Skip to content or view screen version

Police bullying at Camp Kingsnorth

Lt. | 07.08.2008 22:06 | Climate Camp 2008 | Ecology | Repression

I’ve just returned from a 2-3 day sojourn at the Climate Camp at Kingsnorth — site of a proposed new coal-fired power station – which is now gearing up towards its climax. As usual the headlines focus upon policing and the inevitable ‘discovery’ of a weapons cache, more on which below. But once you make the effort – a word I use advisedly — to get through police lines and into the camp itself the overwhelming impression is of a D.I.Y. heaven: solar panels and a wind turbine being erected, water pipes connected, sanitation systems constructed, media and cinema tents put up, impromptu kitchens, cleaning zones … an al fresco and non-commercial soukh catering to the pleasures and necessities of daily life.

Police bullying at Camp Kingsnorth
Thursday, August 7th, 2008
By Lenin’s Tomb |
 http://rinf.com/alt-news/contributions/police-bullying-at-camp-kingsnorth/4304/

The Camp’s great strength is that theory and practice share a space for a week. Having kicked off with marches and due to finish on Saturday with direct action, in the days between there are workshops galore – a hundred or more – covering the usual themes as well as not a few tailored to specialist tastes: “the world lawn tango championships,” “five-finger direct action training,” and – one cannot but wonder whether practice and theory were united here — “safe sex for activists.” That Arthur Scargill made an appearance was welcome, although it was disappointing to see that he has not yet got it. (In the USA at the outset of World War Two it was union leaders who, against bitter resistance from big business, championed the conversion of auto plants to make planes. In the war upon climate change, just think: the skills of power station engineers; solar, wave and wind; surely a no-brainer.) The high-point was a session at which George Monbiot spoke on the role of the state in mitigating climate chaos — although it was marred when that organ itself, in the shape of riot police, threatened to enter the camp, prompting most of the 250-strong audience to exit theory in a headlong rush to practice.

A degree of division arose with regard to the appropriate tactics for countering the police, but it was a no-win situation. Agreement to allow the police onto site – with their batons and video cameras, their bullying, snooping, sniffing and otherwise canine ways – would have necessitated constant surveillance of the surveillers, a continuous and enervating tug-of-war. The other option, the one taken, was to concentrate forces at the gates, to keep them at bay. With this, the boys in blue-and-dayglow-yellow needed only to build up forces at one gate, deploy riot police to the fore, or engage in any minor feint, in order to panic and disrupt the Camp. Which of course they did. In afternoons, during workshops. At two a.m. — waking all with a cacophony of sirens that sparked a mass exit from tents, followed by the thuds of sleepy running bodies tripping over guy ropes. And then again, after adrenaline levels had subsided and campers had returned to sleep, at the break of dawn.

The question is, why have Her Majesty’s police force decided to subject a crew of campers to such astonishing levels of harassment? What tactics are involved, and at what level were they authorised?

On harassment and intimidation the litany is endless. We observed their tactics, aghast. They must’ve looked up and memorised every petty by-law they could find, in addition to compendia of recent legislation. (Thanks to the cop who dropped his copy of the ‘Pocket Legislation Guide on Policing Protest,’ which gives an overview of legislation that can be used to stifle any form of legitimate protest, we know a bit more about an organisation, the National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit, that assisted them in this.) They terminated our shuttlebus service (for ferrying participants from rail station to campsite) and arrested the driver on the grounds that one copper, claiming to have witnessed a passenger give a driver a donation, deemed it to be an unlicensed taxi. They filmed everyone. There were interminable and repeated searches of anyone entering or exiting camp — and these were not the usual cursory pat down. In my case (not an extreme one): in addition to searching all bags and pockets they were uncommonly interested in the linings of my trousers; and they dismantled my mobile phone and took the battery out (”in case there’s a razor blade concealed inside”). From me they took nothing but others were less fortunate. The innumerable items confiscated included: plywood, wheelie bins, a track for wheelchair access, a puncture repair kit, carpet, a board game and part of a windmill. And, of course, childrens’ crayons. (They’re a graffiti hazard, don’t you know?)

Arguably the most visible and unarguably the most audible police presence is the helicopter. Upon arrival, I asked the copper who was searching me – time for such conversations was not rationed — why the chopper was in the air. “It’s because an incident is going on. Don’t worry, it costs a fortune to keep it up there, it’ll only be sent up when there’s something going on.” In fact, it was airborne about one minute in every three; deafening, menacing, watching. Even at night it hovered above us, and would sometimes swoop low – perhaps in case its clatter at normal altitude hadn’t yet woken a few of those below.

So we may return to the question: why apply these tactics? The resources involved, in terms of manpower, equipment and fuel, are colossal. In conversation with a senior police officer, I listened to his point of view. “Don’t get us wrong: we know very well that 99% of the people in the camp are completely non-violent. It’s the other 1% we’re concerned about.” A machete, he claimed, had been found in nearby undergrowth. During my days there, I saw nothing to suggest a potentially violent “1%” – and, unlike the officer, I was observing campers up close. The machete story is a smear. Chances are it is a fiction, or planted, or belonged to a nearby villager. Activists, being ecologically aware, know full well that to approach Kingsnorth does not require hacking paths through jungle. But let’s assume for a moment that he is right. There are around 1,000 people at the Camp. If that same officer were responsible for policing a village of 1,000 people, and was informed that 10 were potentially violent, would he call up a fleet of fully-manned vans from the North Wales Heddlu, alongside similar convoys from the West Mids, South Yorks, the Met, Essex, Kent and all? Rumour has it that 27 forces were involved! Would he call in a helicopter, and riot police? Or would he think “me oh my what an English idyll – a pity, perhaps, about one or two delinquents at closing time on a Friday night, but a token presence should deal with that”?

Perhaps there is a better reason: the police tactic is all about defending Kingsnorth. After all, the Camp’s clearly and openly stated aim is to shut it down. But this explanation has no more traction than does the “violent 1%.” Participants show no sign of going anywhere near Kingsnorth until Saturday, so why police the Camp, which is situated many miles away, all week long? To the possible rejoinder that an absence of police attention would encourage activists to approach the power station sooner than declared, there is an obvious reply. With the same police numbers deployed to harass the Camp, the power station could be thrice encircled: it could be sealed off by land, sea, air and any other conceivable avenue of approach, and with enough spare policepower to boot (no pun intended) that the Heddlu and the Brummies could be sent back home. Just think of all the trouble and tension that could be spared, not to mention police overspend.

The only possible reason for this level of intimidation – apart, perhaps, from an interest in giving riot cops some live training — is that the police force is hell bent on hounding and intimidating the movement against climate chaos. This does not represent a departure from recent trends in policing – as witnessed in London at the anti-Bush protest (with its use of agent provocateurs) and the ‘Circle Line Party.’ Yet it is an escalation.

The question that remains is: who authorised this strategy? Downing Street, one would suppose, but we should be told.

Lt.

Additions

Policing intimidation

08.08.2008 07:00

I am a local resident and visited the camp to find out more. I was subject to stop & search 3 times yesterday and am amazed at the level of harrassment that the police are subjecting the camp to. Everyone I met from the camp was welcoming and friendly - a complete contrast to the police outside.

AndyJ


Comments

Hide the following 4 comments

police n helicopter

07.08.2008 22:50

the helicopter is in the air for the same reason the cops bullied you
self justification in the face of a mediated world.

they need to be seen to be needed and they need to there to justify their existance to the wider public......hence the ever present willingness of cops to actually break the law to 'defend' it, to transgress in order to provoke transgression, they get paid for dealing with those violent anarchists and the all important status quo is preserved......i was going to say everyones happy, but that's a joke, huh.

Glad you enjoyed it, events like this can be inspiring as well as completely locked in the unreality of civilised protest

anomaly


In response to your question,

08.08.2008 00:21

In response to your question, "Who authorised this strategy? Downing Street, one would suppose, but we should be told.", *they* now have a person other than the Home Secretary to sort you 'anarchist travelling circus' types out. The current incumbent is Tony "Fatboy" McNulty MP, "Home Office Minister of State for Security, Counter-terrorism, Crime and Policing". His seat is that well known hot bed of socialism, 'Harrow East' and he has been on the Privy Council for the last year. A lot gets decided in the Privy Council I will have you know. I know that is hard to believe because we live in a transparent democracy, but it is true, behind closed doors *they* talk about you. It is a bit like the staff room at school - you would imagine they would have better things to talk about, i.e. the weather, but, sad to say, they talk about you, plot and scheme new al-qaeda terror threats and all that stuff.

Education-wise, Tony "Fatboy" McNulty did a Political Science MA at Virginia Tech - the place where that gun-nut went on the rampage last year. Virginia Tech is a military college in a 'slave state', not what I would call an obvious choice for a Labour MP, but he did smoke cannabis in his youth.

As for his voting record, it speaks for itself:

* Voted very strongly against a transparent Parliament.
* Voted moderately for introducing a smoking ban.
* Voted strongly for introducing ID cards.
* Voted very strongly for introducing foundation hospitals.
* Voted strongly for introducing student top-up fees.
* Voted very strongly for Labour's anti-terrorism laws.
* Voted very strongly for the Iraq war.
* Voted very strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war.
* Voted very strongly for replacing Trident.
* Voted strongly for the hunting ban.
* Voted very strongly for equal gay rights.

He only claims 120000 or so in expenses each year, maybe he should get an 'Oyster' card for his trips down from Harrow. He is a Blairite although it is not known if he is one of the ten junior whatevers that are threatening to walk out on Brown.

I wouldn't call him 'Fatboy' to his face, coz he might deck you. If you wish to address your concerns in language he understands without having to trouble yourself with fire-arms you could go to the top and write to Home Secretary and 'Blair Babe' Jacqui Smith.

P.S. Very good article, b.t.w.

Cho Seung-Hui


slightly off topic cho?

08.08.2008 13:53

how come in your list of (mainly undesirable) measures supported by 'fatboy' and his party you added that he supported gay rights? the implicit feeling in that list is look at the crap list of things this man supports, surely you don't add gay rights to this list for no reason???? or maybe you do as lets face it, there is a underlying attitude from some (reactionary?straight?) activists that sexuality politics is eithier a fait accompli or something sinister and not mediafluffy enough to support. just wondering

anom


MPs need evidence to stop extra police funding

11.08.2008 13:55

I would urge everyone who witnessed the inappropriate and disruptive policing of Climate Camp to write to their MP urging them to oppose additional Home Office funding requested by Kent Constabulary for policing the camp. If constructive and sensitive policing had been deployed from the start, they would have been able to effectively police the camp with a fraction of the numbers and cost that they eventually used. To say nothing of the arbitrary violence used by the police throughout.

Lynne Jones MP for Birmingham-Selly Oak has been very supportive of my request for her opposition to the funding and is looking into it; but she, like other MPs, need evidence. Give it to them!

Juliet
mail e-mail: juliet_rayment@yahoo.co.uk