A cautionary tale about stereotyping and free speech at Kilburn station

Yesterday evening along with others I was giving out leaflets at Kilburn Station about today's demonstration.

There follows a troubling account of what happened to one of the women who was leafleting which raises issues about stereotyping (religion, age, gender) as well as free speech in a democracy.

After about twenty minutes of leafleting just outside the station, I had a most unusual encounter with a middle-aged Pakistani man who works there. He told me I should move away and stand more discretely and not so close to the station. I asked why, and he said he had received complaints and some people were afraid that I was going to blow up the station because I was wearing a headscarf.

Really? There were plenty of women wearing headscarves walking in and out of the station and past it. Were people afraid they were going to blow the station up as well? What if such a complaint had been made against one of TfL’s female staff members who wear a Muslim headscarf or would he say the same thing to one of them? Here was an Islamophobic comment being made by a Muslim.

I pressed him to find out how many such complaints had been made in such a short space of time as there were few people around. I asked many times until finally he said three. I said I was outside the station and it was not the station’s concern as in a democracy a person can hand out leaflets and people can complain about it, but if neither of us is breaking the law, there is not much anyone can do. There were Police Community Support Officers (PCSO) inside the station the whole time, so I said that if I was breaking the law, he should complain to them and they could deal with it directly.I remained calm all along.

He had picked on the wrong woman to intimidate: he then told me that I was actually on TfL property. I asked for proof of that but he just pointed to the bridge above the station. He said the land just outside the station is also owned by TfL. I said, then why aren’t you talking to other people? He said “you’re too close to the station”. I said if I’m not breaking the law and you can’t prove it, I’m not moving. I did ask him which statute I was offending, to which he could not answer. I also pointed out the discriminatory nature of his actions. Instead, he went on, claiming I was aggressively leafleting people and making them feel scared. This was after he had accused me of being a terrorist, trespass and aggressive behaviour. I am intimidating when I am the person being intimidated.

He spoke to me in a patronising tone. It is not only the fact that I was wearing a headscarf: he also chose to target me as I am a younger person. I think he thought I was a school kid on holiday. 

He eventually gave up and left. As he walked away, I told him I hadn’t moved and didn’t plan to: I stayed where I was until I finished. Before I left, I finally entered the station. I asked his colleague, a younger man, if anyone had made any complaints. He said no, and none had been mentioned to him by anyone else.

I then wanted to make sure I had been in the right: I spoke to the PCSOs who were there the whole time. I asked if anyone had complained to them. They also said no. I told them what had happened and they were surprised as they had not noticed any of this. Another activist had come inside to hand out leaflets but she left when they asked her to step outside and took up a similar position to myself. In this case, the younger man asked the PCSOs to ask her to move.

Explaining that his comments were discriminatory, although I was the one who had been accused of all sorts of things, it was me the PCSOs asked if I wanted to make an official complaint. I said no, as they said they could speak to him instead.

I have been an activist for a long time and I am well aware of my rights. He chose to pick on me because of his perception of my age as well as my attire. I am aware that this happens very often to young people of both sexes, and that a less experienced person would be intimidated and walk away when told to by a person in uniform or authority, even if they are wrong. When I spoke to the police, it was me they agreed with. Issues like the current war in Gaza bring in people who are new to activism and such things can really put them off. I have seen this many times. Like war, discrimination is pretty much an everyday fact of life for most of us. The issues we campaign for, however, are bigger than any one of us and we must not forget that wars abroad have their home fronts too.

Farce or Fascism? Brent approves restrictions on free distribution of literature

Needless to say Brent Executive rubber stamped the proposal on licensing leafleting on designated land this evening but were left in doubt that that their decision was based on a poorly researched and imprecise report with no detail on interpretation and every sign of having dangerous implications for free speech.

I can honestly say as a school governor that a document like that would have been thrown out by a governing body.  I told the Executive it was hard to decide whether their proposal was farce or fascism, but it was likely to fall between the two.

Despite Tara Brady of he Brent and Kilburn Times circulating a copy of the actual e-mail from the Brent Council which stated 'Charities would be exempt from these new rules and political parties exempt during  election times' Cllr James Powney insisted that all along they had meant all activities for political purposes would be exempt.

Cllr Powney dug himself further into a hole when he claimed the proposals were not just about the Olympics but long-term and across the borough, despite the report stating 'These controls are being sought now to assist with the effective control of literature distributors anticipated during the Olympic period in an attempt to reduce the amount of waste printed material deposited in certain areas of the borough'.

Those designated areas include streets far away from the Wembley Olympic venues such as Shoot Up Hill, Station Road Harlesden  and Edgware Road.

As Sarah  Cox said on behalf of Brent Fightback we should not have to rely on Cllr Powney's interpretation of phrases such a 'political purpose' but have precision and clarity in the documentation.

Small businesses and people organising  cultural events,  jumble sales and fund raising activities will be faced with high fees and restrictions on their activities.

There will now be a 14 day consultation but this is only about the Council's proposal to designate certain areas or roads where the licence will be required rather than the scheme as a whole.

Cllr Powney failed to answer a question from Cllr Helga Gladbaum on whether Brent Council had the capacity to enforce the proposed regulations.

Shahrar Ali, Green Party candidate for the London Assembly Brent and Harrow constituency said:

I can think of little more pernicious act than for a council to impose upon its citizens a requirement to seek advance approval for the dissemination of their literature, whatever was written upon it. It is no business of the council to restrict the free exercise of speech or to charge people for their exercise of it or to prevent readers from making up their own minds about whether they want to receive it or not. This is a dark day for Brent and surely one of the worst instances of this administration's evident contempt for the people.

