Thousands say ‘No to Tesco Towers’ in Harrow: Read the petition

 The proposed development (image from developers and only shows one tower)  and protesters

 

From No To Tesco Towers Campaign

 

More than 2,000 Harrow residents have signed a petition opposing the development of multiple tower blocks on the Tesco site on Station Road in central Harrow. 

 

 

 

The current Tesco store from Hindes Road (Credit: Google Streetview)

 

Greenmead Place would see 559 new flats across ten blocks up to 15-storeys high, 155 residential parking spaces, a 20% smaller Tesco store and a third less customer parking,

 

The tallest block is 15 storeys, one at 14 storeys, one at 13 storeys, one at twelve storeys, one at 11 storeys, two at seven storeys, one at six storeys and two at five storeys.

 

Local residents and residents associations have joined forces to protest the plans, launching a petition and website, nototescotowers.com. To date, more than 1,800 residents have signed online with hundreds more signing the paper petition.

 

 

Concerns include the scale of the development, a lack of truly affordable housing and the impact on local infrastructure, such as roads, public transport, schools and health services.
 

While housing association Notting Hill Genesis claims 32% will be “affordable housing”, two thirds will be shared ownership - increasingly criticised for its unaffordability -  and only 55 flats (9.8%) will be social housing. The vast majority - 380 flats - will be sold at market prices.    [Q&A on Shared Ownership]

 

At a recent Harrow Council meeting, the developers admitted that reducing the height of the towers would reduce the amount of affordable housing, including social housing.

 

Cllr Marilyn Ashton, responsible for Planning and Development, referred to residents’ anger over the proposal and urged the developers to take on board the meeting’s feedback.

 

One local resident posted on Facebook:

 

I live near the Kodak site. The original plans included a primary school and community centre. The reality is that those vital facilities do not exist on the developed site and the surrounding roads cannot cope with the increased weight of traffic.

 

The roads around the Tesco site were not built for such heavy usage so traffic chaos will be inevitable. There is no justification for this site other than profit for developers. We need affordable social housing. Not luxury flats only a few can afford. The system is very broken.

 

Pamela Fitzpatrick, Director of Harrow Law Centre, a charity providing free legal support, and a former Harrow councillor said: 

 

Housing is one of the biggest problems we see in Harrow. There’s enough housing in Harrow for everyone but it’s all largely unaffordable.

 

Housing associations no longer do what they were set up to do - provide low-cost, secure rented properties - so many people can’t even afford to live in housing association homes. The proposed Tesco site development appears to simply add to the problems and will do little to alleviate the housing crisis.

 

Tesco and Notting Hill Genesis are expected to submit a formal planning application to Harrow Council in early 2023.

 

THE PETITION WORDING  (SIGN HERE)

 

Residents Say No to Tesco Towers and Notting Hill Genesis Development in Harrow

This petition is to object to the proposal by Notting Hill Genesis and Tesco to turn the store on Station Road Harrow into a high-rise development called  Greenmead Place– Notting Hill Genesis ‘Tesco Towers’ including a 15 storey building.

We ask Harrow Council to consider why the community objects:

• The proposed development is overbearing and will dominate the surrounding homes of mainly two-storey houses and low-rise flats.
• The development design totally ignores the surrounding community.
• There are no infrastructure improvements, no additional GP surgeries, capacity at Northwick Park Hospital, improvement to public transport links, roads, water supply or sewage disposal.
• The increased congestion and pollution from high density housing on one of the busiest roads in Harrow, adds 155 cars to a road where two schools are within a few metres
• 20% reduction in the Tesco store size and 33% less parking spaces for Tesco customers yet further increasing congestion on the roads and less jobs for residents in a smaller store.
• NHG says ‘35%’ of the new accommodation will be ‘affordable’ but this includes shared ownership which is anything but affordable with prices in Harrow.

This development does not benefit the community and would be detrimental to the health and wellbeing of the area.

We ask Harrow Council to not approve the application of this development.

St Lukes Hospice call for your support to protect their patients from intrusive development

Our local hospice, St Lukes, is calling for residents to support their campaign opposing the development of the historic Clock Cottage stable block which is next to the hospice.

 St Lukes Hospice said::

COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT THREATENS WELLBEING OF HOSPICE PATIENTS.  

 

Ask Brent Council to stop their development plans now!  

Brent Council plans to build a controversial new development just 10 metres from patient bedrooms, and just 5 metres from the patients' gardens (pictured above).

St Luke’s has been serving our local community for over 30 years. Last year we provided specialist end of life care to 1,628 people in Harrow and Brent.

Because of closure of beds at two neighbouring NHS Hospices we face a significant increase in demand for our care. The noise and dust from building work of this magnitude, so close to rooms where people at the end of their life are being cared for, will give us no choice but to close at least one third of our in-patient services when it’s needed most.

With the wellbeing of our patients and their families in mind, we strongly object to the proximity of the proposed building to our hospice patients’ beds. People at the end of life need highly specialist care. If we are forced to close at least one third of the Hospice beds, where will people go?

Today, we desperately need your help to protect our patients and defeat these plans.

The badly planned proposed development is intended for people with learning difficulties. People who have passed away at the hospice are taken from a place that will be easily visible from parts of the new development. This, along with the direct views into patient rooms, may cause residents to witness scenes very distressing for them. It also violates the privacy of patients and their families.

We need your support. Please tell the Planning Committee to stop their plans today!

Follow this link to send a message to councillors. All you need is your postcode. LINK

St Lukes Facebook page HERE

Brent Council fights the cuts via a letter to government ministers

There has been a bit of a battle going on in the Labour Party with activists concerned that Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt, hadn't signed one of several statements/declarations on local government cuts. He appeared to be backing the most mild statement which amounted to little more than a quiet quibble.

Now a motion on the 'Breaking Point' campaign over cuts has been tabled for Monday's Full Council Meeting.  Rather than mounting a militant campaign, going out to the community and building mass support amongst those most affected by the cuts, they are going to send a letter to the government...

Even headteachers furious at school cuts managed to march on Downing Street.

We have Climate Extinction - how about Local Government Extinction?

Breaking Point

Full Council – 26 November 2018 Motion selected by the Labour Group

This Council notes that many council budgets are now at Breaking Point. Austerity has caused huge damage to communities up and down the UK, with devastating effects on key public services that protect the most defenceless in society – children at risk, disabled adults and vulnerable older people – and the services we all rely on, like clean streets, libraries, and the teachers in our schools.

•   Government cuts mean that Brent has £177m less to invest in essential and much loved public services than under the last Labour government in 2010; 


•   With an aging population and growing demand adult social care faces a gap of £3.5 billion – with only 14% of council staff now confident that vulnerable local residents are safe and cared for; 


•   Government cuts have seen local authorities left with impossible choices, and 80% of council staff now say they have no confidence in the future of local services; 


•   Brent schools will have lost out on more than £6k per pupil over the last decade, equating to a loss of an entire academic year’s funding; 


•   Northamptonshire has already gone bust due to Tory incompetence at both national and local level, and more councils are predicted to collapse without immediate emergency funding; 


•   Councils now face a further funding gap of £7.8 billion by 2025 just to keep services ‘standing still’ and meeting additional demand. Even Lord Gary Porter, the Conservative Chair of the Local Government Association, has said ‘Councils can no longer be expected to run our vital local services on a shoestring’. 
This Council condemns Chief Secretary to the Treasury Liz Truss MP for stating on BBC Newsnight on 1st October 2018 that the government is “not making cuts to local authorities”, when all independent assessments of government spending show that this is entirely false; and that this Council further notes that Prime Minister Theresa May has also claimed that “austerity is over” despite planning a further £1.3bn of cuts to council budgets over the next year. 


