THE Government has announced more anti-protest rules including allowing police to arrest people wearing face coverings to demonstrations.
Other proposals would see protesters in England and Wales banned from carrying flares and other pyrotechnics, while people who climb national monuments, like war memorials, could face three months behind bars and fines of £1000.
It has sparked accusations that ministers are “pandering to [the] far-right” in response to growing calls from Conservative commentators, including former home secretary Suella Braverman, to take tougher action against pro-Palestine protesters.
SNP MP Amy Callaghan said her party opposed the measures to “clamp down on people’s right to protest”.
The MP for East Dunbartonshire said: “People feel helpless in the wake of the situation – unfolding 24/7 on our social media feeds – in Israel and Gaza. They donate what they can in a cost-of-living crisis, they boycott, they protest.
“How does Westminster respond? By cutting cost-of-living support, by banning public bodies from ethically investing, by clamping down on the right to protest with measures that will particularly impact certain people in society – particularly those living with a disability.”
She added: “Isn’t this just another example of this Government pandering to its far-right wing rather than protecting the legitimate right to protest?”
Home Office minister Tom Tugendhat replied: “I’m sorry, but not entirely surprised, that the SNP is choosing to make divisive politics out of what has, frankly, been a moment of national unity.”
It comes after 2023's Public Order Act gave English and Welsh police sweeping new powers to crack down on protests.
Meanwhile, Labour have indicated they would not outright oppose the proposed measures but would “scrutinise the details”.
Shadow Home Office minister Dan Jarvis warned that “dissidents opposing oppressive regimes” who protest outside foreign embassies in the UK should be allowed discretion when wearing face coverings to protect their families abroad from harm.
READ MORE: UK Government should be able to BAN protests, says Suella Braverman
Jarvis said: “It is essential that the police are able to maintain public order whilst safeguarding the right to legitimate peaceful protest.
“We will therefore scrutinise the details of these proposals to ensure that any new measures are applied appropriately and proportionately.”
He added: “Whilst we do understand the genuine concern about protesters committing public order offences wearing face coverings, we are also concerned that there might be at times legitimate reasons why some protesters would want to wear face coverings.
“Let me give the minister an example. When dissidents protest outside foreign embassies, and the minister will know which ones I have in mind, they may well want to conceal their identity to protect their families back home.”
The Labour frontbencher asked for more clarity about how the new powers would be used, adding: “The UK is and should always be a safe haven for dissidents opposing oppressive regimes.”
READ MORE: SNP call on Labour to help ensure 'draconian' anti-protest legislation is scrapped
Jarvis welcomed the ban on flares and fireworks, as well as the plans to curtail protesters from climbing war memorials, which he described as “extremely important places, places to remember those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in the service of our country”.
Tugendhat assured MPs it would be at “a police officer’s discretion to give an order for the face covering to be required to be removed”.
He added: “That will mean that those commanding the policing of protesting will have the discretion as to when they will be asking for that instruction to be carried out.”
Officers already have the power to ask people to remove face coverings at designated protests – where forces believe crimes are likely to occur.
But the new offence will allow police to arrest protesters who disregard their orders, with those who flout the rules facing a month behind bars and a £1000 fine.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel