Wednesday, March 31, 2021
Did watchdog let the Met off the hook over Clapham Common policing?
Reading the reports on Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) review of the shocking scenes at Clapham Common when police physically restrained women paying tribute to the late Sarah Everard, one cannot help but question the scope of their inquiry.
As the BBC report, the watchdog said there was too little communication between officers at the event but their response, amid Covid restrictions, had been "measured". It called the media coverage a "public relations disaster" for police and added that "there was insufficient communication between police commanders about changing events on the ground".
More importantly, the HMICFRS concluded that the police were wrong in their reading of the law. Some protests can take place legally, even in areas under Tier 4 lockdown. They say the Met could have worked with Reclaim These Streets to manage a safe and respectful vigil, but they didn't because of "confusion" over the law.
In fact this is nonsense. Blaming the politicians for this confusion, as the report does, is actually a major cop-out. There was a court ruling the day before the vigil that made it crystal clear it was possible to hold a legally valid vigil with the co-operation of the police. The fact that senior management in the Met decided to press on regardless in suppressing a peaceful and properly stewarded action led to them putting their own officers into the firing line and left them facing the consequences of a disastrous policing operation.
It is for this reason that calls for the resignation of the Commissioner are absolutely valid. This was a situation that could have been avoided if she and her management team had been more flexible and facilitated a proper vigil. Nor does she improve her case by laying into 'armchair critics'.
As the BBC report, the watchdog said there was too little communication between officers at the event but their response, amid Covid restrictions, had been "measured". It called the media coverage a "public relations disaster" for police and added that "there was insufficient communication between police commanders about changing events on the ground".
More importantly, the HMICFRS concluded that the police were wrong in their reading of the law. Some protests can take place legally, even in areas under Tier 4 lockdown. They say the Met could have worked with Reclaim These Streets to manage a safe and respectful vigil, but they didn't because of "confusion" over the law.
In fact this is nonsense. Blaming the politicians for this confusion, as the report does, is actually a major cop-out. There was a court ruling the day before the vigil that made it crystal clear it was possible to hold a legally valid vigil with the co-operation of the police. The fact that senior management in the Met decided to press on regardless in suppressing a peaceful and properly stewarded action led to them putting their own officers into the firing line and left them facing the consequences of a disastrous policing operation.
It is for this reason that calls for the resignation of the Commissioner are absolutely valid. This was a situation that could have been avoided if she and her management team had been more flexible and facilitated a proper vigil. Nor does she improve her case by laying into 'armchair critics'.
The poor misunderstood Metropolitan Police Commissioner appears to have misunderstood the nature of 'policing by consent.' We may not be at the front line but we expect officers to respond sympathetically and appropriately when faced with difficult situations such as that at Clapham Common.
Meanwhile, another major report out today from No 10’s Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, has concluded that the UK should be seen as an international exemplar of racial equality, and has played down the impact of structural factors in ethnic disparities.
Given that Boris Johnson, who has released this report, called black Africans “picanninies,” Muslim women “letterboxes” and said the problem with Africa is that "we are not in charge any more,” I am sure I can be forgiven for not taking the commission's conclusions seriously.
Meanwhile, another major report out today from No 10’s Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, has concluded that the UK should be seen as an international exemplar of racial equality, and has played down the impact of structural factors in ethnic disparities.
Given that Boris Johnson, who has released this report, called black Africans “picanninies,” Muslim women “letterboxes” and said the problem with Africa is that "we are not in charge any more,” I am sure I can be forgiven for not taking the commission's conclusions seriously.
Comments:
<< Home
"Blaming the politicians for this confusion, as the report does, is actually a major cop-out. There was a court ruling the day before the vigil that made it crystal clear it was possible to hold a legally valid vigil with the co-operation of the police. The fact that senior management in the Met decided to press on regardless in suppressing a peaceful and properly stewarded action led to them putting their own officers into the firing line and left them facing the consequences of a disastrous policing operation."
Just about every bit of this is wrong. Priti Patel is certainly to blame for the confusing instructions and rules around what was allowed and her leaning on the Met Commisionner in asking her to come down hard on protestors. The court ruling backed the police in that they had every right to refuse to sanction the official event, given lockdown restrictions and the need for the Police to enforce such restrictions. The lockdown rules, by the way, have been supported all the way by our party. And the supposed "heavy-handed" response to the many people turning up resulted in just 4 arrests in total. In fact, the police were restrained, allowing the vigil for many hours until, at around 6pm, speeches started from the bandstand and people crowded forward. Ed Davey was premature at best in criticising the Met Police and he needs to apologise.
Just about every bit of this is wrong. Priti Patel is certainly to blame for the confusing instructions and rules around what was allowed and her leaning on the Met Commisionner in asking her to come down hard on protestors. The court ruling backed the police in that they had every right to refuse to sanction the official event, given lockdown restrictions and the need for the Police to enforce such restrictions. The lockdown rules, by the way, have been supported all the way by our party. And the supposed "heavy-handed" response to the many people turning up resulted in just 4 arrests in total. In fact, the police were restrained, allowing the vigil for many hours until, at around 6pm, speeches started from the bandstand and people crowded forward. Ed Davey was premature at best in criticising the Met Police and he needs to apologise.
Actually the sentence is absolutely correct. If you read the judgement, the court ruled that events were permissible if the authorities worked constructively with organisers to deliver them. The Met refused to follow this through. It would not have been against the rules if the Met had worked with organisers to put it in place properly.
Post a Comment
<< Home
