Ne s'est pas débarassé de Brian Haw par la force l'autorité plus grande de Londres essaye encore par la législation, leurs réponses à la protestation de gestion de `de consultation de gouvernement autour du Parlement' que tous semblent être se débarasser visé du camp de paix. Et le gouvernement est conforme à eux, SOCrAP n'est pas enterré encore et ils volent déjà son cadavre.

Heure pour une ville hôtel extérieure de protestation ?

« Le gouvernement a reçu 512 réponses pendant la période de consultation de 12 semaines. Des représentations ont été reçues de 25 groupes de campagne, de six MPs et de deux pairs, d'un certain nombre d'autres dépositaires intéressés comprenant le service métropolitain de police, l'autorité plus grande de Londres, le conseil municipal de Westminster et la société de loi de l'Ecosse. »

“The Greater London Authority (GLA) commented that any discussions on management of protests in Parliament Square needed to take into account proposals to redevelop Parliament Square “to create a more accessible, safe and high quality place”. They also commented that while Trafalgar Square was a good model for successfully managing demonstrations, its layout was different to Parliament Square in terms of its safe pedestrian access and hard landscaped surfaces. The GLA believed that Trafalgar Square had a long and established historical tradition as a place to protest as opposed to Parliament Square.”

“The Greater London Authority commented that a key concern for the Mayor was proportionality and duration, arguing that if a protest took place it would limit public use of Parliament Square and protests should therefore be limited in duration. “ 

 http://www.justice.gov.uk/docs/governance-analysis-consultations.pdf

——————————————————–

Sir George Young (Con): On part 1 of the Bill, although no one would object to orderly and peaceful demonstrations in Parliament square, many people object to permanent, unsightly encampments in the middle of a great, historic city. Will the Bill put that right?

Mr. Straw: I understand that there are strong feelings about that. Those encampments are unsightly, but they also represent people exercising a right to demonstrate. The changes in the law have not been conspicuously successful— It is no good pointing at me; I am not the police. The changes in the law have not been conspicuously successful in dealing with the problem, and they have appeared to be pretty heavy handed as well, so better arrangements are needed. Let us see what the House has to say about it. 

 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080325/debtext/80325-0006.htm#0803254000411

——————————————————–

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, on the substantive question that the noble Baroness raises on sessional orders, there has clearly been a lot of concern about whether some provisions of the SOCPA are necessary and whether they are an inhibitor to legitimate protests and demonstrations outside Parliament. However, there is also concern that if those provisions are simply repealed and problems arise in the future with regard to open and free access to Parliament and issues around noise there will not be sufficient powers to deal with those problems sensibly and effectively.

Comment on 'SOCPA: The GLA’s campaign against Brian Haw' :

RSS TrackBack URL

Related News: