Public Order Bill
Public Bill Committee, 9 June 2022.
(Morning)
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
I have a few preliminary announcements. Hansard colleagues would be grateful if Members could email their speaking notes to hansardnotes@parliament.uk. Please switch electronic devices to silent. Tea and coffee are not allowed during sittings.
We will consider the programme motion on the amendment paper. We will then consider a motion to enable the reporting of written evidence for publication, and a motion to allow us to deliberate in private about questions between the oral evidence sessions. In view of the time available, I hope that we can take these matters formally, without debate. I call the Minister to move the programme motion standing in his name, which was discussed on Tuesday 7 June by the Programming Sub-Committee for this Bill.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
The Committee will proceed to line-by-line consideration of the Bill on Tuesday 14 June at 9.25 am.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Copies of written evidence that the Committee receives will be made available in the Committee room and will be circulated to Members by email.
Examination of Witness
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
We are now sitting in public again and the proceedings are being broadcast. Before we start hearing from the witnesses, do any Members wish to make declarations of interest in connection with the Bill? No, I take it. We will now hear oral evidence from Chief Constable Chris Noble, lead for protest on the National Police Chiefs’ Council, who is joining us via Zoom. I remind Members that questions should be limited to matters within the scope of the Bill, and that we must stick to the timings in the programme motion. The Committee has agreed that, for this session, we have until 12.15 pm. Can the witness please introduce themselves for the record?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Thank you, Mr Noble. If, at any time, you have any difficulty in hearing the questions, please indicate and we will make the necessary technical adjustments.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Good morning, chief. Thank you very much for joining us. At the outset, can you outline the current protest situation, and changes in protesters’ tactics over the past three or four years, from your experience? The Bill is responding to those changes in tactics, so it would be helpful for the Committee if you could outline what they are. Also, can you talk about your experience of the disruption caused and the challenges faced on safety grounds, and say what the cost to policing has been over the last couple of years?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q One form of protest that we have seen recently is locking on—people glue themselves to motorways or fuel depots and fuel gantries. Could you illustrate some of the dangers that that may present, particularly in a fuel environment? What steps do officers have to take to deal with that kind of protest?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Under current legislation, one of the challenges that you obviously face in looking after protest is balancing the right to protest against the right of others to go about their business. Could you explain to us the training that a police officer has to go through in order to appreciate those balances, and how the judgments are made? What training is there around the danger presented to protesters, officers or the general public in protest situations? Does that colour the picture, when it comes to the conditions that may be put on a protest?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Obviously, a significant amount of effort and capacity goes into this work. A final question from me: do you think the police would benefit from more pre-emptive powers to prevent some of these more dangerous protests and get ahead of them? As you know, the Bill allows the police to do that.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Thank you for giving evidence to us today. Could you talk us through some of the powers that you already have to disrupt protests? Can you give us recent examples of when you have used them?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Can you talk us through some of your powers that have been used for arresting and charging protesters—for instance, aggravated trespass, criminal damage and obstructing a highway?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Can you talk us through injunctions and how the police work through somebody getting an injunction? How does that operate?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Is the timescale a frustration? Do they take longer than you would want them to?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Obviously, this Bill was first introduced last year as amendments to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 in the Lords. Can you talk us through the consultation the Government have done on policing, both when the amendments were introduced in the Lords and now with this separate Bill?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Back in 2019, Matt Parr did a big piece of work with Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary and fire & rescue services. Some of the aspects we are looking at today were debated and he thought about them, but many aspects were not part of that original process whereby he went out to colleagues to ask various questions that the Government had asked him to ask. A lot of his recommendations in that report said that the issues were not necessarily about legislation, but about training, resources and making sure that people upstream understand and have the intelligence that you referred to earlier to know that these powers are in place.
You also had some concerns about things in the Bill that he talks about—for example, the potential chilling effect on freedom of assembly that the stop-and-search powers, in particular, could have. Could you give us your view on the non-legislative suggestions that he had and how important they are? What is your view on his concerns about some of the things we are talking about, in particular the suspicionless stop and search and the scope of police power that that provides to you?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Not changes in the law; most of the recommendations in his report are not about changing the law. They are about
“equipping police commanders with up to date, accessible guidance…ensuring that they consider the levels of disruption or disorder above which enforcement action will be considered; improving the way that police assess the impact of protests…improving the quality of police intelligence on protests…addressing a wide variation in the number of specialist officers available for protest policing throughout England and Wales”.
It goes on. They are all non-legislative recommendations. They are about how you train and support, gather intelligence and have the right people in the right place.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q One more very small question from me—I could ask you questions for ages. On the disruption orders, I was on the Bill Committee that took through knife crime prevention orders, which are not dissimilar, and have not yet, I think, come into force because they are being piloted. What is your sense of them? Concerns have been raised by several people that, in a similar way to knife crime prevention orders, disruption orders go beyond the scope of what is required by policing.
Lee Anderson (Conservative, Ashfield)
Thanks, Mr Noble, for giving evidence. It is really helpful. I want to talk a little about social media and how that helps and hinders you in your job. Q Social media is a great platform, but it is also good for fuelling protests. I want to know how social media can help you with some of these professional protesters. What more can we do to help you make sure you can do your job correctly?
Lee Anderson (Conservative, Ashfield)
Q Obviously, protests are becoming more prevalent with the social media age, as I have said. There is a massive opportunity cost here to the police force, so how are we increasing the use of things such as drones to help police protests, as well as animals, such as dogs and horses?
Lee Anderson (Conservative, Ashfield)
Q Just one more question, Mr Noble. This is about tunnelling—protesters tunnelling underneath roads and fuel depots. My big concern is that somebody is going to get seriously hurt, whether that is the protester or, more importantly, the police officers. Can you just explain what you have to deal with—not on a daily basis, but in general—with tunnels, and the measures that you have in place to protect your officers.
