Sunday, March 04, 2007

Laura Norder (3)

In New Labour's surveillance society, protecting the interests of central government and multi-national utility companies is more important than keeping the streets and
the houses of ordinary citizens safe.

Maintaining a police presence at the Cilfrew protest against the siting of a gas transfer station caused officers to be withdrawn from local towns like Skewen, as Emma Denholm's report in the Neath Guardian explains.

Frank Little writes: "Let me be clear. I am in favour of the gas pipeline, as it reduces England & Wales dependence on supplies from an increasingly capricious Russian state-controlled utility.

"However, it was wrong to divert police resources to what is basically a security company job. The implication that these respectable people now find themselves on a central police database of criminal suspects is very worrying."

4 comments:

Aberavon and Neath Liberal Democrats said...

I hasten to add that approval for the gas pipeline does not mean that the project should be carried out on the cheap, nor that valid concerns of residents should be carelessly overridden. There are safety concerns about the siting of the plant at the Milford Haven end of the pipeline. More conscientious design would have allayed these.

The gas transfer station planned for Cilfrew need not be in the heart of the community. An engineer advising the Cilfrew residents has proposed an alternative site, which may be more expensive in the short term, but which meets the needs of both the utility and the residents.

- Frank Little

Aberavon and Neath Liberal Democrats said...

I agree with you Frank. The pipeline is indeed essential in order to maintain our competitive advantage over the emerging Russian energy market.

However, as you say, the pumping station need not be placed in a residential area nor should the police resources be diverted to deal with what could be dealt with by a private security firm. Thats not to say that i agree with the protest either. In such a democratic society as ours the protest should be at the ballot box not on the street. Direct action, in all its forms is, in the circumstances, simply unnacceptable.

Richie Northcote

Aberavon and Neath Liberal Democrats said...

As an afterthought, it would be interesting to know whether the South Wales Police Authority now intend to request reimbursement of police funds spent policing the protest.

It might just go a short way towards closing the £3.5m funding gap they have reported this year. More likely is that the cost of policing will have to be borne out of the limited, existing funds that should be spent on policing our streets.

Yet again, this cost, inter alia, will probably be funded by an increase in the Council Tax in the coming months.

Richie Northcote

Aberavon and Neath Liberal Democrats said...

Direct action (if that implies violence) is to be deplored. However, I would defend peaceful protest when the democratic process is seen to have let people down.

This is especially true of local government in Wales. It is still based on first-past-the-post voting, when Scotland has already moved to a proportional system. Councillors who are perceived to be in opposition to a particular official line may be excluded by specious rules.

- Frank Little