Whitehall Demonstration: Police Action (Hansard, 10 June 1982)

§ Lord Monson
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, I understand from the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis that the police acted under difficult circumtances and in accordance with their duty to prevent a breach of the peace.

§ Lord Monson
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his Answer. Is it not, however, deplorable that our flag and our National Anthem should be banned merely because they annoy communists and members of the Socialist Workers' Party, particularly when these latter parties, together with other pro-Argentinian and pro-IRA groups, have complete freedom to demonstrate noisily as often as they wish and, what is more, can evidently get away with burning and trampling upon the Union Jack with complete impunity?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, the Union Jack was neither burned nor trampled upon on this occasion. The police were acting under difficult circumstances and had to act to prevent what appeared to be an imminent and considerable breach of the peace. We should recall that the actions of the police were based solely on the need to keep the peace. It is not their business to weigh the merits of one cause against another. Neither did they do so. Noble Lords will recognise that this degree of impartiality requires considerable self-discipline, and they will realise from the events to which the noble Lord has referred that the police are fully able to command it.

§ Lord Elwyn-Jones
My Lords, will the noble Lord the Minister tell the House what happened?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, if I may summarise for the benefit of the noble and learned Lord, at the point we are considering the head of the procession had passed—

§ Lord Soames
What procession?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, I had assumed a greater degree of knowledge among my noble friends and others than there appears to be. There was a procession and a rally organised by something calling itself the Ad Hoc Committee for Peace in the Falkland Islands numbering about 4,000 people. It assembled in one place and marched to another, and the latter place was Trafalgar Square. As the marchers approached Trafalgar Square, the head of the procession passed, I believe, No. 21 Whitehall—although I am not sure of the number.

§ Lord Shinwell
My Lords, while respecting—

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, I think I should complete the account for which many noble Lords have asked me, even if it makes a longer answer. As the procession passed this point, things were thrown on the people in the street below. As this section of the procession arrived outside that building, windows were thrown open, banners with proclamations upon them were hung out of the windows, as was the Union Jack, and music was played. The procession began to slow down. At that point, about eight people appeared on the roof and started shouting at the people below. They were joined by the crowd surrounding the procession. The procession began to halt and events became extremely tricky. The police decided, rightly in my view, that the only catalytic factor they could remove was the people on the roof. They did so and they also removed their belongings, which were t he banners and also the flag to which the noble Lord has referred—and that is normal practice. As the police left they also turned off the electric switches, as they should have done, and that silenced the music.

§ Lord Shinwell
My Lords, while not uttering a word of offence or criticism of the general conduct of the police, of whom we are, generally speaking, proud, may I ask whether this event seems to indicate that some sections of the police force are now yielding to the hypocritical pacifism and so-called humanitarianism that has disgraced our society recently during our troubles?

§ Lord Elton
Absolutely not, my Lords. I should add that 13 people whose views were exactly contrary to those of the people to whom we have just referred were arrested on the same day.

Lord Inglewood
My Lords, may I ask my noble friend—because I do not think he has yet made it clear—whose band this was and which was the building in Whitehall? While not disputing that the police have to make difficult decisions all the time, would he not agree that this was the sort of occasion about which, surely, Members of this House are entitled to seek information?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, I have given the House copious information. I will add to it by saying that the band was recorded and I do not know what was on the label of the disc. Now I have clean forgot what the second question was.

§ Lord Soames
Whose building was it?

§ Lord Elton
It was in Whitehall, and my recollection is that it passes under the address of Nos. 21 to 31.

§ Lord Soames
Whose building is that?

§ Lord Boyd-Carpenter
The Home Office?

§ Lord Elton
Well, my Lords, at least people not very friendly to the Ad Hoc Committee for Peace in the Falkland Islands.

§ Lord Chalfont
My Lords, although this matter seems to have been treated with a certain amount of levity and amusement, may I ask the Minister whether it is not a bizarre state of affairs that, while the Armed Forces of the Crown arc engaged in hostilities in defence of Britain, it should he forbidden to display the Union Jack and to play the National Anthem, even allowing for the fact that great difficulties were confronting the police? If in future a choice has to be made between a demonstration of that kind and one which gives aid and comfort to the enemy, would it not be better to ban the latter and not the former?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, may I add to my previous reply that the building was Nos. 27 to 31 Whitehall. Although the arresting officers did not have occasion to make inquiries at the time of the people they arrested in that connection, I believe it is associated with something called the Coalition for Peace through Security. As to the noble Lord's separate question, I find myself in a difficult position because I think it a very glorious thing that in a democracy under stress it is still possible to allow those who criticise the defence of democracy to have their voice. If one resorts to absolutely silencing critical views, one is beginning to do what it is that one is trying to defeat. On the other hand, as, I hope, a not unpatriotic Member of your Lordships' House, I find some of the sentiments thus expressed extremely offensive to me personally. That is why I have such unbounded admiration for the police, who always determine these issues with strict impartiality; not on what the demonstration is about but on whether or not the Queen's peace is in danger.

The Lord Bishop of Norwich
My Lords, is the noble Lord the Minister encouraged by the fact that, either in preparation for this Question, which I believe he has answered so well, or because it is the natal day of the Commodore General of the Royal Marines, Whitehall is today lull of Union Jacks?

§ Lord Elton
My Lords, I believe that is an admirable sentiment with which to conclude what has become rather a lengthy debate.