Facts relating to police bill are easy to understand
MR Haynes (Viewpoints, 8 April) shows his customary agitation about all matters related to policing. He refers to the statement of fact that the new Police Bill is inspired by XR and BLM as somehow an “insinuation.” He either needs to consult the dictionary, or consult Peter Fahy, the former chief police officer whom I was quoting. Cressida Dick, who is in charge of the Met, is on the record as saying the police need more powers to deal with... XR protestors.
Mr Haynes then celebrates the fact he will be voting next month. So will I. We can both vote because contentious social movements fought for those rights. He mentions governments come and go - true.
But the laws that they pass outlive them, and can constrain or even abolish hard-won democratic rights.
None of what I’ve said above is in the least bit controversial, but some of it seems hard for some people to grasp.
Dr Marc Hudson, Moss Side
What’s the worry?
WITH reference to the new legislation to give the police more powers during protests, no one up in arms about it ever says just what it is that we should be worried about. They just give vague generalisations that our civil liberties are being eroded. Most reports say that this new legislation is to prevent disruption to the lives of people going about their everyday business including noise reduction. The general public are not opposed to protests but they are annoyed at the timing of them.
We are hopefully coming out of the worst year in our lives and anything that jeopardises it such as mass gatherings of any kind is not welcome. We read every day that violence on the streets is spiralling in areas of Manchester and Salford. Schoolchildren threatened with weapons to surrender their mobile phones. It would be nice to think that the minimum amount of police could be deployed to cover protests and let them get on with preventing crime.
Jack Haynes, Swinton
Fleeced by airport
IF your readers are heading to
Manchester Airport to let down or pick up passengers then be very, very careful.
I was stung by the invisible voice for £25 after driving into, and then out of the let down, passengers area when I was picking up my sister arriving from Newark USA.
Firstly, due to road works at the very front of the exit of the area, one’s view is totally obstructed by tractors and diggers Manchester Airport themselves are using. Secondly I had a split second then to turn, and as it happened I drove into the drop off area. I waited for several minutes then I drove straight out (I hadn’t picked up my sister at all). She has a bad back and I couldn’t stop there. I then drove off only to find that a fine of £3 was imposed …it then quickly rose to £100…as I was stuck at the barrier and I didn’t have money with me.
Upon haggling with the man in the box it was reduced to £25.
I want to ask how do Manchester Airport justify stinging the public like this? Even in the worst scenario, a car parked for 10 minutes in the wrong place whose driver never did pick up the passenger, how is a £100 fine justified?