Zijn er niet in geslaagdd om Brian Haw door kracht van de hand te doen probeert de Instantie van Groot Londen opnieuw door de wetgeving, schijnen hun reacties op het overheidsoverleg `het Leiden Protest rond het Parlement' allen om op het van de hand doen van het vredeskamp worden gericht. En de overheid gaat met hen akkoord, wordt SOCrAP niet nog begraven en zij roven reeds zijn corpse.

Time voor een protest buiten de Zaal van de Stad?

De „overheid ontving 512 reacties tijdens de periode van het 12 weekoverleg. De vertegenwoordiging werd ontvangen van 25 campagnegroepen, van zes Afgevaardigden en twee Edelen, van een aantal andere geinteresseerde bewaarders met inbegrip van de Metropolitaanse Dienst van de Politie, de Instantie van Groot Londen, de Gemeenteraad van Westminster En de Maatschappij van de Wet van Schotland.“

“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: