All 1 Margaret Greenwood contributions to the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022

Read Bill Ministerial Extracts

Mon 25th Apr 2022
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill
Commons Chamber

Consideration of Lords messageConsideration of Lords Message & Consideration of Lords message

Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Home Office

Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill

Margaret Greenwood Excerpts
Sarah Jones Portrait Sarah Jones
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The point we are trying to make is that there is a balance to be struck between what is reasonable in protests and what is not. We believe that the right to protest is not an absolute right; there have to be provisions in place to ensure that protests are reasonable, and do not put out the public too much. These provisions on noise are almost impossible to interpret—they are really unclear—and the police and the public have not asked for them. There are existing rules to ensure that reasonable, peaceful protest can take place, and the Bill rides roughshod over those genuine rights.

Margaret Greenwood Portrait Margaret Greenwood (Wirral West) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend is making some good points, particularly around interpretation. In Wirral West, we had a successful campaign against underground coal gasification after the coalition Government granted a licence for drilling in the Dee estuary underneath Hilbre island. People were very concerned about that, and we had a mass demonstration on the beach. When people go to a demonstration, they do not know who else will be there. I am concerned that people will feel intimidated by this law, and will perhaps feel that they should not attend a protest that they want to go on because of concerns that they will not be in control of the noise volume.

Sarah Jones Portrait Sarah Jones
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That is an interesting point. Thank goodness for those protests and for our right to protest in that way. It is not fair and not right to force the police to make political decisions about how much is too much noise. Imagine a scenario where two sides of a public debate are protesting, with one group on a street where there is lots of double glazing and the other on a street where there are old houses and no double glazing. Are we really saying that the police, who might close one protest for being too noisy and not the other, would not find themselves in a difficult political situation, with criticism from the public?