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Good afternoon, chief constable. Thank you very much for your time. The Minister asked you about training requirements. Can I ask about Staffordshire police in the first instance? How many officers do you have trained in these tactics, at command level—gold, silver and bronze—and among the police officers that are deployed?Q
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
When you say “significant”, what are we talking about in terms of abstraction rates, not only in terms of policing these protests but in terms of training?Q
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Is the reality that with new legislation, and therefore additional training requirements, those abstractions would potentially be increasing?Q
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
The report from Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary and fire and rescue services, “Getting the balance right?” found that insufficient officers were coming forward for training in these roles. Is there any evidence that you have seen that that has changed?Q
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Q Obviously this legislation is England and Wales only, but as we saw in COP26 in Glasgow last November, mutual aid is critical for policing services across the UK. What assessment has been done by the NPCC in relation to the impact the change in legislation might have on mutual aid?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Andrew Bridgen and then Anne McLaughlin, but we will need quick questions and quick answers if everybody who wants to participate can get a chance.
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative, North West Leicestershire)
Thank you, Chair. I have two quick questions. Chief Constable, you have talked about the ability of protesters to find legal loopholes. Are there any measures you would like to see in the Bill that are not in the Bill? Have you spotted any loopholes at this stageQ ?
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative, North West Leicestershire)
Q You talked about public frustration at the current tactics of protestors and about the risk—we have seen it—of the public taking matters into their own hands, perhaps with some mitigation if someone was being taken to hospital or an emergency vehicle was being disrupted from going about its essential work. Would you agree that, when enacted, the Bill will protect not only the public interest and the public, but legitimate protestors?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Anne McLaughlin and, if there is time, Rupa Huq, but we have to finish at 12.15 pm.
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Thank you, and good afternoon. I had four questions, but I will keep it to two. I want to look at the offence of being equipped to lock on, which the Bill creates. That is where an individual has an object connected with locking on. How will the police decide what objects are connected with locking on, and could you give me some less obvious examples? A big chain with a padlock is fairly obvious, but there are more everyday items that people could have for legitimate purposes or for locking on. What are they, and how does a police officer decide?Q
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q I would love to follow on from that, but I will not. The next thing I want to ask about are serious disruption prevention orders. The HMICFRS report said:
“We agree with the police and Home Office that such orders would neither be compatible with human rights legislation nor create an effective deterrent.”
Do you agree with that? If not, could you say why, and how issuing one of these to someone without any criminal conviction is compatible with human rights legislation?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Mr Noble, I wanted to allow you to finish that answer, but that brings us to the end of our allotted time. Thank you.
Examination of Witnesses
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
We will now hear oral evidence from John Groves, Chief Security and Resilience Officer at High Speed 2 Ltd, and Nicola Bell, Regional Director South East at National Highways. For this panel, we have until 1 pm. Will the witnesses please introduce themselves for the record?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Thank you. We begin this questioning session with Ms Jones.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Thank you both for coming to the Committee. Let me start with Mr Groves, partly because I have your written evidence in front of me and it is very interesting. I wish to explore with you the issue of injunctions, because in your evidence you set out that there is a problem with people who seem like frequent flyers—a small number of people who come back again and again—and that you are frustrated with the criminal powers. You say that the civil injunctions are useful but expensive. You have set it out in your evidence, but it would be useful if you could talk us through how you have used the injunctions and the process you are currently going through with the large, route-wide injunction you are pursuing.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Can you talk us through how you get an injunction—how long it takes and what you have to do?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q If changes were to be made to the way you apply for injunctions and how that works, what would make your life easier when you are trying to get them?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Could I ask Ms Bell to talk us through the current policing powers that have been used on the highways, and in particular around people blocking the motorways, some of whom have ended up in prison? There has been a process, and there are powers in place. Can you talk us through what they are and how they have worked?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q You obviously have these hardcore people who are persistent: who are being arrested, being charged, and then coming back again. To what extent do you think a new offence of locking on, or whatever it might be, will change their mindset in that sense? Obviously, there are criminal charges that can lead to legal action, and injunctions that can lead to a more stable situation but are costly. What, in terms of more and different charges in the Bill or generally—calling them different things, but they are still criminal charges—would stop those repeat offenders who are intent on popping up on a motorway or blocking your building?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Mr Groves, may I start with you? Could you just give us a picture of what you have had to put up with over the last few years? Obviously, in your written evidence you outline the cost—the very significant cost—there has been to HS2. However, I was very struck that in your evidence you alluded to some of the conduct that your staff and contractors have had to put up with. Could you give us some examples of the kind of treatment that they have had at the hands of these so-called protesters?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Just to be clear—obviously, we all understand this, but just to be clear—the birth of HS2 followed a democratic decision in this House, following significant public debate and indeed protest and all the rest of it, and a decision was made, I think on a cross-party basis. Is that right?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Right. You do not quite say it in your written evidence, I do not think, but your view would be that these protesters are effectively trying to frustrate a democratic decision of this House.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q On persistent offenders, obviously, you have got what sounds like a hardcore group who come back again and again and again. Do you believe that the powers in this Bill to place controls on them would have a significant impact on your ability to complete the project?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Thanks very much. Ms Bell, I just wanted to ask you a little bit more about the injunction process, because it strikes me that there is a bit of confusion about the civil route versus the criminal route and what is possible between the two, which is being alluded to. I am sure that you will recall that the Labour party called for a nationwide injunction to deal with those protesters at the time. However, it is the case, as you say, that those injunctions are very difficult to get and although they require a lower standard of proof, they are a much more elongated process than necessarily a criminal charge.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Would it be fair to say that there is an asymmetry between what is available as a sentence under the injunction? I think it is up to two years.Q
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Two years with a judge and quite a significant fine, but at the discretion of the judge. However, it does not have a power of arrest. On the flip side, while there was a power of arrest on some of the offences that were committed, such as obstructing the highway, actually, the sentence that is available is low and nobody, I do not think, will be in prison under any of the charges that have been laid.Q
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q I think I am right in saying that obstruction of the highways carries a maximum level 3 fine, which is up to £1,000. Is that right?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q I thought you may have had to research it.
So in your view, would it be a sensible move to combine the best of both? Effectively having a power of arrest for an offence that attracts a not dissimilar level of sentencing, which might act as a deterrent, that you would get under an injunction.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Finally, from my point of view those protests cause a significant impact on the road network, which would have had an immediate impact on those individuals, but presumably, somewhere in your department or the Department for Transport, there is an economic impact that these things have. Have you been able to cost the economic impact of those kinds of delays?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Thank you.
