Dodgy Evan Harris proposal
Reader | 21.01.2005 20:41 | Oxford
Thought people in Oxford, especially animal rights activists, would want to see the statement below by Evan Harris MP. Surely 'economic damage' is a hugely sweeping term which could be used to curtail any protest that stops trading in any way?
***********
Animal Rights extremists could face prosecution for causing economic loss to
researchers, under proposals put forward by Oxford MP Evan Harris.
Dr Harris, the Liberal Democrat MP for Oxford West and Abingdon, said new
legislation was needed to combat the growing problem of violent intimidation
which has held up plans for a new research laboratory at Oxford University.
MPs yesterday began to study the details of the Government's Serious
Organised Crime Bill, which creates a new offence of causing distress by
protesting outside people's homes. It also allows police to use injunctions
to prevent protesters returning and widens the scope for arrests.
Dr Harris is proposing an amendment which would create a new offence of
economic sabotage, so that intent to cause financial loss to the research
industry would become a criminal offence.
He told a committee of MPs scrutinising the legislation: "This is a major
problem, not only for the individuals concerned but also for economic
reasons. There are concerns that research and development investment may
well drop because this country is no longer a civilised place to do this
business."
***********
Animal Rights extremists could face prosecution for causing economic loss to
researchers, under proposals put forward by Oxford MP Evan Harris.
Dr Harris, the Liberal Democrat MP for Oxford West and Abingdon, said new
legislation was needed to combat the growing problem of violent intimidation
which has held up plans for a new research laboratory at Oxford University.
MPs yesterday began to study the details of the Government's Serious
Organised Crime Bill, which creates a new offence of causing distress by
protesting outside people's homes. It also allows police to use injunctions
to prevent protesters returning and widens the scope for arrests.
Dr Harris is proposing an amendment which would create a new offence of
economic sabotage, so that intent to cause financial loss to the research
industry would become a criminal offence.
He told a committee of MPs scrutinising the legislation: "This is a major
problem, not only for the individuals concerned but also for economic
reasons. There are concerns that research and development investment may
well drop because this country is no longer a civilised place to do this
business."
Reader
Comments
Hide the following 5 comments
Where does he live?
22.01.2005 20:59
Scrivener
Also...
23.01.2005 21:57
:-)
Elise
Elise
e-mail:
elise@greenoxford.com
Homepage:
http://www.greenoxford.com
example letter
24.01.2005 16:38
It has come to my attention that you are currently advocating a new law
against "intention to cause economic damage", mainly aimed at animal
rights protesters.
I would strongly object to any such law.
Such a law would inevitably eventually be used to criminalise many forms
of legimate protest, to increase already ridiculously repressive police
powers and crack down on dissent.
Experience has taught us that this is the case. For example:
-the various terrorist acts, sold to us as being necessary to protect us all
from some nebulous terrorist threat, then used to stop and search peaceful
antiwar protesters at Fairford airbase, DSEi arms fair, etc
-the Protection from Harassment Act, sold to us as being necessary to
protect women from stalkers, then used on protesters.
I could go on, but the pattern is clear. Politicians use some apparent threat
to justify repressive laws, then the police and laws use them to restrict
and deny our democractic rights and civil liberties.
How many of your constituents have you actively consulted on this issue? How
can you claim to be representing us when you are taking it upon yourself to
promote draconian laws without stopping to consider that many of us might
believe civil liberties to be a higher priority than corporate profits?
On this issue you are misrepresenting me and I demand you immediately
withdraw your support from this outrageous proposal.
Please reply as soon as you get the chance letting me know what you have
done in this matter.
grrrr
Letter to Oxford Mail
24.01.2005 22:00
Dear Sir,
Evan Harris is a leading supporter of Oxford University's injunction against peaceful protestors against animal-testing. I hold no brief for any protestors who use violence or harassment. But in these protests, the only person arrested since the first injunction last summer was a contractor, after a harmful substance was thrown over the protestors.
Dr Harris is proposing in Parliament a new offence of economic sabotage, which would make it illegal to "intend to cause financial loss" to the research industry. Is he aware that this would outlaw one of the most important tools of democracy?
Where was he when anti-apartheid activists boycotted firms that made money out of South Africa? Even apartheid's fiercest apologists never said that campaign should be illegal.
What does the good doctor think of the harm caused by smoking? Would he make it illegal to demand compensation for its victims, risking financial losses to the tobacco industry?
Would he outlaw Oxfam's campaign for coffee companies to pay decent prices to poor farmers? Or Lord Wilberforce's determination 200 years ago to end the slave-owners' ghastly profits? Or does he want this protection to apply only to drug companies?
If anyone makes profits out of immoral practices, it is only right to protest. Money which is immorally acquired does not deserve to be kept. We can argue about the rights and wrongs of animal testing, but Dr Harris' proposed law could be the thin end of a very thick and illiberal wedge.
Yours sincerely,
Tom Lines
Green Party candidate for Oxford West & Abingdon
Tom Lines
e-mail:
tlines@globalnet.co.uk
Evan the Oppressor
25.01.2005 18:30
The problem is that they cant catch the people doing the illegal stuff, so in order to appease the pharmaceuticals - who form some of the biggest donors to the political parties - and to be seen to be proactive, they've decided to penalise the people doing the legitimate stuff. Can it be far from fascism... certainly the corporation is more important when it comes to civil liberties.
The animal rights movement is simply being made the whipping boy for all protest movement. And all the mad negative press over the last year has been designed to isolate the movement from other protest groups to make it easier to justify the bringing in of new oppressive legislation. Whether you agree with animal rights or not, this is an issue that affects everyone - remember the poem of Pastor Neimoller (spelling?), it has rarely been so apt in the UK.
Lay down your differences and fight back for your fundamental rights - after all our grandparents died in the way to protect our freedoms, not to have them signed away in this fashion (or so they tell us).
Dr Evan Harris is very closely tied to Oxford University and is allowing himself to be used as a mouth piece for their conservative bigotry. Please contact him (email & fax) below and ask him to stand up for freedom and not fascism.
Dr Evan Harris
Liberal Democrat MP for Oxford West & Abingdon
27 Park End St
Oxford OX1 1HU
Dr Evan Harris's office
Tel: 01865 245584 Fax: 01865 245589
Email:
PS
you may think my use of the word fascism strong, but that is because the UK government has done a very good PR job justifying its new legislation. Did out a history of how Mussolini or Franco ruled, and their policy of marrying state and corporation to create power elites and justify oppressive legislation. Scratch below the surface of the stories in the corporate controlled media and see how scarily similiar it all becomes.
GQ