In defence of The Moot

We were asked to give a statement to Newcastle magistrates court regarding an incident in late-November.

“I witnessed the incident in Newcastle via the live Facebook feed, after being alerted that there was a problem by one of the band’s followers.

What I saw made rather uncomfortable viewing. Two security guards (actually they turned out to be Council officers but this wasn’t the impression given by their dress and demeanour) were acting in a very menacing manner, circling the defendants. There were repeated threats to take the buskers’ equipment without any adequate explanation of why or the process necessary to do so. 

My immediate advice was to ask what law was being broken (if any) and as no explanation was forthcoming, that the Police be called to deal with the  situation. The aggressive behaviour of the two officers continued for the entire period until the Police arrived, at least half an hour if I remember rightly. It must have been quite frightening for two women to be surrounded by these burly men for that length of time.

Even once the Police finally attended no mention of the 1974 Control of Pollution Act was made, for some time. In fact not until the musicians had actually finally been pressurised into beginning to pack down their gear and leave. It was during this process that the Police and security officers consulted their mobile phones, presumably found the relevant legislation, and then unlawfully threatened the pair with a Dispersal Order to force them to give their details.

The entire incident would have been entirely avoided had the Newcastle staff politely explained the relevant section of the 1974 CPA in the first instance. Instead they chose to intimidate the performers and threaten to make an unlawful seizure of equipment.

Keep Streets Live also questions whether it is in the public interest to pursue this case, as there were no complaints about the busking itself, no harm or loss was being caused, and the fact that the summons was issued a considerable period after the performance had actually stopped and it was clear that it would not continue. We believe claim that one of the buskers had previously been warned regarding this offence is simply not true. Would the Council like to provide evidence to the contrary?”

Clare end Eryl have now launched a crowdfunder to cover their legal costs which they currently estimate at being approximately £1500.

What is particularly ironic about these events is that, as has been previously documented on this site, in 2015 Newcastle City Council published a document entitled ‘Vision for Culture’ which had the ambition of creating

 “a city buzzing with creative spirit, offering opportunities for everyone to play their part in creating our culture – continuing to make ours one of the most vibrant cities in Europe. “

Busking in Scotland

Busking in Scotland

We were recently contacted by The Times to discuss stories of clampdowns on busking in Scotland. We’ve already been campaigning in Edinburgh for some time, but there have apparently been worrying developments in Dundee where amplification has been banned and performance limited to three locations across the entire city.

KSL Director Chester Bingley quoted in The Times.

“We recognise some street performance can be disruptive but the way forward is to have structured communication with all parties to find workable solutions. Edinburgh council have chosen not to do this and have put up their own signs that have no basis in law. Choosing to perform in the streets is not illegal and has deep historic and cultural roots.”

The arbitrary rules introduced by Edinburgh and Dundee have no basis whatsoever in law. In fact, as Police Officers in Scotland already have extensive powers under Section 54 of the 1982 Civic Governance Act to stop any busker if they are giving ‘reasonable cause for annoyance’, they are also rendered utterly unnecessary. Councils already have every weapon they need to deal with any problems that arise on a case-by-case basis. These ‘rules’ merely serve to extend punishment to those who are causing no disturbance and facilitate the domination and control of public spaces by BIDs and local authorities.

Jonny: Statement

Jonny: Statement

As a family we have been processing the circumstances surrounding Jonathan’s death for the past 8 months. We are aware that the conclusion of today’s inquest may be extremely difficult news for those of you who knew and loved him.

Jonathan had battled through a very difficult 18 months in his personal life prior to his death and we as a family remain extremely proud of the dignified and courageous manner in which he conducted himself throughout that time. Jonathan was a dearly loved son and brother, a passionate advocate and activist with a brilliant mind, a talented and gifted musician, a gentle yet formidable spirit and a devoted and loving father. It is for these qualities, that we as a family will remember Jonathan and it is our hope that everyone who knew and loved him will do the same.
This will be the only statement that we will be releasing and we thank you for continuing to respect our privacy as we grieve.

For anyone needing to speak with someone in response to today’s news we would encourage you to access support. Help is available from:
Leeds Survival-Led Crisis Service– https://www.lslcs.org.uk
CALM (Campaign Against Living Miserably) – https://www.thecalmzone.net
Samaritans – https://www.samaritans.org

In the meantime we want to express our deep gratitude for the wonderful support we have received during this difficult time from countless people who loved Jonathan and his children and who continue to love and support us.

Thank you.
John, Michele, Sarah & Michael