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Good afternoon to both of you. My question is for John. In your written evidence, you stress several times that the protests that you face are often unlawful. If Nicola agrees, I am happy for her to answer as well. If they are unlawful, that means that the legislation already exists to prevent or stop these protests, otherwise they would not be considered unlawful. In your view, what is it that stops those existing laws being implemented, and what is it about this proposed legislation that will make it more likely to be implementedQ ?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Do you want to respond, Nicola? You do not have to.
Natalie Elphicke (Conservative, Dover)
My question is to Nicola Bell. The Bill intends to make deliberate interference with key national infrastructure a criminal offence. As we have just touched on, Dover has several pieces of key infrastructure, such as the national strategic road network, the M2/A2 and the M20/A20, and the port of Dover itself, which transits about a fifth of all our goods. In recent years, the port and the strategic road network have been targeted by extremists on several occasions. We have mentioned the 2021 incident, which saw people gluing themselves to tankers and closed down the port and the M2 and M20. Going right back to September 2019, we had a similar incident with extreme protestors that saw the port completely shut down and disruption to and closure of the A20 and M20.Q
I was hoping you could expand on your earlier answer to give the Committee more of a feel for the impact of this kind of traffic disruption on the Kent and Dover economy and its importance to the strategic network for the nation, and for some of the safety and other challenges in dealing with these incidents that are different from the ordinary traffic disruption that your team deal with on a more regular basis.
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
My first question is primarily for Nicola. Of the protesters who have been blocking key roads, such as the M25, roughly what proportion have been locking on or gluing themselves to a road, as opposed to just sitting on a roadQ ?
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
Q So they got there initially, sat down and did not immediately lock on, and then they would wait for the police to arrive and start doing it. Did the police do anything to stop them when they saw them doing it?
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
Q Broadening it out to Nicola and John, this Bill will hopefully do some good things in providing a deterrent, which both of you have mentioned. On the police’s threshold to intervene and the balance they strike between the right to protest and the right of others to go about their business, do you think they strike the balance about right at the moment? Have there been occasions where you have been frustrated that the police have not intervened as robustly as they could have done within the existing laws?
Lee Anderson (Conservative, Ashfield)
Q I would like to know what sort of impact this has on the morale of your contractors and employees on site.
Lee Anderson (Conservative, Ashfield)
Q Going to work and being threatened and intimidated is pretty awful. What more can we do, working together with you, to make sure you retain those staff? It is quite important that you retain the staff and get on with the job.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Do any other Members wish to raise a question? Ms Jones.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q It is really clear that the cases you are talking about are people doing criminal activity that need to be stopped in the best way we can—I do not think anyone on this Committee would think otherwise. It is important to say that. There is no question there—the question is how and what the tools are.
I have a couple of follow-up questions. In the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, which has not yet come into force, there are lots of changes to protesting. They are not yet law, but they will become law as soon as the Government get around to doing that. One change is that obstruction of a highway will carry a prison sentence of up to six months. The Minister was talking about it being a fine—it will now be a prison sentence of up to six months. There is also a raft of stuff about imposing conditions on static protests, so, if you are organisers of static protests, there are conditions on those, and, again, you can be imprisoned for that.
What is your assessment of the impact that that legislation will have when it comes into force? There is a question as to whether we should implement that legislation to see whether it has an impact before we move on to other things. What is your assessment? Will it have an impact?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q But static protests can be anywhere. It is the police imposing conditions on static protests, in the same way as they can in—
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Presumably it is more of a deterrent if it is a six-month prison sentence.
Natalie Elphicke (Conservative, Dover)
Q I just want to draw on that a bit more, Mr Groves. I think most people recognise that there is a difference between making a political protest and just causing trouble—deliberately blocking national infrastructure and affecting other people and how they go about their lives. Tunnelling is obviously far less visible than the sort of thing that we have seen on the highway. What do you feel is the intent behind some of the activity you see? Is it just to stop what you are trying to do?
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Q I thank you both for your time. What has come through strongly in your evidence is about very committed groups of individuals who have no regard for the law as it currently stands and are continuing to break it. What you have both said is that you hope this additional legislation will be a deterrence. Why do you think this legislation will be a deterrence, given what we have just described and what you have illustrated about very committed groups who pay no attention to the law?
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Q Mr Groves, you said that these groups are very good at looking forward and looking at where you are. Once this legislation is in place, where do you think these people will go next?
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative, North West Leicestershire)
Q My questions are for Mr Groves. I will declare that I am no fan of HS2. Indeed, I voted against it at every opportunity I had in the House. However, as we all know, the majority of the House approved the project. Many of my concerns are about the spiralling cost of HS2. Could you tell the Committee again the costs of security measures for HS2 and removing protesters? Do you have any estimate of what the savings would be to the taxpayer if the Bill is enacted?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q My question is for Mr Groves. If tunnelling is the biggest issue for HS2, are you surprised that it has just been added on as an amendment, given that it is so important? What that does is cut out the consultation—there has been no consultation on it —so are you surprised that it has just been added on?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
I suppose that is a question for the Minister, but I am not allowed to ask the Minister.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
We are questioning the witnesses at this stage. In due course, I am sure you will have the opportunity to question the Minister.
