Connect with us

Published

on

Rishi Sunak has described a planned pro-Palestinian march in London on Armistice Day as “disrespectful” – but has accepted the protest will go ahead.

The prime minister met with the chief of the Metropolitan Police Sir Mark Rowley for a crisis meeting this afternoon – and had vowed to hold him “accountable” for the commissioner’s decision to greenlight the demonstration on 11 November.

Sir Mark had resisted calls to try and block a march taking place – and said, after looking at intelligence, the legal threshold for a ban had not been met.

Israel-Gaza latest: ‘Hamas head of weapons killed’

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM: Met Police chief ‘accountable’ over protest

In a statement, the prime minister said: “Freedom is the right to peacefully protest. And the test of that freedom is whether our commitment to it can survive the discomfort and frustration of those who seek to use it, even if we disagree with them. We will meet that test and remain true to our principles.”

He added: “It’s welcome that the police have confirmed that the march will be away from the Cenotaph and they will ensure that the timings do not conflict with any remembrance events.

“There remains the risk of those who seek to divide society using this weekend as a platform to do so. That is what I discussed with the Metropolitan Police Commissioner in our meeting.

“The commissioner has committed to keep the Met Police’s posture under constant review based on the latest intelligence about the nature of the protests.”

Read more:
Labour shadow minister resigns over Starmer’s Gaza position
Explained: Can you ban a protest?

Sir Mark Rowley has interpreted the law correctly

By Graham Wettone, policing analyst

Sir Mark Rowley was very careful with his words about why the pro-Palestinian protest this Saturday has not been banned.

He spoke about the legal issues around banning a gathering and then explained the possible options for a ban.

He has interpreted the law correctly and some in government appear to have misunderstood or misinterpreted it, and forgotten the police have operational independence.

Section 12 of the Public Order Act 1986 allows for marches and processions to have conditions placed on them if the senior officer “reasonably believes” it may result in serious disorder, damage or disruption.

The Met can impose conditions relating to the duration and route of a march, as placing a number restriction is totally unworkable. That is what they will be doing with the organisers this Saturday, as the organising groups have refused to cancel the protest.

Section 13 of the Public Order Act relates to banning a march. This is only applicable if the commissioner reasonably believes that the powers under Section 12 – any conditions he imposes on the procession – will not be sufficient to prevent serious disorder.

Sir Mark clearly stated that, at the moment, the intelligence does not support the “reasonable belief” that serious disorder is likely, hence he cannot legally apply for a ban under Section 13. I would agree that is probably the case – but intelligence will be developing over the next few days, and the commissioner did not rule out the situation may change before Saturday.

Sir Mark then explained the law around gatherings or assemblies. Police can impose conditions on these under Section 14 of Public Order Act, which is similar to Section 12 in that there needs to be a “reasonable belief” of “serious disorder”.

However a key difference is that Section 13 only applies to processions or marches under Section 12 – and not gatherings under Section 14. There are no legal powers to ban people gathering.

The Met tried to prevent unlawful assemblies using Section 14 across London a few years ago with Just Stop Oil, but the High Court ruled it was unlawful and that gatherings cannot be legally banned.

The likely scenario as it stands is that if a ban went in for the march, the organising groups would still have people attend a “gathering” – and the fact a ban is in place may well increase numbers. If groups then decide to separate off in different directions, and if there are significant numbers in the thousands, then arresting all is impossible.

PM ‘picking a fight with police’

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer had accused Mr Sunak of “cowardice” for “picking a fight” with the police.

He tweeted: “Remembrance events must be respected. Full stop.

“But the person the PM needs to hold accountable is his home secretary. Picking a fight with the police instead of working with them is cowardice.”

Home Secretary Suella Braverman had called the pro-Palestinian demonstrations “hate marches” and said anyone who vandalised the Cenotaph on Armistice Day “must be put into a jail cell faster than their feet can touch the ground”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM ‘politicking’ over pro-Palestine march

No 10 denies putting pressure on Met

Downing Street denied seeking to put pressure on the Met, which is operationally independent, and insisted the meeting was about “seeking assurances” that their approach is “robust”.

The Met has said its officers were already preparing for remembrance events over the weekend and “we will do everything in our power to ensure that people who want to mark the occasion can do so safely and without disruption.”

In a statement on Tuesday, Sir Mark said: “The laws created by Parliament are clear. There is no absolute power to ban protest, therefore there will be a protest this weekend.”

He added that the use of the power to block moving protests is “incredibly rare” and must be reserved for cases where there is intelligence to suggest a “real threat” of serious disorder.

He said organisers of Saturday’s rally have shown “complete willingness to stay away from the Cenotaph and Whitehall and have no intention of disrupting the nation’s remembrance events”.

“Should this change, we’ve been clear we will use powers and conditions available to us to protect locations and events of national importance at all costs.”

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Organisers say protest will be ‘well away’ from Cenotaph

Tens of thousands have demonstrated in London in recent weeks over Palestinian deaths in the Israel-Hamas war, with 29 arrested during a fourth week of protests last Saturday, during which fireworks were thrown.

Organisers of the protest next Saturday say it will be “well away” from the Cenotaph – going from Hyde Park, around a mile from the war memorial in Whitehall, to the US embassy – and won’t start until after the 11am silence.

The Met chief will likely come under further pressure to change his mind in the coming days, with Cabinet ministers stressing discussions are ongoing.

Health Secretary Steve Barclay told Sky News that 11 November was the “wrong day” for protest action in London and “there’ll be ongoing discussions on this”.

He said: “There is a legal threshold and the Commissioner is of the view that that legal threshold has not been met.

“Obviously, the Home Office and colleagues will discuss that over the course of the day.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Lisa Nandy says Sir Keir Starmer ‘very sensible’ to accept football tickets worth thousands

Published

on

By

Lisa Nandy says Sir Keir Starmer 'very sensible' to accept football tickets worth thousands

Lisa Nandy has said Sir Keir Starmer’s decision to accept thousands of pounds worth of football tickets was “very sensible”.

The minister for culture, media and sport also said she had never accepted free clothes from a donor.

Speaking to Sky News at the start of the Labour Party conference today, the MP for Wigan said: “The problem that has arisen since [Sir Keir] became leader of the opposition and then prime minister is that for him to sit in the stands would require a huge security detail, would be disruptive for other people and it would cost the taxpayer a lot of money.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM ‘pays for his season ticket’

“So I think he’s taken a very sensible decision that’s not the right and appropriate thing to do, and it’s right to accept that he has to go and sit in a different area.

“But I know that he’d much rather be sitting in the stands cheering people on with the usual crowd that he’s been going to the football with for years.”

Ms Nandy also said while she has not accepted free clothes – joking “I think you can probably see that I choose my own clothes sadly” – she doesn’t “make any judgements about what other members of parliament do”.

Follow the latest on politics

More on Keir Starmer

She said: “The only judgement I would make is if they’re breaking the rules, so they’re trying to hide what they’re doing. That’s when problems arise.

“Because the point of being open and transparent is that people can see where the relationships are, and they can then judge for themselves whether there’s been any undue influence.”

She asserted there had not been an undue influence in gifts accepted by senior Labour figures, adding: “We don’t want the news and the commentary to be dominated by conversations about clothes.

“We rightly have a system, I think, where the taxpayer doesn’t fund these things. We don’t claim on expenses for them. And so MPs will always take donations, will always take gifts in kind.

“MPs of all political parties have historically done that and that is the system that we have.”

Read more:
Everything you need to know about Sir Keir’s freebies
Westminister Accounts: Search for your MP

She added: “I don’t think there’s any suggestion here that Keir Starmer has broken any rules. I don’t think there’s any suggestion that he’s done anything wrong.

“We expect our politicians to be well turned out, we expect them to be people who go out and represent us at different events and represent the country at different events and are clothed appropriately.

“But the point is that when we accept donations for that or for anything else, that we declare them and we’re open and transparent about them.”

👉 Click here to follow Electoral Dysfunction wherever you get your podcasts 👈

Sir Keir, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves said yesterday they will no longer accept donations in the future to pay for clothes.

The announcement followed criticism of Sir Keir’s gifts from donors, which included clothing worth £16,200 and multiple pairs of glasses worth £2,485, according to the MPs’ register of interests.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

The register shows Ms Rayner has accepted clothing donations to the value of £2,230.

Sky News also revealed the scale of Sir Keir’s donations this week as part of our Westminster Accounts investigation.

Sir Keir was found to have received substantially more gifts and freebies than any other MP – his total in gifts, benefits, and hospitality topped £100,000 since December 2019.

Continue Reading

Politics

AI may lead to inflationary pressures: Bank of Canada

Published

on

By

AI may lead to inflationary pressures: Bank of Canada

Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem highlighted the potential risks AI poses to inflation and financial stability in the short term.

Continue Reading

Politics

Bank of Canada just says no to retail CBDC in reshuffling of priorities

Published

on

By

Bank of Canada just says no to retail CBDC in reshuffling of priorities

Regulating and speeding up payments without a CBDC are more important to the Canadian central bank.

Continue Reading

Trending