The name Donnachadh McCarthy means something to those of us of a certain age. Donnachadh was once a Liberal Democrat and he was proper Awkward Squad. I spent many hours arguing with him on Cix, which was where all online Liberal Democrats hung out back in the day. Quite often I agreed with him and even when I didn’t, I realised that he was the sort of pain in the backside that every leader needs. Liberals have always been particularly bad at venerating their leaders. Willie Rennie described us, the day he became Scottish leader, as a party that doesn’t want to be led. He, actually, has been pretty good at engaging with members and boosting morale, probably better than any leader than I’ve ever known, but even he needs his wings clipping at times.
Anyway, back to Donnachadh. There will be many figures from the establishment in the Ashdown and Kennedy Eras who will have felt the sharp end of his tongue. John Tilley, if he’s reading this, will no doubt fill in some of the details in the comments. The day Paddy issued that Joint Statement with Blair was a case in point. And as Deputy Chair of the Federal Executive, he pushed very hard for the party to oppose the war in Iraq. Where I parted company from him was his ability to see conspiracy theories in absolutely everything when circumstance or cock-up was the most accurate conclusion. He was, however, pretty insightful at times at where the party was getting it wrong and how it needed to engage with people.
Since he left the party in 2005, he’s focused his energies on being an environmental campaigner. I was not in the least surprised to find that he was in with the Occupy protesters. It seemed a very Donnachadh thing to do. Yesterday, he managed to get himself arrested in Parliament Square. However, if you watch the video (about 15 minutes in), you have to wonder if the Police response was not just a wee bit, actually, quite a lot, heavy handed.
There are a whole load of things you aren’t supposed to do in Parliament Square, one of them being to look like you are going to set up camp. That’s the law, sadly. I have to say that I suspect that in this case the law may have pointed ears and go hee-haw. The tarpaulin that Donnachadh was carrying may well be what attracted the attention of the Police, but it was folded. He had done nothing with it and they didn’t mention it to him as a reason he was being arrested. With him was Green Peer Jenny Jones.
To me, the policing tactics seemed a bit over the top. And I’m not particularly impressed by the restrictions on the right to protest near to our Parliament. If you look at the list of things that are not allowed, it’s a wonder the Equal Marriage vigils were allowed last year – they had amplified sound, although they weren’t technically on Parliament Square.
A thriving democracy is one where peaceful protest is not just accepted but celebrated. These scenes worry me. What do you think?
Photo by Paul Walter
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings. You can find her on Bluesky at caronmlindsay.bsky.social
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Lord Bonkers: "Something less terrible than the truth"
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Reform under water
expats
David Raw
Tom Reeve
Nonconformistradical
Sam Ammar
30 Comments
Absolutely. The closure of Parliament Square to protesters, in 2005 I think, was part of the “war on terror” restriction of civil liberties; it would be good to see the restrictions removed. The excuse seems to be that terrorists might hide among demonstrators, but that kind of paranoia would suggest banning all traffic from being that close to Parliament.
It’ll be interesting to see if the Canadian government over-react to today’s terrorist (?) incident outside their parliament.
I only watched the section where Donnachadh and Jenny were arrested but it seemed extraordinarily over the top. It’s a good thing that someone was documenting it so carefully. The irony is that Jenny Jones is a London Assembly member and the Deputy Chair of the police and crime committee (as well as being a member of the House of Lords). She didn’t appear to be infringing anything unless it is now unlawful to hold on to someone who is carrying a piece of plastic.
Thanks Caron. Yes I agree using nearly 30 police in military formation to arrest someone for the “crime” of having a folded tarpaulin under my arm, is totally over the top. It is ironic that a former Deputy Chair of the FE, should be arrested in such a manner under legislastion passed by my former colleagues.
I was arrested because a tarpaulin was judged to be “sleeping equipment”, which the Lib Dem / Tory government banned from Parliament Square, making the previous Blairite suppression of political dissent in front of Parliament even more restricted.
Caron wrote —“Anyway, back to Donnachadh. There will be many figures from the establishment in the Ashdown and Kennedy Eras who will have felt the sharp end of his tongue. John Tilley, if he’s reading this, will no doubt fill in some of the details in the comments.”
Donnachadh was an excellent Liberal Democrat Councillor in the London Borough of Southwark. He was and still is an activist for many causes beyond party politics. He had solar panels on the roof of his house before Ed Davey had left school and lives a life-style which is not just carbon neutral but carbon negative.
It was a great disappointment to many party members when Donnachadh left our party. He did so after many years of trying to do the positive, constructive thing within the internal “democratic” structures of the party. A regular and popular speaker at annual Conferences, he championed a number of causes within the party and we benefited hugely from his active membership. He was also the best candidate for London Mayor that we never had. He remains a good friend to Rosemary and me.
I am not sure that “sharp tongue” tells the whole story. He was and is very persuasive, sometimes more patiently assertive than I could ever manage. I like the fact that if he thinks I am talking rubbish he will tell me so. He would expect nothing else in return because he is above all else an honest individual. I do not often think he is talking rubbish.
When I saw this video a few hours before it was featured here, I was firstly concerned that after 8 hours in police custody Donnachadh was OK.
My second thought was to ask Donnachadh if he had persuaded any of the arresting officers to buy a copy of his latest book.
It is a sad reflection on democracy in the UK in 2014 that one can no longer walk along the pavement or stand on the pavement in Parliament Square without fear of being arrested. But this is the law, recently passed, which enables any police office to arrest someone who “might” do something, or even “might be about to do something” in Parliament Square.
The people in Hong Kong currently taking part in the “umbrella” protests there are being treated better by the police and Beijing than UK citizens are treated outside our own Parliament buildings.
I am not sure that “sharp tongue” tells the whole story. He was and is very persuasive, sometimes more patiently assertive than I could ever manage. I like the fact that if he thinks I am talking rubbish he will tell me so. He would expect nothing else in return because he is above all else an honest individual. I do not often think he is talking rubbish.
Great, but these days in the party such a person would be seen as contributing to a testosterone-fuelled confrontational environment that excludes certain groups.
No Richard, with the likes of Donnachadh in the party it would be far less likely to be excluding those people.
Sometimes you have to put your neck on the line, and Donnachadh has always been prepared to do that.
I hereby call on Nick Clegg to explain publicly to the members of this party why he has supported the policy that led to these arrests, and why he also supports legislation that means that should Donnachadh and others arrested in this protest choose to take civil action against the police for their action on this occasion may result in their case being heard in private without them having the right to be present and counter claims against them. That is the implication of the secret courts legislation and this is one of our own (member of not nobody can claim that Donnachadh is not now of our own) who is being subjected to illiberal legislation introduced, promoted and supported by a Liberal Democrat Leader.
I and many others have warned Nick Clegg against these illiberal measures. Now he must answer for them, and LDV is as good a place as any.
This is utterly disgraceful.
People may be interested in this ‘paper’ by Kiron Reid http://www.pbs.plymouth.ac.uk/solon/journal/vol.1%20issue3%202013/Reid%20final%20Parliament%20Protest.pdf
I have urged Nick Clegg to use Downing Street more as a place from which to talk to the people, to launch and lead campaigns.
In this case, and in view of the importance of Parliament Sq as an historic place of direct communication and protest, I think Nick Clegg should pay the Sq a visit, leaving from Downing Street, walking down Whitehall, taking with him over his arm a tarp, a sleeping bag and speaking through an electronically amplified loud hailer.
I agree with all the comments, just wanted to express my solidarity to Donnachadh through these pages.
As I recall, Donnachadh resigned because the powers that then were in the party failed to be open and transparent with the membership and the public. There are parallels with yesterday’s police action in Westminster.
I am thoroughly biased since Donnachadh was my ward colleague on Southwark Council and has been one of my dearest friends for twenty years . However, how a gay ex-ballet dancer who was one of the kindest most patient caseworkers for his constituents you could ever witness could be deemed to contribute to a world full of “testosterone filled confrontation” I don’t know!
His brilliantly organised demonstrations to protest about cycling deaths have been universally admired and marked by a remarkable level of police co-operation. There will be another on Oxford Street on November 15.
Donnachadh McCarthy had and has integrity and believes what he says and acts accordingly – some people in the party were very uncomfortable with that. because it is an contrast with their own behaviour.
I have just spoken to Donnachadh. His arrest was for not giving his name – as he is carried into the van he is giving the police his name and thanking them for acting peacefully. He was handcuffed for three hours and held in solitary confinement in a cell at Brixton Police Station for seven hours. His requests for water and to contact his solicitor were also delayed for hours.
I think this treatment of a peaceful protester is way over the top. In these times of danger from terrorists etc. this is a complete waste of Police resources.
No prisoner should be denied their rights in custody. Perhaps it is time our part of this coalition made their presence felt in the interest of human rights and civil liberties both of which are being gradually eroded before out eyes
Shocking. At about the time of the original Blair law against protests in Parliament Square I suggested to Mark Oaten, then Home Affairs spokesman, that the entire Parliamentary Party should stage an illegal protest against the legislation and DARE the government to enforce the law. He of course was having none of it not wanting to rock the boat or something. It used to be that liberals stood up for civil liberties and some still do but not the toadies elected under false pretences.
We have now gone through decades where trendy types engage in these “look at me” protests, while actual electoral politics has steadily shifted rightwards. All these protest look like is a bunch of stuck-up middle class types going on about their own obsessions. What do they actually think they are going to achieve? They certainly don’t seem to be doing much to get the electorate to vote for the sort of politician who support their sort of policies. Neither do they seem to be doing much to get the existing politicians to shift their way. If they think it will lead to The Revolution, well, I wonder how that will work? Russell Brand ending up as our Dear Leader? Or maybe as in Syria – the establishment of rule by a bunch of psychopaths.
I rather feel those who defend this sort of thing do so because they suppose the protests will always be about issues where they have some sympathy. Well, if they are to be truly sincere they must not discriminate depending on the issue. So if a bunch of racists sets up camp in Parliament Square to put the case for racist policies they must be as happy to support them as they are the trendy-wendies.
Matthew Huntbach 23rd Oct ’14 – 2:47pm
“…..We have now gone through decades where trendy types engage in these “look at me” protests, while actual electoral politics has steadily shifted rightwards. ”
Matthew, I think you have completely misjudged the character and the facts of what was going on in Parliament Sq.
You may be taking a deliberately contrary line or this may be your own genuine reaction.
If the latter, I think you should seriously reconsider what you have written.
On the points in your comment —-
1. I am no expert on what is a “trendy type”. But I would seriously suggest to you that Jenny Jones, Deputy-chair of the GLA Police Committee and member of the House of Lords , dressed in a weather proof jacket will not be gracing the pages of Vogue as the epitome of trendiness.
She is one of the people arrested in the video and then, according to the Met Police statement to the Evening Standard, “de-arrested”, presumably once the arresting officers had it pointed out to them by wiser heads that to shove a lady member of the House of Lords, and deputy chair of the committee responsible for the Met might be a bit of an own goal. I have never come across the word “de-arrested” before but it was a narrow escape for the constables who made the arrest.
2. Your point about — what if it had been a right wing demonstration. Elsewhere, Sandra Gidley (former LD MP) has commented in relation to this event this week, that the only demonstration where she has felt threatened was one some years ago by The Countryside Alliance. Did she respond by putting forward legislation to ban demonstrations because she felt threatened by The Countryside Alliance? No she did not. Nor did any other Liberal Democrat MP until this corrosive Tory dominated coalition began to warp to senses of otherwise Liberal people.
3. I am trying hard to think of a protest that is anything other than a “look at me” protest. You seem to be using the description it as a pejorative term. What other sort of public protest can there be? Perhaps you would suggest that protests should only be allowed if everybody dressed top to toe in a burka?
4. You seem to be suggesting that “through the decades” we have seen more protests. My memory is very different. In the 1970s and 1980s there was probably not a single weekend when the traffic in Central London was not stopped by hundreds of thousands of people asking to the streets (including Parliament Square) to demonstrate against Apartheid, the Alton Bill, Cruise missiles, Unemployment, the Poll Tax. In the last twenty years with the exception of the two million on the streets to try and stop Blair’s War in Iraq, public protests have been significantly curtailed by a combination of legislation (by both the Blair Government and the present Government). Public protest is also now curtailed by the sell off of public open spaces. Try and protest outside London’s other seat of democracy, City Hall, and a Security Man employed by the Gulf Arabs who own that land now will move you on, or worse.
5. You deride protesters as “stuck-up middle class types” and “trendy-wendies”. Nobody has ever described me as
Ike that before. Do I need to start dressing like Keir Hardie to convince you that I am neither of those things?
6. In a corner of Pariament Square there is a statue of Nelson Mandela. A man who was for some years a full time paid organiser for the ANC whose job was to organise public protests and to court arrest by the police. For repeated examples of this read ‘The Long Road to Freedom’. I guess you would dismiss him as a “stuck up middle class type” and a “trendy-wendy” ?? You might suggest that his peaceful pubic protests got him nowhere?
Matthew Huntback misses the point. The right to protest should be sancrosant in a democracy. It matters not if you agree with the objectives of the protester we should defend to the death the right to protest.
I agree a with most of what Donnachadh represents and wish him well in all his efforts. We need more people like him . Our party would benefit a great deal from people who stand up for their beliefs and uphold some principles
One question, did the demo take place before or after the incident in Canada. If it was after that might be some explanation for The Police action being so over the top. If the news had already come out then it would have been wise to postpone the Demo, I should stress I dont know the timings.
Obviously I agree that the square should be open to ordinary rallies/Demos. The problem with Occupy was that their goals were so vague & all-encompassing, there seemed no reason why their camps should not have become permanent. Comparisons with HK are not valid. If camps/occupations are to be a part of the normal lexicon of protest they need to be self-limited in time & space. This are for this long, not indefinite.
Theres a long, noble tradition of deliberately breaking stupid Laws, was that the intention in this case or was it about something else, the report doesnt say.
Oops, This area for this long, penultimate line.
Rosa, this was actually written long before the awful incident in Canada, just published afterwards.
John Tilley and Angela Davies
[Comment too long to be allowed as a comment, but will appear here http://ldv.org.uk/43038 shortly.]
Angela Davies
The right to protest should be sancrosant in a democracy. It matters not if you agree with the objectives of the protester we should defend to the death the right to protest.
Yes, but should that protest be of a form which actually blocks alternative views? A permanent camp set up outside Parliament does just that. Suppose some big group of right-wing Catholics were to do that? Suppose they took over Parliament Square and set up a permanent camp there, forever waving around pictures of aborted foetuses and claiming anyone who supported abortion was a mass murderer? Would you think it acceptable that whenever anyone approached Parliament this was what they were met with, day in, day out, year after year?
No,I hope you would accept that people who feel strongly this way have a right to make some sort of protest, as do people who feel strongly the other way, but not to dominate to the exclusion of all others. In order to be fair to everyone it seems to me there needs to be some sort of limitation on how long the protest can go on for. Not allowing people to set up camp and thereby hog this spot for days on end doesn’t seem to me to be unreasonable.
John Tilley
You deride protesters as “stuck-up middle class types” and “trendy-wendies”. Nobody has ever described me as
Ike that before.
Well, it seems my more detailed reply was too long to be allowed. However, in short, no I am not condemning all protest of any sort. However I am suggesting that far too much protest is just as I have described it. The aim of protest is surely to have some effect. But what we have seen in this country is a continual drift of politics to the right at the same time as this trendy “don’t get involved in electoral politics, instead prance around with banners in a protest” has grown. I don’t think the two are disconnected. The ineffectiveness of al most all “protest” on the left is shown by the way those who most need the politics of the left are being drawn into the exact opposite which is UKIP because the trendy upper middle class poseurs who dominate the image of what is the “left” are unable to get through to them, and don’t seem to care about it anyway.
“The people in Hong Kong currently taking part in the “umbrella” protests there are being treated better by the police and Beijing than UK citizens are treated outside our own Parliament buildings.”
Regardless of how wrong the arrest here was (and how unfair the current rules around protest in Parliament Square are), this is just hyperbolic, wrong and in some ways very damaging.
The Police here were not great, but they did not break out the ‘Riot’ gear and left hundreds of people (whether protester or not) with injuries going all the way up to sever head injures. They also were not found to be paying people to be ‘anti-protesters’ to start fights in the streets.
D’s latest book is called The Prostitute State – How Britain’s Democracy Has Been Bought. It is self-published but you can find it with a search.
I think the Left is failing because it has no coherent alternative programme to put up against the globalised neo-liberal economic policies we are suffering under.