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Can I go back to the question of deterrent? With some of the groups we are talking about, particularly the environmental campaigners, the aim is to get arrested—that is very clearly stated. I have seen calls to action where it says, “Our objective is to have x number of protestors, resulting in x number of arrests.” What makes you think that deterrence will make any difference, because the more offences there are, the easier it is going to be to get arrested for something, and that is their objective?Q
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q In that case, again, if they are willing and wanting to be arrested and are not worried about the level of fines because payment will be crowdfunded, that suggests that it is not a deterrent. I am a Bristol MP, and we saw with the Colston statue and the Black Lives Matter protests that the jury acquitted four of the defendants of criminal damage. My concern is that the more unreasonable the legislation is seen to be, the more bases it covers and the more it cracks down on what many people view as legitimate public protest, the more likely we are to see jury acquittals. Do you share that concern?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q I want to pursue that point a little further. Mr Groves, as you see it, the current level of fines is not proving to be a deterrent because they can be crowdfunded. As I understand it, your view is that if we were specific about the offences of locking on and tunnelling, and we added a term of imprisonment and a criminal charge against those, that would be a ramping up that might prove to be a significant deterrent—is that right?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Ms Bell, obviously the impact of your injunctions on activity were delayed, but do you have a sense that, once protestors were going to prison under the injunctions, there was an element of deterrent there? Secondly, one of the things I know from my own experience is that when people realise that having a criminal record has implications, not least the fact that you cannot travel to the United States, that is in itself a deterrent as well. Did you get the sense that was having an impact?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
If there are no further questions from Members, I thank the witnesses for their evidence.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
We are now sitting in public and the proceedings are being broadcast. We will hear oral evidence from Elizabeth de Jong, chair of the United Kingdom Petroleum Industry Association, and Steve Griffiths, managing director of London Stansted airport, part of MAG, the Manchester Airports Group. Welcome to our witnesses. This session will run until 2.45 pm. Please will the witnesses introduce themselves for the record?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Thank you. I ask Ms Jones to start the questions.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Let me ask both of you to describe your experiences with protests. It would be useful if you described the police response, what they were able to do and what happened as a result, whether you used injunctions and what that managed to achieve, and gave us the scale and a flavour of the challenges you facedQ 58.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Locking on is a new phenomenon, and very frustrating. Will anything in this Bill speed up the process of removing somebody who is locked on?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q My question was more about the speed. It is interesting—and, as I think we all accept, a big challenge—to ask, “What is the right legislative response? What can we do through the law?” There were 500 arrests, as you say, so the problem was not that the police were not arresting people; they were arresting loads of people quickly, but you cannot speed up the process of getting the specialist to come and remove someone who has locked on. Even with an offence of locking on, you will have the same time problems when it comes to removing people. All those things will be the same; locking on will just be an offence that the police can charge people with, just as they have been charging them with aggravated trespass or criminal damage.
I guess my question is whether an offence of locking on—I think that it has its own problems because of the very broad way it is drafted—will be any more helpful than those 500 arrests that the police made; you are talking about people who just come back afterwards.
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
This is really for Q Elizabeth. Which region was most badly impacted by the Just Stop Oil protests that we have seen over the past three months?
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
Q So the eastern region is up there, in terms of being the most impacted region.
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
Q With locking on, in terms of individuals locking on to tankers et cetera, roughly what proportion are employing locking on tactics, as opposed to just blocking key roads around depots, et cetera?
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
Q Do you feel that the police have been as interventionist as they ought to have been? Have there been occasions when you have been slightly frustrated that the police have not been more, for want of a better phrase, on it when it comes to intervening and moving on some of these protesters?
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
Q Do you think that all of this disruption has in any way fed through to increased prices of petrol and diesel?
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
Q So, the chances are that that is likely to have an impact in terms of how much consumers are paying for petrol at the pump.
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
Thank you.
Natalie Elphicke (Conservative, Dover)
To follow up on fuel distribution, there was certainly an impact in Dover and Deal. We had petrol stations running dry during that period. That really brings home the impact: people were unable to get the fuel that they needed to go to work and to school, and to get about. It has an impact on hauliers as well.Q
I want to explore the Stansted situation a bit more. You have your highly secure zone—that goes without saying for national infrastructure—and people break in through a security fence and close a runway. I think you said that 25 flights were grounded as a result.
Natalie Elphicke (Conservative, Dover)
Q What sort of impact do you feel that had in terms of security? Do you feel that the impact was not just to cause disruption but to affect the security of the airport?
Natalie Elphicke (Conservative, Dover)
Q At what stage did you know that this was a political protest rather than a terrorist incident or similar? Was there any concern about the nature of the protest when your personnel saw people breaking into the airport?
Natalie Elphicke (Conservative, Dover)
It had a political dimension.
Natalie Elphicke (Conservative, Dover)
Q Finally, I am mindful of the Court of Appeal’s decision and its clear direction that there was no specific offence that could reflect the magnitude of the event. The Court reportedly said:
“We recognise that the various summary-only offences with which the appellants were originally charged…might…not reflect the gravity of their actions.”
I think that underlines the importance of the matters before us. At the Court of Appeal, Lord Burnett referred specifically to disruption “likely to endanger” the safe operation of the airport or the safety of people there. We have heard from your evidence that the actions that were taken were grave and had real impacts on the airport’s operations and security.
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative, North West Leicestershire)
Elizabeth, clearly there are two parts to the threat from protesters: first, if they gain access to your oil terminals—the one at Kingsbury, just down the road from my constituency, is the largest in the country—and secondly, if they cause damage to assets or disrupt access to your fuel depots. How are those situations currently treated differently in policing, how easy is it to get people off your premises once they are there on them, and how will the Bill help you to deal with those situations?Q
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative, North West Leicestershire)
Q You have a very large perimeter, haven’t you?
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative, North West Leicestershire)
Q If there were an ignition of fuel at somewhere like Kingsbury, whether accidental or deliberate, with the huge volume of fuel that is kept there, what sort of catastrophe would that be?
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative, North West Leicestershire)
Q About how many acres is Kingsbury depot?
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative, North West Leicestershire)
Q Steve, given Government policy regarding removals to Rwanda, do you see an increased risk to airports?
Gagan Mohindra (Conservative, South West Hertfordshire)
I put it on the record that I am a former Essex county councillor, since Essex has been referred to a couple of times now. My first question is about the international picture. Do other countries have this issue, and how are they combating it? Do our police have the necessary tools in place when compared with international comparators?Q
Gagan Mohindra (Conservative, South West Hertfordshire)
Elizabeth, do you want to give it a go?
Gagan Mohindra (Conservative, South West Hertfordshire)
Q Elizabeth, you referenced petrol stations earlier as a bit of a gap in what is proposed in this Bill. Are there any other aspects that you think would be nice to have as part of this Bill? It would be useful for us to flesh that out, because we are trying to create a piece of legislation that will be effectively future-proofed, so that we do not have to revisit it in the months or years to come.
Gagan Mohindra (Conservative, South West Hertfordshire)
Thank you. Steve, is there anything from you?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Much of what you have both described does sound extremely challenging. I understand that, but I am wondering whether you understand that many protesters are protesting because they have firmly held beliefs. I think we all agree that they should have the right to protest. Environmental campaigners’ concerns, for example, are that both your industries contribute to the climate crisis and, if more is not done more quickly, there will Q be no oil and no airports for them to protest at or for you to manage. If we all understand that, what would you suggest they could do to protest in a way that is safe and non-disruptive but also impactful, because there is no point in protest if it makes no impact? What is the middle ground? What is the compromise?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
I understand that, but I am asking about—
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q Thank you both for your answers. I am glad that you accept that there should be a right to protest peacefully, but what you both seem to be saying is, “They’re wrong; we are contributing to the solution.” I have no doubt that that is partly the case, but their firmly held beliefs are that you are not doing enough quick enough. They obviously have the right to protest about that. Other than just simply agreeing with you, what can they do to get their point across to encourage you to go faster? What can they do that would make an impact without disrupting and causing safety concerns? How could they do that?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
I think we are straying into the debate around net zero rather than the issue in hand.
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
What I am really trying to say is that they disagree with the answers that you have given me; if they have a different view, they must have the right to protest. How can they do that and make an impact, while dealing with the safety and disruption concerns we have talked about?
Matt Vickers (Conservative, Stockton South)
All the measures in the Bill aim to end the behaviour as quickly as possible when there is an incident and to deter people from coming back and having another go. When you think about the hardened, seasoned protesters in this field, who have plenty time on their hands to go gluing themselves to things on a regular basis, do you think they are sensitive to fines or do you think it is important that we look more towards custodial sentences for those hardened repeat offenders as part of the mix?Q
Matt Vickers (Conservative, Stockton South)
Q When you look at what is proposed in this Bill, are we going far enough? Is there anything that you would like to see added to the mix?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
I have a couple of questions. In response to Ms McLaughlin’s point about protest, presumably the most direct thing these protesters could do is not buy your products—not drive a car, not use gas in their cookers, not fly on holiday. That consumer behaviour would have an impact on the way you run your businesses.Q
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
I want to ask a little bit about pre-emption. You talked, Mr Griffiths, about the breach of your fence. Do you think it would have been helpful for the police to have the powers to identify and stop somebody and possibly search them on approach to the airport to see if they were in possession of, say, bolt cutters, and remove them before they were able to reach the perimeter?Q
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Presumably, in both circumstances, your members now are much more attuned to the notion of hostile reconnaissance and the notion that that needs to be detected on a pre-emptive basis to get ahead of some of these protests.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Ms de Jong, is that the same now with petrol dumps?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Finally, for clarity, Ms de Jong, to confirm what I think you said a couple of times, during the Just Stop Oil protests, when they breached the perimeter of some of those places, there could quite easily have been a catastrophic and very large explosion.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q I have a couple of quick follow-up questions. You might not know the answer to the first one, but I am interested to know whether you were aware in either case of whether there was any police intelligence that the protests were going to happen before they did.
Also, there seem to be slightly different issues. The issue with the flight was a slight one-off, in that people were objecting to that particular flight going away. There is a particular problem, it seems, with people trying to block entire infrastructure programmes across the country. They are two quite different things and I think they need a slightly different response.
I want to confirm with you, Mr Griffiths, that the police arrested the people but that the issue was that the charge was not right. It was not that they were not arrested and taken away; it was just that the charge did not stick because the right charge was not there, if you see what I mean.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q And was that helpful?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
If there are no further questions from Members, I thank our witnesses for the evidence. We will move on to the next panel.
Examination of Witness
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
We will now hear oral evidence from Adam Wagner, a barrister at Doughty Street Chambers. We have until 3.5 pm for this session. Will Mr Wagner introduce himself for the record?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Hello. We have been round this process once already in recent times with the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill; it is good to have you back here. It would be helpful if you could set out your view of this piece of legislation and what you think its flaws might be. There are some particular parts of the Bill that I want to ask you about, but it would be good to get your general sense. For the sake of the Committee, it would also be good if you could lay out what other offences the police use. One of the issues raised earlier is that they do not all involve custodial sentences, so it would be good if you could go through the main ones that the police use in the business of policing protests and what kinds of sanctions they have.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q In terms of the powers the police already have and the challenges they face, it would be helpful if you could set out whether you are content with the powers they have, what they can use and what sanctions they have. Do not worry if you cannot give an exhaustive list.
Also, we heard from previous witnesses about cases in which people have glued themselves to motorways in a dangerous way, and about people locking themselves on and tunnelling under things—doing things that are criminal and dangerous. That is the problem that the Bill is seeking to tackle: the small number of people who are repeatedly doing things that are dangerous for themselves and others. It would be helpful for you to explain how that marries with your view that the Bill will affect loads of peaceful protesters.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Can you explain what you mean by that? What do you mean by saying the Bill will end up putting people in prison? What do you think will happen? Will you speak to the specifics of locking on, stop and search and serious disruption prevention orders, and why they will end up with lots more people in prison?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
We have limited time, so I will allow the Minister to ask his questions.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q I think we are clear on your view of the Bill, and I gather that you were clear on your view of the Bill on social media before you appeared. Those sweet likes are so gratifying, are they not?
I want to ask you a couple of questions. First, you seem to be quite happy for those who profess to be protesters to go to prison in certain circumstances. So, if someone glues themselves on to a fuel gantry, bringing themselves and others into danger, you are quite happy for those people to go to prison—the only question in your mind is for how long. I presume you accept that part of the role of sentencing is not just to punish, but to deter. In circumstances where somebody is persistently committing those offences, whether or not they are subject to the order that you talked about, would you not expect them to get increasing sentences as they reoffended?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
I understand. I apologise if I was rude before.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q I was trying to be wry; my apologies. I do not know whether you are familiar with Scottish law, but I want to ask you about the comparison with that. In Scotland, we are seeing fuel protesters being charged under what is called malicious mischief, which is an offence that attracts an unlimited sentence—subject, obviously, to judicial oversight. Presumably, you think that if that is being used significantly against protesters in Scotland, prisons there will similarly fill.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q This is the final question from me. We are seeing an increasing use of civil injunctions in these circumstances where protesters are going to prison. In your view, are there more protections for the individual through the criminal courts than through the civil courts? If you were acting for a protester, would you rather be subject to criminal or civil proceedings, from the point of view of civil liberties and protection of the individual?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
A short answer, Mr Wagner, because we are in the final minute.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
That brings us to the end of the time allotted for the Committee to ask questions of you, Mr Wagner. I thank you, on behalf of the Committee, for your evidence.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Q We will now hear oral evidence from David Dinsmore, executive vice president and chief operating officer at News UK. We have until 3.25 pm for this session. Mr Dinsmore, could you please introduce yourself for the record?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Thank you for coming. Do you want to begin by telling us about the protests you have been affected by? What happened, how did it all progress, what did the police do, what offences were people charged with and what happened at the end of it?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q You mentioned that the police did not start removing people straight away and that there was a delay. What happened? Why was there a delay?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q What were they locked on with?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q There is a bit of a shortage of specialist teams. That is something that the inspector has flagged in his report. If they had been available, some of this disruption could have been minimised, because they would have acted quicker.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q My only point is that it would have sped things up if that delay, which you pointed out at the start, had not happened. You could have got things moving quicker, so that needs addressing.
