I understand that some people have concerns about the measures being introduced through the Public Order Bill to reduce the impact of protests on people's day to day lives. I can assure you that the Government is not eroding people's rights  but making sure that highly disruptive protests do not cause misery to the public. At the moment hard-working people across the UK are seeing their lives brought to a standstill by some activist groups.

I understand that the Government has also recently tabled an amendment to the Bill in the House of Lords providing greater clarity on the definition of 'serious disruption'. As such, I can assure you that measures contained in the Bill will only be used to deal with specific incidences and protests that prevent people from being able to go about their daily lives. 

Further, I can assure you that the reforms included in the Bill of Rights Bill will strengthen home-grown rights. The Bill will boost freedom of the press and freedom of expression by introducing a stronger test for courts to consider before they can order journalists to disclose their sources. It will also recognise that trial by jury is a fundamental component of fair trials in the UK. I am glad that it will also introduce a permission stage in court requiring people to show they have suffered a significant disadvantage before their claim can go ahead, thereby preventing trivial legal claims wasting taxpayers’ money. 

Where human rights have been used to frustrate the deportation of criminals, the Bill will prevent such misuse, ensuring those who pose a serious threat can be deported by allowing future laws to restrict the circumstances in which their right to family life would trump public safety and the need to remove them. It will mean that under future immigration laws, to evade removal, a foreign criminal would have to prove that a child or dependent would come to overwhelming, unavoidable harm if they were deported.

I believe that the Bill of Rights Bill will help to strengthen the UK's traditional freedoms. 

Buffer zones:

As you might be aware, MPs agreed to add Clause 9 which introduces areas around abortion clinics and hospitals (buffer zones) where interference with, and intimidation or harassment of, women accessing or people providing abortion services would be an offence to the Public Order Bill.

Matters related to abortion are a free vote for MPs, meaning the Government does not ask members to vote a certain way. I recognise that there are very strong views from both sides of the debate on this subject.

This country has a proud history of allowing free speech, but the right to peaceful protest does not extend to harassment or threatening behaviour. The law already provides protection against harassment and intimidation, and the police have a range of powers to manage protests. Like all members of the public, protesters are subject to the law and suspected criminal offences must be robustly investigated and dealt with by the police.

Following concerns about the tactics of protestors outside some abortion clinics, a review was instigated by Government in 2018. This review revealed that anti-abortion demonstrations take place outside a small number of facilities. In 2017 for example, 363 hospitals and clinics in England and Wales carried out abortions. Of those, 36 hospitals and clinics experienced anti-abortion demonstrations. With this in mind, the Government’s assessment was that introducing buffer zones would not be an appropriate response given the experiences of the majority of hospitals and clinics. As matters relating to abortion are a free vote issue, MPs nonetheless decided to add provisions for buffer zones to the Public Order Bill.

Separately, Ministers have taken steps through the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act to give police the powers they need to better manage protests, enabling them to balance the rights of protesters against the rights of others to go about their daily business.

Locking on:

Recent protest activity from a minority of individuals utilising guerrilla tactics has caused misery to the hard-working public, disrupted businesses, interfered with emergency services, cost millions in taxpayers’ money, and put lives at risk. 

The new Public Order Bill seeks to criminalise the protest tactic of individuals attaching themselves to others, objects or buildings to cause serious disruption. The locking on offence will carry a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment, an unlimited fine, or both. The maximum penalty for the offence of going equipped to lock on will be an unlimited fine.

Locking on is undoubtedly an extremely dangerous and disruptive tactic. For example, protestors locking on from great heights places at risk not only the protestor themselves, but also police removal teams. Indeed, I am pleased that the law-abiding majority recognise the necessity of bringing forward legislative measures to combat this type of protest activity. A recent YouGov poll found that close to two-thirds (63 per cent) of the public support making locking on a criminal offence. A separate survey found that 53 per cent of those asked supported tougher measures for activists blocking roads, transport and other infrastructure.

Stop and search:

The new stop and search powers contained in the Public Order Bill seek to enable the police to proactively tackle highly disruptive protest offences by searching for and seizing items which are made, adapted, or intended to be used in connection with protest-related offences. In their 2021 report on the policing of protests, His Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services agreed that such powers would have an operational benefit to police.

The Bill provides for both a suspicion-led power, amending section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, and a suspicion-less power. Suspicion-led stop and search is where a police officer suspects that a person is carrying an object that they intend to use in connection with a protest-related offence. When the suspicion-less stop and search power has been authorised, it will allow a constable to conduct a stop and search without the need for suspicion.

The suspicion-less stop and search power uses a similar framework to that found within section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 to ensure consistency in terms of police powers and safeguards.

I understand people’s concerns regarding stop and search. There has to be a balance between deploying tactics to help fight crime and ensuring no one feels unduly threatened. However, I want to be clear, no one should be targeted because of their race. 

A number of improvements to stop and search data collection in the last year have also allowed for more in-depth insight and analysis. For the first time, in the year ending March 2021, the Home Office collected record-level information on stop and search, meaning a single stop and search can be followed through to the outcome, with much richer data about who was stopped and searched (for example, age, gender and ethnicity information for each record). This is part of an ongoing programme of work to improve the clarity and context of stop and search data and to better understand the disparities in stop and search rates.

I am confident these new changes to public order law will put a stop to the relentless reoffending and significant disruption caused by a selfish minority of protesters which impinge on the rights of the British public to go about their daily lives in peace.