Street protests are, in my view, a distraction from this, but they are a necessary part of a free society which Britain resembles less and less every day – it was to be expected under Zanu Labour, but not under the Lib Dems.
Shame on Clegg!
Matthew,
I think there’s some conflation in your argument. Donnachadh McCarthy and Jenny Jones, far from arguing that people shouldn’t vote, have been arguing that people should vote Green. Just because one person in Parliament Square says that people shouldn’t vote doesn’t mean that everyone there is saying that. There’s quite a diversity of opinion there. A shame not to see some Liberal Democrats in there, in my view.
With regards to permanent protest, I don’t think you’ve appreciated the consensus politics many of the protesters have been developing. If someone was to come down to the Square with another cause and start a protest, I know the likes of Donnachadh and Jenny Jones would say “We’ll go over here. Where would you like to set up, over there?” I believe most of the protesters there would also take the same view. Heck, in the time I’ve taken to write this post Donnachadh would have gone over to someone with a different cause, mentioned his excellent new book “The Prostitute State” – well worth a read whether you agree with his views or not – it poses some very awkward . questions.” Indeed, I believe that you would then find a workshop being set up, in the middle of the square to discuss the different causes points of view and causes people believe in.
If the protesters aren’t winning, how come we’re sat here talking about it? How come Donnacadhadh has managed to reach out to the Police yesterday with a brilliant sign opposing Police privatisation, which strangely enough the Police and security didn’t tear down? I would hope every Liberal Democrat would support such a sign – I know I’m against police privatisation, I’m a modern liberal, not a libertarian. Even a classical liberal would include the police in their nightwatchman state as nationalised (Political Ideologies is my speciality when teaching my A2 Politics 6th form students 🙂 ).
On the subject of tolerance, as a Politics Lecturer, I’m going to have to invoke Rousseau, and say with regards people in the square “I may detest what they say, but I will defend to the death their right to say it.”
So should everyone who believes in liberalism. From John Locke’s original idea of religious tolerance, to prevent the then Protestant/Catholic divide from tearing the UK apart, down the centuries to the multiculturalism developed out of Canada in the 1960s which is a key part of modern liberalism. The idea of tolerance for those of different beliefs isn’t just an idea for liberals, it’s in our DNA, our lifeblood, our history.
I believe we should be proud of this heritage. At those very times where people present challenging views, is perhaps the time when we need it most.
Best wishes, Simon Foster.
I have to admit I don’t agree with the grounds on which they were protesting. Just seemed like a bunch of vague, unhappy lefties being vague, unhappy and left-wing. As has been previously pointed out elsewhere in the comment section of this blog – I’ve spent time in America – so I didn’t find the police particularly brutal…
However, the fact that these individuals were arrested makes absolutely no sense and is a shocking violation of their civil liberties. It is a testament to the degradation of the right to protest in this country. The political establishment shouldn’t be able to remove peaceful protesters because they see the protesters as an inconvenience . That’s the point, innit?
It could be argued that previous protesters have abused the right to protest by setting up a seemingly permanent dwelling on Parliament Sq. but that was clearly not the case in this instance. Perhaps that is a blog post for another day!
Thanks for the comments. For info – the protest told the police it was time limited to 9 days and despite the continuous assaults, kettling, arrests, harassment etc by Boris Johnson – we managed to keep our word and finished on Day 9.
The purpose of the protest was very clear – to demonstrate against the corporate take-over of our politics and media and the disastrous consequences of this for social and ecological justice.
I would urge people to view this video footage of this particular sunny morning.
3 minutes in the arrest of the young girls has most people in tears and the military style formation arrest of myself with Jenny Jones for possession of a folder piece of tarpaulin is truly shocking IMO – it was done under LibDem facilitated legislation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W77mnfAM2uk#t=908
I was a bit saddened by Matthew Huntbach’s mis-informed rant. Name calling of people whom he had no idea who they were is truly unconstructive. For his information the people protesting there came from all classes and backgrounds – from unemployed council estate volunteers to PHDs. I have never been prouder to be associated with a courageous protest, since the Lib Dem marched on the Peace Protest against the Iraq War, which the deceitful leadership of Charles Kennedy did their best to block.