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q As MPs, we have the opportunity every day to express our views, and the media has an even greater opportunity to do that. You have said yourself that you are a proponent of freedom of speech, so how should the ordinary woman or man in the street make their views known? These might be views about the Black Lives Matter demonstrations or about the fact that black women are four times more likely to die in or just after childbirth, and environmentalists are worried about the very future of the planet—
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
We cannot go into the detail. The concept of how a protest can be taken forward is, however, a legitimate question.
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q How can those people and others make their views known without being criminalised?
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q I am not sure that your organisation is known for campaigning alongside Black Lives Matter people, for example. However, are you suggesting that the only legitimate way for the people that I mentioned to protest is either through us as MPs or through yourselves as media outlets? Let us face it: that means that you have to agree with them or we have to agree with them. How do they make their own voices heard? How do we empower them without causing the disruption that you talked about so that they can make an impact?
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative, North West Leicestershire)
Q To be provocative, this is a Bill to protect national infrastructure such as fuel terminals, roads, railways and airports, and I am giving you a platform to make a pitch. Why is your industry worthy of this protection and not people who deliver bread, milk or toilet rolls? Why your industry?
Andrew Bridgen (Conservative, North West Leicestershire)
Q But surely most of that is delivered online now.
Natalie Elphicke (Conservative, Dover)
Q I want to follow up on that very point. On a number of the other disruptions that we have seen, what is disrupted cannot be delivered in another way: the roads, ports, fuel and so on. But, as you say, minute-by-minute news is doing its stuff. If I understand the reason that you were targeted, it was that there was a view about what the political representation of the group was, rather than what was necessarily going on at the plant itself. I think you mentioned The Guardian, among other things. Do you think that the measures should be widened to give greater protection to organisations that are targeted, not because of what they are doing but because people just want to disrupt that business, organisation, or person’s life to make a political point in an unacceptable way?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q I want to underline that point. Do you believe that the reason you were targeted was the political and social posture of your publications, and that those protesters were effectively trying to silence your point of view or the point of view of your publications?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q In that specific protest, was there no publicly declared reason for the protest?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Do any Members wish to ask further questions? On that basis, Mr Dinsmore, I thank you for your evidence.
Examination of Witnesses
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Q We will now hear from Sir Peter Martin Fahy QPM, a retired police officer and former chief constable for Greater Manchester police, Matt Parr CB, Her Majesty’s inspector of constabulary and Her Majesty’s inspector of fire and rescue services, and Chief Superintendent Phil Dolby of the West Midlands police. We have until 4.10 pm for this session. I will begin by asking the witnesses to introduce themselves for the record.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Thank you. We will begin with a question from Wendy Chamberlain.
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Q I fear my own policing time is very much in the minority here. Thank you very much to you all for your time this afternoon. This morning, we had in front of us Chief Constable Noble from Staffordshire police, who is the National Police Chiefs’ Council lead. One of the questions that I asked him—actually, it was one of the topics he raised—was specifically around policing by consent. I am keen to get your views, first on how far you think the Bill strikes the right balance, and secondly on whether you think there is a risk that this increased potential criminalisation of peaceful protest will change that balance from the perspective of policing by consent. Sir Peter, perhaps I could start with you.
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Q My understanding is that this Bill does not change that.
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Q Regardless of rank, the first police officer there is in charge.
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Q Is abstraction, for both training and deployment, a critical issue in terms of how the police might need to implement the Bill?
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Q To focus on the 2021 report, “Getting the balance right?”, part of the training and abstractions piece was a shortage of people who had the specialist training required. Has that changed?
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
Q And intelligence, in terms of preparation, probably.
Obviously, your report from 2021 considered protest banning orders, which was something suggested by the Met. Your report stated that
“such orders would neither be compatible with human rights legislation nor create an effective deterrent.”
What are your views on the serious disruption orders in the Bill, given what you have said previously?
Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife)
We shall find out from the Minister why he has changed his mind.
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Thank you all for coming: we really appreciate it. Sir Peter, obviously we do not want a French model—I do not think the British public would have the appetite for change that would be needed if we were to police slightly differently. But we do potentially need more resources in this area. Do you have a sense of the appropriate level of resourcing and training, and who should police protests and how they should be trained? Do you also have any thoughts on the real challenge that we have heard from large infrastructure organisations that are being disrupted a lot—people gluing themselves to things and causing damage? What more can we do to deter those people or to deal with them once they are in place?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Thank you. Mr Parr, we have talked about your report many times in Committee and in Parliament, and what the definition of “a modest reset” is in terms of the powers and how it works. It would be helpful for the Committee if you could just clarify which bits of this legislation you looked at and what you thought. I might not have heard the answer to the question of which of your many recommendations have been implemented, and what the progress is on that front.
The third question is just about any thoughts you might have on things in the Bill that you have not looked at. You might not have had thoughts because the Government have not asked you to do a report on it—I think I am right that they have not asked you. Do you have any thoughts on things that you have not looked at before?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q Do you mean this Bill, or previous legislation?
Sarah Jones (Labour, Croydon Central)
Q I was talking to your police and crime commissioner, who was singing your praises at some other event, about how well you have managed lots of protests over a long period of time. You have managed to talk people down, to get people to change behaviour and to come to a sensible agreement about somebody who had been there for a short period time moving on. You have obviously deployed the powers that you have, and the persuasion that you have, effectively. Can you talk to us a bit about what you do, how that works and how you managed protests in the west midlands without too much disruption?
