Will Protesters Have To Pay To March?

Protests are in danger of becoming privatised, campaigners have told Sky News.

Thousands of people will gather later to join the Campaign Against Climate Change's march through central London, but its organisers have told Sky News they were shocked to be told by the Met Police that they would have to pay thousands towards road closures and for private security.

"We were very surprised to be told that we need to hire a private traffic management firm to close the roads for us," organiser Claire James told Sky News.

"The costs to organisations like ourselves is really significant. It's an important democratic right to protest and it should be something the state facilitates.

"We're really worried it could create a situation where the right to protest ends up being limited to those that can afford to pay those costs."

The Met Police has traditionally always taken the lead when it comes to helping organisers prepare for protest marches.

But it recently said campaign groups must be prepared to contribute more towards the costs, like producing a traffic plan which can be more than £10,000 and hiring certified road stewards, which can be around £120 a day per steward.

Two marches planned for this weekend - the Campaign Against Climate Change and the Million Women Rise march - were expected to be among the first to have to pay.

However, the Met has now agreed to help with resources.

In a statement, it said: "We have been discussing this issue for some years with our partners, including Transport for London and local authorities.

"We will continue to engage with our partners and protest groups to ensure everyone is clear where responsibilities lie.

"Many protest events take place throughout the year without the need for any policing presence, leaving police officers in local communities where people want to see them."

Campaigners insist few groups could afford to pay the costs.

However, with drastic cuts to policing budgets, it is an area where many forces are keen to make savings.

Chris Armitt, the national police lead for protests, told Sky News forces they are having to "weigh up" where resources are most needed.

"We will facilitate lawful and peaceful protests as it's a fundamental right of democracy, but if that starts to be prohibitively expensive for the police service, for the local authority and for anyone else, then you've got to ask the question, is it proportional?

"I think it's quite realistic to say to organisers 'we need you to do things in different ways, we need you to consider whether you can provide some of the supervision and stewarding for the event'."

Seems right to me

after all

lets consider our sgc and fac

those of us who shoot are actually indulging our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to bear arms...

the certificates (NOT LICENCES...there IS an important difference) are rightly in place to ensure that each of us is a "fit and proper person to excercise that right"

NOW in law these certificates are there for public protection and do NOT give us (the shooter) ANYTHING that is not a right in anycase... therefore there is a strong argument to say that as they are there for the publics benefit ...the public should pay

I realise however that that is unrealistic and in fact if truth be known the cost of the certificates is indeed set too low, the cost having been kept at its present level for over 10 years...

I would infact absolutely agree to in increase, possibly to double the present fee, in exchange for some simple (and cost saving changes)

like a 10 year licence (or even licence for life) (since the plice get any feed back going on your helath or any "misdeeds" so constant revisions are not necessary)

like a consiistant approach to licencing across the country, with Chief constables being made to stick to the "real rules" not what amounts to, in many cases, their own whims and predujdices.

in fact a "central licencing authority" similar to the DVLA would be good....

there is no reason, except in certain circumstances, for an application to take more than 4 weeks....yey some constabularies take 9 months plus ojn a regular basis.....

so a "customers charter " please....


then I will happily pay £100 or even £150 for my cert....


so in comparison to the above post.......

these "protesters" wish to excercise their "right" to protest...thats fine and dandy

however there ARE issues of "public protection" involved....


IF us SHOOTERS have to pay...then so should these protesters....

THAT my friends ...is equity......

Rubbish, you take away people's right to protest and you have fascist state not a democracy.

So, was the cost of security and policing included in the Olympics? Who pays for the police at music festivals? Who pays for the police at football matches, not just at the match but for the policing of the crowds going home etc?

All marches and protests, no matter what they are for, and I include the EDL etc in that, should be free. Our right to protest is sacrosant. So many things would never have changed without it.

risingsun wrote:All marches and protests, no matter what they are for, and I include the EDL etc in that, should be free.  Our right to protest is sacrosant.   So many things would never have changed without it.

so is my right to own a fire arm.....it is afterall a CONSTITUTIONAL right..... and yet you think I should pay......

small protests dont require much policing so dont cost much (except ceratain "troublemaking ones....like the "anti's" whos criminal tendencies and proclivity to bodily violence is well knowm)
as the number of people rises so does the cost

therfore the cost is proportional to the size of the protest...


so a fiver or tenner each seems quite reasonable