Minutes:
ENGLISH DEFENCE LEAGUE PROTEST 9 OCTOBER
The meeting discussed in detail issues regarding the proposed demonstrations by the English Defence League (EDL) and Unite Against Fascism (UAF) to be held on 9 October in the city. It was noted that the Home Secretary had granted a ban on all marches for the Friday to Sunday, but there were no powers to stop peaceful static protest.
Councillor Dawood stated that the protests were not welcome in Leicester, but there was a duty to uphold democratic process. He stated that, upon receipt of a letter from the police, Cabinet had agreed to ask the Home Secretary for a ban.
Chief Inspector Richard Keenan and Sergeant Steve O’Neill reported on the work that the police had been doing and the plans in place. He stated that work on forming an opinion on the march could not take place until the formal letter had been received from EDL. All available evidence had been weighed up in deciding to recommend a ban, as this was not taken lightly. Much consultation of residents and stakeholders had taken place. Lessons had been learned from other areas where such protests had been held and a full policing plan had been established. This included bringing in support from other police authorities. They would manage the event itself, ensure protesters were escorted to the site without marching, provide cover for vulnerable locations and protect residents. Local police would be clearly visible in communities on the day. He stated that it was likely that the protesters would not stay any longer than for the duration of the protest. Detailed liaison had taken place with communities, religious buildings, businesses and schools. Extensive work had been done to try to discourage young people from getting involved such as additional activities. All protesters would be dealt with fairly but firmly if there were problems. External officers had been briefed on the way Leicestershire police expected things to be done.
Adrian Russell, Director of Environmental Services, assured residents that the council was working closely with the police and shared concerns about the impact. Significant work had been done on issues other than just the demonstrations such as practicalities, bus routes and offering advice and support. An element of disruption, however, could not be avoided. People were being discouraged from counter-protest on the day and instead asked to support two events on Friday and Sunday which had been organised in conjunction with Hope Not Hate.
A representative from the Federation of Muslim Organisations started that they recommended that people should stay away from the demonstrations, including those from other authorities who had offered support. They asked for media balance in reporting the day and stated that mosques would be kept open, in particular so young people could attend. He stated that a joint press release with representatives of the Sikh Community had been published to state that the Sikh community were not in support of the EDL protest.
Concern was raised that Humberstone Gate East was a controversial site to allow the protests, but Chief Inspector Keenan stated that several sites had been assessed and this was the most suitable location for managing the protests and minimising impact.
In rspose to further questions and concerns, the following responses were given:
· The change in the Highfields bus route was not related to the demonstration.
· It would be made clear that the increased police presence at mosques and other sites would be to reassure, not because they were targets.
· Announcements and guidance could not be made earlier, as a decision could not be made on how to address the issue until the formal request from EDL.
· Efforts were being made to keep up with rumours circulating on the internet.
· There would be a network of officers making regular contact with relevant people with updates on activity on the day.
· A Navratri event would continue to go ahead on Saturday evening near Humberstone Gate East.
· From experience elsewhere, licensed premises would not be made to close, as this could push attendees further out into estates and cause more disruption.
· Even though EDL had stated that they may defy the ban, residents were assured that if they did, they would be breaking the law and would be treated accordingly. They would be escorted to the site by officers in a manner that did not allow them to “march”. The law would be applied with professional judgement, taking circumstances into account.
· It was not possible to charge EDL for costs of the demonstration. A political approach to the government may be made by Councillors after the meeting with regard to this legislation.
· Assurance that police would not be taken away from sites they were assigned to. There were plenty of police to cover contingencies.
· Police would stay on full duty until after the protestors had gone home.
A representative from Hope Not Hate explained the events that were being held on Friday and Monday as an alternative to protesting on Saturday. He reassured that the police and council response was much more robust than elsewhere and praised them for this. He stated that Hope Not Hate had published a newsletter with an expose of the EDL’s motives. The alternative events would celebrate Leicester’s diversity and offer a united stance. The events would be:
A representative of Unite Against Fascism stated that the group would be protesting on the day, but that they were a peaceful organisation. They aimed to offer a peaceful, properly stewarded opposition on the day. A resident stated that they would be stewarding on the day and that there would be in intelligence team to ensure protection of civil liberties.
It was felt that, although this was being imposed on Leicester, its communities would come out of it stronger and more united. Councillor Dawood urged people not to counter-demonstrate on the day, due to the potential for matters to get out of hand, and not to make this an event in Leicester’s history for the wrong reasons.