Natalie Elphicke (Conservative, Dover)
Q I will start with Mr Parr. In terms of that level of disruption not being right, we have also seen eye-watering costs. I have some figures here. In 2019, Extinction Rebellion cost about £37 million, and at least £6 million was spent on just the policing costs alone. I appreciate all the comments that have been made about choices of policing and taking people from alternative policing duties. That is an enormous amount of resource that is going on this type of political activism, rather than on preventing and detecting serious crime. Part of that resetting is, obviously, ensuring that this has a deterrent effect and fills in some of those gaps. By filling in those gaps and giving greater clarity, will that help with this resetting and start some of that resetting of behaviour?
Rupa Huq (Labour, Ealing Central and Acton)
We touched on what a protest is and also what serious disruption is. Some of these things have very vague boundaries. Peter, you mentioned the Sarah Everard case. For me, it was disappointing that the words “woman” or “women” are not in there at all. After the Sarah Everard vigil, I know you said it was all done by the book, but to the public it looked like very insensitive policing of the vigil. The reason it looked scandalous is that it was taken alongside all the other scandals with the Met police at the time, with that previous commissioner. The case itself is pretty horrific, and then there was the policing on the other side of it. What I wanted to ask you is whether serious disruption could be different for different people, and could it include psychological distressQ ?
Rupa Huq (Labour, Ealing Central and Acton)
That was what it looked like. It was like—
Rupa Huq (Labour, Ealing Central and Acton)
The other reason—
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
We are very tight for time, so I am going to Tom Hunt.
Tom Hunt (Conservative, Ipswich)
Q Sir Peter, I think you mentioned the point about police forces being aware of views within communities when it comes to policing protests. I am somebody who thinks it is very important that all protests are policed in the same way, and my slight concern is that it opens a Pandora’s box if you perhaps have a force that thinks, “Well, we think this cause is quite popular in the community, so we’re going to police it in a certain way”. Actually, that might not be the case. It might be that there is a vocal section of opinion that makes you think it is quite uncontroversial in its support when actually that is not the case. I just wondered how that is balanced.
Also, I just want a point of clarification—I think this discussion was again with Sir Peter—in terms of how we can improve things and how we can get to a point where perhaps there is a more dedicated team of people who are very trained and specialist. If we believe that these protests are becoming more frequent and more of an issue, although we do not want to go down the route of France, there have been occasions when I think that has been a temptation—when we have seen some of these out-of-control protests. I want to know what this new team that could help us get to a better place looks like.
Matt Vickers (Conservative, Stockton South)
Q We talked about the financial cost of policing these sorts of protests. Actually, as part of the pile that is spent, if the volume of resources spent increases on protest, it reduces on knife crime and on everything else. How bad does that get? When you look at something like Insulate Britain when they took to London’s streets, what happened to policing in our communities that was tackling things such as knife crime? How low does the bar get in communities when you have to prioritise something like that?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
I have to draw you to a close, Chief Superintendent. That is the end of the time allotted for the Committee to ask questions of this panel. On behalf of the Committee, I thank the witnesses for their evidence.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
We will now hear from Olly Sprague, military security and police programme director, Amnesty International; Stephanie Needleman, legal director, Justice, via Zoom; and Martha Spurrier, director of Liberty. I should say to Ms Needleman, please alert us if any technical issues arise during the course of your evidence. We have until 4.55 pm for this session. I invite the witnesses to introduce themselves for the record.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
It is good to have you. We will begin with a question from Anne McLaughlin.
Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party, Glasgow North East)
Q Good afternoon and thank you for coming. This rehash of the protest parts of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill that did not get through Parliament seems to me to be more about reacting to issues that this Government disagree with and to protesters they do not like, such as environmental protesters and Black Lives Matter protesters. Regardless of whether that is the case, this Bill affects everyone, including the one group of people whom surely no one can get upset about, and that is the WASPI campaigners—I have just remembered, I am not supposed to talk about that. We have heard about disruption to people’s lives from protests, albeit we are talking about protests that are very short-lived and last only a few hours, as Sir Peter Fahy just said. Ideally, we would all live in complete harmony with no disruption to anyone’s life, but we do not. In your view, what will cause the most severe damage, the longest term damage and the damage to the most people—racism, environmental damage, people losing their pensions, or people staging protests?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q May I ask about the serious disruption prevention orders in clause 12? As I understand it, there could be an application to the court by the authorities to prevent somebody from taking part in protests, even if they had not been convicted of something but are deemed to have been involved in disruption. I did have further details, but I did not realise I would be called so quickly; I have given the general gist of my point. Do you have a clear idea of how much would have to be proved? If you are applying for an order on the basis that someone has been involved in something but they have never been convicted of it—let us assume they have not been taken to court and acquitted of it—I guess the idea is that they would be known to the police as having been involved in previous protests. How would you see that panning out? Could they find themselves being subjected to this process just because they have been photographed at previous protests at which other people committed disruptive acts? To what extent is it a collective thing? Or would it have to be proved that an individual had done something?
“Disruption” is such a vague term. What would a person have to have done for the police to be able to go down this route? I should probably ask the Minister, because I think the answer at the moment is that we do not really know, but how do you see this panning out?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q How do you see the provisions working? As I understand it, an application has to be made to a court for the order. Would the person who was going to be subject to this order be entitled to legal representation? Would getting the order involve proving the person’s original involvement? Would they be able to challenge the fact that they were deemed to have been involved in supporting disruption on two previous occasions? Or would the police apply for the order and have it granted in absentia?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
I could understand it to a point if somebody’s presence at a future protest could lead to a dangerous situation, which is what you say the international comparison would be; but under the Bill, basically your right to protest could be removed for five years because you had not behaved impeccably on previous protests.
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q I think the Amnesty note says that in other countries, the issue is about not being allowed to organise a protest, but this measure, as I understand it, would mean that you were not allowed to participate. It could be quite specific: you would not be allowed in a particular place at a particular time, or in a particular area when something was going on. Is that right?
