Originally published at http://www.politics.co.uk
We’ve all been surprised at how quickly public confidence in the Met police has fallen in the past month, in spite of crime dropping, public satisfaction often very high, and more and more officers on the streets. It shows that we probably have very high expectations of our police force, and the video footage of police behaving badly has been a shock to many.
So, I’d like to say, that in spite of being a forceful critic of some of the policing of the G20 protests, I do still believe that, in terms of effectiveness and experience, the Met is almost certainly the best police force in the world. It’s very annoying when people say that in other countries the police would have used water cannon or CS gas. Our police can’t afford to measure themselves against other police forces failures – they have to set themselves against a standard of excellence that we feel happy with. And it’s the Metropolitan Police Authority’s (MPA) job to help them set that standard and stick to it.
Today is one of those make or break moments in the life of a democratic society, as the MPA struggles with the fallout from the death of Ian Tomlinson and the policing of the G20 protests. The MPA has to maintain a balance between reflecting the concerns of Londoners, while supporting the police in doing a very difficult job. A YouGov poll for the Evening Standard and London Tonight found that Londoners were fairly evenly split on how well the police handle demonstrations, with 45 per cent believing the police were poor and 48 per cent thinking the police did a good job.
Any assumption that Guardian readers are in one camp and Telegraph readers are in the other does not take into account the history of complaints about the policing of demonstrations, which includes the Countryside Alliance march of 2004. Whatever your personal view on this gradient of public opinion, I hope that we are all united by the assumption that the police are meant to be our servants, not our masters. This happy assumption is one of the pillars of a healthy democracy.
The MPA debate will be in public and will deal with police shortcomings, but we members have to remember that it’s more important that the police learn from the mistakes than to rub their noses in their mess. I’m furious about the aggression that the police showed the peaceful Climate Camp protest, and I never want to see policing like that again, but I also want young people to be free of the fear of knife crime, and I want to know that the Safer Neighbourhood Teams are working well with the community.
It is also a make or break moment for Boris as chair of the MPA, who faces the prospect of a split vote on the MPA for the first time in its nine years of existence.
There are two motions on the agenda. One motion calls for the creation of a panel of MPA members to review the policing of demonstrations and the other outlines the basic principles on which a review of public order policing should be based. Both these motions seem moderate steps towards reform when measured against You Tube images of Ian Tomlinson and others allegedly assaulted by police officers.
However, there will be other members of the MPA who will base their own arguments on You Tube images showing the alleged assaults on police by protesters. Boris has to seek a way forward which unites all Londoners around a common debate and common principles regarding how they are policed at such events.
My own line of questioning today will focus upon the Climate Change Camp in Bishopsgate, which was largely ignored by the media during the day itself because of its peaceful nature. The camp was run by the fluffies and hippies who tried to arrange meetings with the police ahead of the demonstration. They were very clear about their peaceful aims and constantly liaising with the police over practical arrangements like food and toilets. The camp was ‘kettled’ by the police around 7pm on the basis that they wanted to stop it from being infiltrated by ‘violent’ elements coming from the separate protest outside the Bank of England.
Having confined the protest, the police then used riot shields and batons to force it backwards, a tactic which initially failed due to the large number of protesters holding their arms up in surrender and singing ‘this is not a riot’. The best that can be said of the police’s behaviour and tactics is that they clearly succeeded in their aim of keeping out any violent elements, who might have fought back. Having held these non violent protesters inside the camp for several hours, they eventually let many of them out before using the same tactic of baton charges and riot shields to completely clear the road in time for a non-existent midnight rush of traffic.
There are so many things wrong with using this degree of force on peaceful protests that I don’t know where to start. The police have a duty to facilitate peaceful protest, so why didn’t they let the climate camp finish their 24 hour protest, which would be all over before a company like Thames Water had got the signs up to dig their latest hole in the road?
When we meet today and discuss the policing of the G20 protests, the MPA must always keep an eye on the future. It’s very important to oust the thuggish element in the police, but we don’t want a demoralised service that can’t perform its job of protecting society from criminals. The MPA chair, Boris, Mayor of London, has the responsibility for whether or not London comes out of this meeting a more united city. Let’s hope he’s up to the job.
ENDS
Jenny Jones is a member of the London Assembly and the Metropolitan Police Authority. A former deputy Mayor of London, Jenny is the leader of the Green Group on the Assembly and deputy chair of the planning and housing committee. She is also our candidate for London Mayor 2012. For more information on her campaign, please visit www.jennyforlondon.org