UK jails anti-frackers
and why we should all be concerned about prison time for peaceful protestors.
By Ceri jones
Fracking splits opinions, but even more so today. It’s true that, for the time being at least, we need hydrocarbons. Regardless of partial or ‘some day’ alternatives in the energy mix, right now we’re dependent on affordable sources of dirty energy.
But today marks the first time since 1932 that an environmental protester has been sentenced to jail .
Anti-fracking protestors held red roses in support of the men.
Fracking in the UK
Energy company Cuadrilla was granted a licence to drill for shale gas near Preston New Road in the north of England in October 2016. Operations kicked off to construct a fracking pad at the site near Blackpool in January 2017, then on 25 July a convoy of lorries moved in to deliver drilling equipment.
While many members of the local community were up in arms over the decision, four protestors took direct action by climbing on top of lorries – Simon Roscoe Blevins from Sheffield, Richard Roberts from London, Richard Loizou from Devon and Julian Brock from Torquay.
Unable to proceed, the lorries came to standstill and the men sat tight, supplied with food, drinks and blankets by other protestors. Of course, this couldn’t last forever and eventually Loizou descended, closely followed by Blevins and Roberts, and Brock the following day. All were arrested.
Sentencing protestors
Today in Preston Crown Court, Judge Robert Altham sentenced Blevins and Roberts to 16 months in prison, Loizou to 15 months in prison, and Brock to a 12-month suspended sentence, a hefty price for a combined 276 hours sitting atop lorries.
Altham said that, despite their serious concerns for the environment, the defendants saw the public as “necessary and justified collateral damage”. This collateral damage was reported by prosecutor Craig MacGregor as travel disruption, disruption to local residents and loss of trade for businesses over a period of less than four days. However, this translated to police costs and loss of money for Cuadrilla – the biggest factors – totalling £12,000 and £50,000 respectively.
Reminding the court of citizens’ rights to peaceful protests, and that no persons or equipment were damaged, Kirsty Brimelow QC, representing Roberts, pushed the men’s good intentions and said, ‘It is relevant that there is a huge amount of scientific study that points to the damage of increasing climate emissions,’ and she indicated intergovernmental climate panel findings that climate change would displace 75 million people by 2035 and lead to the extinction of one in four species by 2050.
Your opinion on fracking
Whatever your opinion on fracking, an open dialogue cannot be had unless all factors are taken into account, including our urgent and growing need for energy security and that studies have proven that fracking produces radioactive waste.
Added to this, local authority Lancashire County Council opposed the drilling and more than 300 protestors have been arrested since operations started. So it seems that those most likely to be affected by the fracking are the ones not being allowed to exercise their freedom of speech, or had their concerns fall on deaf ears.
Whereas, the government and Cuadrilla stand to earn a great deal of money in their determination to tap that gas.
Industry, economy, business - when is it ever simple? However, it’s essential to keep the conversation open to find a better way to power the country without compromising the people prepared to protect it.
We’d love to hear your thoughts.
Source information from the Guardian.