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q You say that in Belarus anyone who has been fined is not allowed to organise a protest for another year. This measure goes way beyond that.
Kerry McCarthy (Labour, Bristol East)
Q You would like to think that our civil liberties protections were a bit better than those in Belarus, but the ban there is only for a year, rather than five.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Q Did you wish to say something, Ms Needleman, or was I misinterpreting you?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q For precision, we should be clear that the measure that was previously considered, which you referred to, Ms Spurrier, was a protest banning order that was an absolute ban, which you rightly did not support. However, this measure is a conditional order, which may place restrictions or conditions on somebody’s ability to operate in a protest environment. For example, a Just Stop Oil person may be banned from coming within half a mile of an oil terminal, but could still attend a protest in central London outside this building about the same issue. That is the difference between the two, is it not?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Under judicial supervision.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Would the same effect currently be achievable through an injunction against an individual through a civil route?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q But you could, through a civil injunction, stop somebody attending a particular place at a particular time, or associating with particular people or, for example, coming near an oil terminal. There are wide—basically unlimited—powers to impose conditions through an injunction.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q I do not mean to rush, but we are short of time. From a human rights point of view, if you were a protester subject to some kind of control or sanction for your activity, would you rather go through a civil procedure or a criminal procedure, based on the protections that would be available to you as an individual —access to a jury trial, supervision by a judge, the level of proof and all those kind of things?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Sorry, I was not necessarily referring to SDPOs. I meant more widely. At the moment, we have a situation where we see people go to prison in this country for so-called protest activity through a civil route, because the criminal route is not deemed enough of a deterrent or is too slow. The contrast between the two is presumably that in the criminal system, there are quite strong protections, including the right to a jury trial and others, that do not apply in a civil situation. If the end result is that you are going to end up guilty of a particular offence, surely you would do it through the criminal route, rather than the civil route.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q But nevertheless, the impact or effect of the two is not dissimilar.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q I thought that for a breach of an injunction, you could face up to two years in prison.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Okay, thanks very much. Mr Sprague, I want to ask you about other jurisdictions—most notably, Scotland. My perception is that Scotland has more draconian sentencing powers in these circumstances. For example, we referred earlier to the offence of malicious mischief, which carries an unlimited prison sentence when presented in front of a judge. Just last month, the organiser of a protest in Glasgow was arrested on the grounds that the protest had not been authorised by the city council. Are you engaged with the Scottish Government over concerns about that situation, or do you think it is a very settled legal situation that has been there for some time, so that is an acceptable bar?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q The hon. Member for Ealing Central and Acton has been campaigning for some time on buffer zones around abortion clinics, which would obviously impact individuals’ rights to protest. As organisations, do you support the principle of buffer zones in such circumstances?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q Okay. Do any of the other witnesses wish to comment on buffer zones?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Ms Needleman, would you like to comment?
Rupa Huq (Labour, Ealing Central and Acton)
Can I ask a question? It is my amendment.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Order. I am going to come to you, Dr Huq, but I will decide who speaks and when. The Minister is currently speaking, and we are asking Ms Needleman, who is joining us by Zoom, whether she wishes to give a response.
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Obviously it is, and the reason why I raise it is to illustrate the subjective nature of the judgments about where the line is drawn when balancing rights between competing groups. I guess that that leads Q to my final question. I am not trying to be provocative, but I would be interested to know whether there are occasions in your organisations’ histories when you have campaigned for the rights of those who are affected by protest but not participating in it—the rights of the majority to go about their daily lives. If so, are there things we should be doing to restrict particular protests—for example, for persistent protestors who cause enormous damage or danger to others—that you think should be in the Bill?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
Q What should we do about that?
Kit Malthouse (Conservative, North West Hampshire)
No, what should we do about the hard core that you are talking about?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Ms Needleman, do you wish to say anything?
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Dr Huq, you can have your say now.
Rupa Huq (Labour, Ealing Central and Acton)
Q Sorry, I just thought that, seeing as it is my amendment, I could explain what it proposes, rather than being ventriloquised by the Minister.
The distance need not be 150 metres. We just took that from Ealing, because that is where the main road is, so then it is not in the eyeline. But it again comes back to this question of what is a vigil—those people would say they are doing a prayer vigil—what is a protest and what is harassment. In the eyes of the woman who is going in for a traumatic procedure, it feels like that, and it can be psychologically distressing. The French legislation allows for psychological distress to be considered.
Is there a right to privacy as well? I ask that because the London Borough of Ealing has acted under local authority powers, and only three local authorities in the whole country have done so since 2018, because the process is too onerous. Every time a case has gone to the High Court, the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, the privacy of the person having their procedure has trumped freedom of thought, expression, conscience, belief—all that stuff. I just wondered where the three of you stand on that. Again, I am disappointed, because with Sarah Everard, we said so many times, “This should never happen again; she was only walking down the street,” but, in my eyes, these people are just trying to access the pavement to have a perfectly legal procedure. As the Minister pointed out to me in the House the other day, this has been lumped in with the vax protests. I think it is about women—a marginalised community who should be protected, as you said at the start—being able to use the pavement. They should be able to do so unimpeded. What do you three of you think?
Rupa Huq (Labour, Ealing Central and Acton)
Q I feel that they should not be on the doors of the clinic, though, because that is deliberately designed to shame women and not really to do anything else. Otherwise, they should be targeting legislators or doing it on the other side of the road, where it is not visible and upsetting.
Rupa Huq (Labour, Ealing Central and Acton)
Q I totally agree; it should be considered case by case. I would have asked about our local police, if I could have had a go. There were two groups—it was “West Side Story”—with the protestors and the counter-protestors, who felt they had to escort people in each time. The process has freed up police time, and no one has been fined under it.
I want to ask about suspicionless stop and search—no one has said anything about it—which corrodes trust for BME communities, and about how body cameras could be a way out of completely suspicionless stop and search.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
Order. You will have to draw it to a close, Mr Sprague, because we are at the end.
David Mundell (Conservative, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale)
It is not your fault; the Committee had determined certain timescales for the panels, and we have reached the end of the timescale for this panel. My apologies to those I was not able to call during this section.
My thanks to our witnesses—those in the room, and Ms Needleman, who has joined us by Zoom. We are grateful to all the witnesses for their contributions.