You can read Brent Fightback's leaflet by click on the PDF below:

The Tale of Two Tories

Certainly the most colourful by- election leaflet

I bumped into Venilal Vaghela the former Conservative council election candidate who is standing as an independent yesterday.

We chatted about interests that we have in common (he is a member of Brent Sustainability Forum) and then turned to the reasons he is standing against the official Conservative candidate in what could be seen as a marginal ward.

Although his leaflet says he is 'fed up' with the Labour Council he told me that he is also fed up with Brent Tories. Apart from neglecting Barnhill ward, which they should have been nursing as they held it prior to 2010, ("It used to be ours") he also blames them for ineffectual leadership, failure to turn up at crucial meetings and community events, and incoherent contributions to Council debates - with the possible exception of Reg Colwill.

Vaghela is campaigning on issues such as too many shops selling alcohol, too many betting shops and the need for a crematorium in the borough.

I have not met the official Conservative candidate whilst canvassing yet, but it is a big ward so that is understandable. I hope to meet her so that she can tell me what she thinks about Venilal's  candidature. have seen many of her leaflets rain sodden on the pavement and in the front gardens of the ward - I am not sure if the new powers Brent is seeking means that it could force her to pick them all up!

Leaflet Licensing: regulation gone mad?

Would he fire Ann John?

Despite the Council's clarification of their understanding of 'political purposes' I am still very sceptical about their proposed leaflet licensing system and whether they will be able to enforce it.  For those of you who have not been able (or could not face) downloading the document I print below the proposed Licence Conditions for Distribution of Free Literature.  It made me feel sorry for the poor small businesses trying to make a crust faced with this tangle of regulation.

All licences will be subject to the following standard conditions. Licences may also be subject to specific conditions based upon the application details.

1. All staff engaged in the distribution of free literature shall wear an authorisation badge with photograph of the distributor issued by Brent Council bearing the licence number and showing the name, address and contact telephone number of the licence holder so that it is clearly visible.

2. The above authorisation shall be produced on demand to an authorised officer of the Council or other relevant agency, such as the police.

3. All staff engaged in the distribution of free literature shall wear a hi-visibility safety tabard provided by the licence holder and marked ‘Authorised Distributor’.

4. No free literature shall be left unattended by staff for the general public to take at their discretion.

5. All places in the vicinity of free literature distribution, must be kept free of discarded literature so that the area does not fall below grade B of the Government’s Code of Practice on Litter and Refuse at any time. If an authorised officer of the council judges that the standard has been breached as a consequence of the distribution of free materials, his judgement will be definitive at the time. Challenges to that assessment will only be accepted

through the formal appeal process.

6. The free literature must bear the name and address of the licence holder who is responsible for its distribution unless exemptions have been agreed by the Council.

7. Applications for consent must be made not less than 14 days before the required date for the distribution of free literature.

8. Licences will be subject to the payment of a fee to be paid at the time of the application.

9. No free literature shall be placed on, attached to, affixed to vehicles, buildings, street furniture, telephone boxes or structures.

10. No free literature which encourages irresponsible consumption of alcohol can be distributed. This includes examples of: offering free alcoholic drinks; drink vouches; discounted drink offers; all in bar offers; unduly cheap sales; happy hours and similar promotions. It is recommended that responsible promotions for alcohol carry the Drink Aware message.

11. If an authorised officer requests the consented staff to pick up discarded literature, the staff member shall do so immediately.

12. If litter is created which is in need of urgent clean up, the licence holder will be liable for the full cost of the necessary street cleaning operation.

Can you imagine the contestants on the Apprentice trying to tackle their assignments in Brent?

Seriously, have the Council the capacity and the police the time, to enforce this?

Now Brent Council says campaigns would be exempted from Leaflet Licence scheme

Following my urgent enquiry about the proposed controls on leafleting in designated areas of the borough I have received a clarification from Michael Read, Assistant Director Environment and Protection, for Brent Council. I had asked: Could you clarify that for 'political purposes' would cover groups giving out literature with 'political'  (but non-party political) content such as anti-cuts campaigns, library campaigns etc -  so they would be exempted.

He says:

I am sorry for the delay in replying.  The exemptions including that for political purposes are not at the Council’s discretion.  They are included in the primary legislation which says:

‘(4)Nothing in this paragraph applies to the distribution of printed matter—

(a)by or on behalf of a charity within the meaning of the Charities Act 1993, where the printed matter relates to or is intended for the benefit of the charity;

(b)where the distribution is for political purposes or for the purposes of a religion or belief.’

Whilst the interpretation of the wording would ultimately be a matter for the courts, the council’s view is that the kind of issues you mention would fall within the definition of “political purposes”, would benefit from the exemption and would not need a licence.

The Brent Council press office had told the Willesden and Brent Times that the exemption applied only to 'charities, religious organisations or political parties'  (my emphasis)

This still leaves the issue of small businesses wanting to leaflet a shopping street to drum up business, such as the Windows on Willesden shops that the Council have publicised. As a Green I want to support small local businesses and recognise that the costs of a licence could be prohibitive for such start-up businesses.

Yes, litter is a problem, but so is maintaining the vibrancy of our streets and our local culture. As it is still not clear how these proposals would be enforced and by whom, I would suggest that the whole thing should be dropped.