Arrested for Selling ‘The Socialist’
From the latest edition of The Socialist
TONY AITMAN, a long-time Socialist Party member was arrested on 30 August for selling copies of The Socialist on a stall in Liverpool city centre. The tradition of political stalls in Church Street and its continuation Bold Street in Liverpool city centre stretches back over 30 years. Now, with the 2008 Capital of Culture title, the city council is trying to ‘clean up’ the centre, and remove any signs of opposition from the streets.
Over the past few months, there has been growing harassment of stalls and sellers on Liverpool’s streets, from both the police and the council’s wardens. Following threats of arrests, a “mass stall” was held a few weeks ago. Around 12 different organisations, including the Socialist Party, the CNWP, the Stop the War Coalition, CND, Animal Rights, the SWP, Cuba Solidarity, a cycling group, Merseyside Anarchists and the Fight ID Cards campaign set up stalls in defiance of the threats to our free speech.
Last Saturday, at the pitch we have used for years, Socialist Party member Tony Aitman was arrested for “wilful obstruction” after refusing to stop selling papers and collecting petition signatures on a stall against food and fuel price rises.
Tony is well known to Socialist Party members throughout the country; an activist for over 45 years, he is prominent in the CNWP and is a Unison shop steward, a member of Liverpool Unison branch committee. Our stall and papers were also confiscated. What seemed to annoy them most was when one of our (female) members called one of the police “love”!
We will not take this attack on our rights lying down. We have called for a further mass picket this Saturday, 6 September, meeting in Church Street at 12 noon.
By Merseyside Socialist Party members.
This is clearly past of a pattern, following our own experience in Swindon.
And the threat from Bristol City Council to prosecute Andrew Murray as a beneficiary of Fly posting.
There is a sequel to our leafleting experience, from Swindon Borough Council concerning flyposting that I will write about soon.
I think that this is not so much inspired by trying to silence dissent, as stopping any manifestation of non-conformity.
Social-conformity is a running theme from New labour - through ASBOs, demonisation of women wearing a veil, etc.
Comment by Andy Newman — 5 September, 2008 @ 11:09 am
It is more widespread. In Ipswich the area on the Corn Hill is now run by a private market company - one of the tattiest and most useless markets in the country most people think. Their wardens have also harrassed left stalls. But apparentely, according to council officers, we can ask for permission for such non-profit stalls. Which raises the question of why one has to ask for ‘permission’ to exercise democratic rights. Ultimately it’s about privatising public space, as I’m sure we are all aware.
The free market, and its council and police enforcers, smashing free speech and grass-roots democracy… Blair and Brown’s legacy yet again.
Comment by Andrew Coates — 5 September, 2008 @ 11:30 am
The Wakefield SP branch has been successful in keeping its stall going despite harassment from the police and council officials. They may be able to give helpful legal advice.
Comment by wildboar — 5 September, 2008 @ 11:49 am
We’ve only suffered harassment once from wardens, and that was (coincidentally, I’m sure) when the branch ran a petition against the mayor’s council tax rises before I was a member.
Strangely, people who run the animal testing stalls get grief because they solicit donations. We don’t fall foul of the petty bureaucracy as we’re considered to be selling stuff. Bizarre.
Comment by Phil BC — 5 September, 2008 @ 12:01 pm
Wilful obstruction? Is this under the Highways Act?
Anyway, I probably telling you what you already know but you have got some legal advice? He is a Unison activist then he should be able to get it as part of the union. Has he a court date etc.? Defence campaign?
Comment by Louise — 5 September, 2008 @ 12:18 pm
The left needs to work together on this. Clearly there will be increasing attacks on our democratic rights, and we need a collective effort to ensure that we are fully briefed in conflicts with the police, and that we understand how to both avoid arrest and how to run a legal defence campaign. I am sure that Respect will be keen to work together with the SP and others to develop common work.
Comment by Duncan Chapel — 5 September, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
Just a caveat to the last point - it’s important to avoid unnecessary arrests, and to minimise them. But ‘wilful’ in this context means continuing to do it after you’ve been told not ot, and sometimes it’s necessary to say (politely) “No, I’m not moving, I’ve got a right to sell/leaflet/whatever here” and call their bluff. And sometimes they won’t be bluffing. It sounds to me like the comrade was right to not back down.
Comment by chjh — 5 September, 2008 @ 1:48 pm
I was briefly detained by transport police in 2002 while handing out leaflets outside Euston Station denouncing the Terrorism Act 2000. The head honcho said the leaflets were “sedatious”. I said the word he was looking for was “seditious”. He replied, “Oh, you think you’re fucking smart, do you?”
Comment by Death to imperialism — 5 September, 2008 @ 2:39 pm
This is disgusting.
I’m blogging it.
Comment by David T — 5 September, 2008 @ 6:02 pm
I think all of the left in Liverpool should take an active priority in doing stalls, not only is it a forum for ideas it’s also a demonstration of defiance to political intolerance.
There’s a letter in SW that a friend of mine wrote, about a similar thing happening in London (and a similar thing has happened to me in a different part of London) : http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=15715 The letter is called “These are our Streets”. Let’s make the phrase ring true.
Comment by Futurecast — 5 September, 2008 @ 8:32 pm
The local activists here have previously taken a stand on this, as the original article acknowledges
I agree with #1, this harassment seems to be more about ‘tidying up’ the city centre from unsightly obstructions to consumerism, rather than about silencing dissent as such. In some ways thats even worse. Its done in an ad hoc way to, which leaves the activists never knowing where they stand.
There is a good article here http://dreaming-neon-black.blogspot.com/on the privatisation of the streets where the new shopping centre is (you have to scroll down for it).
Comment by Danny — 5 September, 2008 @ 11:04 pm
I support the rights of individuals (such as Tony Aitman) or groups to congregate freely in the public sphere.
Even if I think the people involved and the views involved are scum (as I do in this particular case).
Freedom of assembly and freedom to propagate political views is paramount, regardless of political feelings.
So good luck to Tony Aitman.
Bet you weren’t expecting me to say that, eh?
*laughs*
Comment by M o r g o t h — 5 September, 2008 @ 11:37 pm
And why is Tony Aitman “scum” in this case?
Comment by A N D Y — 6 September, 2008 @ 12:14 am
He’s a socialist, a willing follower of an ideology that has killed probably two hundred million people in the 20th century.
Doesn’t mean that the Plod or the Little Hitlers that occupy our Town Halls have the right to prevent him from expressing his views in a public place though, collectivist or non-collectivist.
Voltaire and all that.
Comment by M o r g o t h — 6 September, 2008 @ 1:04 am
Morgoth: “Bet you weren’t expecting me to say that, eh?”
Gosh no. You must have really shocked a lot of people to their political core with that. Wow.
Must be more to this ultra-individualist, ‘libertarian’, far-right, ‘Satanist’ (ha ha ha) loon - one that one of the hosts of his favourite blog, ‘Harry’s Place’, called ‘a particularly disgusting, unfortunately persistent commenter’ - than we thought.
Comment by Ed — 7 September, 2008 @ 2:08 pm
#8 Perhaps ’sedatious’ was a postmodernist pun combining seditioous and salacious?
Hope the mass pickets/ demos/ paper sellling etc went well. Not quite sure what the legal status is but I’ve heard that oif threatened to be moved on demanding to see an injunction can sometimes work. In general, though, mass demonstrations and non-compliance I think is they key to defeating this. And if it’s not defeated quickly may be having a regional or national demo. Keep us posted.
Comment by Jason — 7 September, 2008 @ 2:19 pm
I think it was more likely confusion between “sedition” and “sedation” or “sedative”. Not post-modernism, just a uniformed jobsworth with a limited vocabulary.
A US Army captain in France in 1944 was corrected by one of his lieutenants during a briefing - the captain said something was not “revelant”. The lieutenant, who did not like him, said “the word you’re looking for is ‘relevant’” or something like that. The captain took umbrage and sent the lieutenant’s platoon the next day on a stupid frontal attack on the German lines which resulted in the lieutenant being killed and most of his platoon being wiped out.
Comment by Death to imperialism — 7 September, 2008 @ 8:24 pm
Much better is to point out that misspelling is often a sign of high intelligence as a number of extremely interesting, well written, but sadly properly subbed articles alleged last month. On the otherr hand sending someone from HP into the arms of death for correcting my punctuation does have its charms. That would sort them.
Comment by johng — 7 September, 2008 @ 8:49 pm
I do not concur. My spelling and general handling of English is very good, in total contrast to that of the Sturmbannfuehrer of Euston Station.
Comment by Death to imperialism — 7 September, 2008 @ 9:04 pm
Just a point of clarification to the main posting, the Cuba Solidarity Campaign did not join in the solidarity action on Church Street on Saturday it was Rock Around the Blockade, www.ratb.org.uk who regularly run a Saturday stall there. In fact we have had our own run ins with the Council steet wardens but have made them back down by having the relevent bye laws etc from the council which show we have the right to politically campaign in the city centre.
Comment by Bob — 8 September, 2008 @ 12:11 am
It was Rock Around the Blockade who participated in the ‘mass stall’ mentioned in the Socialist article, not the Cuba Solidarity Campaign as it was RATB who were out this Saturday.
Comment by Bob — 8 September, 2008 @ 12:17 am
This is great, look forward to looking into every area. Thanks for being there.
Comment by supermarche casino — 8 September, 2008 @ 5:55 am
This site is interesting as well as informative. Enjoyed browsing through the site. Keep up the good work. Greetings..
Comment by keno — 8 September, 2008 @ 5:56 am
#18 “Much better is to point out that misspelling is often a sign of high intelligence”
Then I hope I didn’t offend too much by pointing out yours.
#23 “This site is interesting as well as informative”
When the host isn’t deleting innocuous comments and then refusing to explain why.
Comment by skidmarx — 8 September, 2008 @ 12:04 pm
It’s open season for shoplifters on a Saturday in my local “mall”, as ALL the security guards spend ALL of their time ensuring that the stalls of of the political groups do not intrude so much as one inch onto their frontage. I think that this is the main issue - as more and more shopping areas which used to be public highway get bought up and turned into malls, it becomes easier to stop activists using “private property” arguments.
Comment by Andy BH — 8 September, 2008 @ 12:25 pm
http://devilskitchen.me.uk/2008/09/more-jumped-up-council-cunts.html
Comment by Not just the left — 9 September, 2008 @ 10:42 am