full video at london.indymedia.org/videos/11961

last wednseday, after covering the ukuncut 'austerity doesn't work' protest at downing street, i followed some protestors down to parliament. they were told that according to bye-laws, without prior permission or public liability insurance, they could not protest on the grass (now no longer fenced in). so, their protest moved on to victoria gardens and to the media village at college green, and i strolled across the grass to take a couple of photos of them passing by with the houses of parliament behind them.

i was immediately approached by two men in heritage warden uniforms. despite refusing to show me his security ID, turning the tag away from my sight, one of them claimed i wasn't allowed to be on the grass. i asked which bye-law he was referring to, and refused to move.

police were called. constable pentreath claimed there was a new bye-law that said i couldn't remain there "for any length of time". however, she was unable to tell me how long would be a breach. constable uddin told me to stop taking photographs, but couldn't give me a reason why.

next, a sergeant was called. sergeant doherty produced a copy of the bye-laws. he couldn't find one that i was breaking.

one of the heritage wardens then started asking me what i was going to use my photographs for. he'd found a bye-law that prohibits commercial photography without prior permission. i assured him i was not going to sell my photos but that i might post any images or footage on the internet if they were interesting.

despite threats to "have me removed" from one of the heritage wardens, and also a brief visit from a police inspector, i held my ground, and it appeared that no-one could actually find a lawful excuse to back up their intimidation, threats, questions, or the photography ban. so i kept on filming and i sat on the grass.

left alone for a little while, i watched the heritage warden shooing various tourists of the grass, including a group of french students who quite rightly pointed at me sitting there and asked why they couldn't. i called for them to join me, but the warden scared them off.

a rather more sensible constable later came over and said he'd had a word with the heritage wardens as he wasn't sure why they were shooing people away "like pigeons".

after all this hassle, i then had a frank conversation with the head of the heritage wardens, 'dean eardley'. in addition to patrolling parliament square, his heritage wardens cover trafalgar square, where similar bye-laws are about to be introduced by the GLA.

after listening to my complaint about my treatment, mr eardley asked the warden what had been going on. the warden claimed that he hadn't hidden his ID, that i was "with the protestors" and would be posting my images on a site that is pro or anti something, and he claimed he'd only shooed away people with banners. mr eardley assured me he wouldn't tolerate bad behaviour from his staff. i have invited him to watch the footage i took.

i also asked mr eardley to clarify the bye-laws around photography. he claimed that any posting on the internet was classed as "commercial" as it was being "published". i suggested that would stop tourists from posting their holiday snaps on flickr. he back-tracked a little and then stated that the GLA had a list of sites that can't be "published" on, as they might be anti-GLA, anti-london, or anti-mayor. i asked him to provide me with a list of those sites. he told me that wasn't really his area (even though he is charged with policing these rules?), and that i should speak to ben mcknight, the GLA press officer.

for the past week, all attempts to get a comment or even response from mr mcknight have so far failed.

i'll post updates after mr eardley has seen this footage and if i ever get hold of that list of banned sites, or any further explanation, retraction or apology from the wardens or the GLA.

the full video can be seen at london.indymedia.org/videos/11961