march to do so wherever you choose, freely and lawfully, without being forced into a police-managed pen.’
This, of course, is a contradictory statement. In order to keep the peace, the Met will, almost certainly impose conditions. This means that if pro-Israeli activists materialise somewhere along the route to ‘oppose’ the march, this is likely to breach conditions and therefore will not be lawful.
If the march is large, there will probably be significant sections of that march which will be unpoliced thus a sizeable rival group appearing is a recipe for a potentially serious incident. Another factor in relation to these PSC marches, are the numbers of young children who are accompanying their protesting parents. These range from babies in prams, toddlers in pushchairs and those who have yet to reach double figures in age.
An incident that results in panic amongst any crowd could have disastrous consequences. On the positive side, it looks as if PC Rain may well be making an appearance tomorrow which should cool tempers on both sides.
Despite the hype around PSC ‘hate marches,’ as officers who police them on a regular basis will testify, they have resulted in relatively little serious physical disorder. Amongst the marchers there is always a substantial ‘Jewish bloc,’ and frequent appearances by Nature Karta, a Jewish anti-Zionist group despised by mainstream Jewry.
The one exception was during the initial Palestine Action ‘arrest me’ protest which took place in Parliament Square. A PSC march finished in nearby Whitehall and a number of marchers made their way down to Parliament Square. This resulted in a number of officers being punched and kicked as they moved those arrested through crowds, to police transport.
Most disorder issues have occurred during so the smaller so-called emergency protests when those attending tend to be younger and ‘undiluted’ in terms of the absence of more restrained older protesters.
There is no doubt that many Met officers are ‘protest weary’ which is one of many factors currently sapping morale. Both sides of the Gaza conflict divide frequently accuse officers of ‘two tier policing’ and of being antisemitic or Islamophobic.
The STH counter-protest proposals stated above are likely to result in more officers being deployed to ensure the safety of protesters and counter-protests during tomorrow’s PSC march; doubtless many of these officers will receive abuse from activists of both sides.
It will be interesting to see whether Met Comms, recently much improved, ups its game after a poor week evidenced by failing to both respond to criticism and provide basic information in relation to controversial public order events.
Chris Hobbs is a former Special Branch officer who follows public order events for Police Oracle.
Category: Public Order