 This Council agrees with the aims of the ‘Breaking Point’ petition signed by Brent Labour councillors, in calling for the Prime Minister and Chancellor to truly end austerity in Local Government by: 


•   Using the Budget to reverse next years planned £1.3bn cut to council budgets; and 


•   Pledging to use the Spending Review to restore council funding to 2010 levels over the next 
four years. 
This Council resolves to: 


Support the ‘Breaking Point’ campaign, recognising the devastating impact that austerity has had on our local community.

 

 Ask the Leader of the Council to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government setting out the funding pressures faced by Brent Council, and calling on the Government to truly end austerity in Local Government.

Brent Council to launch 'plastic free' Wembley campaign

From Brent Council

Plans have been announced to rid Wembley town centre of all plastic shopping bags and plastic cups, in a bid to become 'plastic' free.

The campaign which officially launches Thursday 15th November focuses on the borough's most visited area and aims to reduce plastic use there by 15 per cent by 2020, in time for the European Championships and the celebration of Brent as the London Borough of Culture.

The project is run in partnership with Wembley Traders Association and in Your Face Advertising and through it the Council hopes to encourage all businesses to commit to eliminating single plastic use, which for Wembley's green grocers is a staggering 100,000 plastic bags a week.

Poly Lactic Acid (PLA) cups, Vegetable Starch refuse sacks and ecoMEDIAbox's (an alternative carrier bag) are being handed out free of charge to greengrocers and bars currently piloting the scheme. It is hoped that these compostable and 100 per cent biodegradable items, made from plants such as corn, cassava and sugar cane, are taken up by all retailers and businesses across the town centre.

Cllr Krupa Sheth, Lead Member for Environment, said:

We're committed to doing what we can locally to help this greater issue. Through this innovative project we are hoping to significantly change the amount of plastic waste across the town centre, especially at larger sites such as Wembley Stadium and Wembley Park Drive, where the number of plastic cups used on one single event day averages 160,000.

Cllr Shama Tatler, Lead Member for Regeneration, Highways & Planning, said:

We are all aware of the global problem created by our use of plastic and on a local level in Brent are working with businesses to address fundamentally unsustainable habits of shopping and leisure in the borough. It's not something that we can do alone, it relies on the support of our local businesses and shoppers to get on board with what we are trying to achieve.

Businesses and residents can follow the campaign on Instagram: pfwembley, Twitter: @pfwembley #PlasticFreeWembley and Facebook: Plastic Free Wembley

Help ensure the future of Preston Community Library & comment on redevelopment proposals - consultation tomorrow at the library

Preston Library, Carlton Avenue East Redevelopment Proposal, Consultation Event

Tuesday September  18th 2018, 3pm – 8pm

Preston Library, Carlton Avenue East, Wembley, HA9 8PL

Brent Council is consulting on the future of the site of the former  Preston Library, off Preston Road, Wembley.

 Following the Labour Council's announcement of the closure of the library a huge campaign was launched to keep it open, even if that meant it being run by volunteers. For a time the building, after modification, was used by 'bulge classes' for Preston Park Primary. When it was no longer needed for that purpose community volunteers, helped by a more sympathetic Labour adminstration, set up a community library at the site on a short term licence which has been very successful putting on classes and film nights in addition to the lending library.

This consultation is about plans to redevelop the site and about the potential for incorporating a social space that could house the library or other community activities.

Consultation ends at 5pm on October 5th 2018

The consultation document is embedded below. Click on bottomn right hand corner to see full size.

Support 'Trees for the Triangle' - bring beauty & clean air to Kensal Triangle

Kensal Triangle ResidentsAssociation have launched a campaign to plant more trees in their area and are calling for support to persuade Brent Council to help fund the project. Supporters should email Trees@ktra.co.uk

Queensbury pub redevelopment consultation today 4pm-8pm St Gabriel's Church Hall

Queensbury pub campaigners are rolling their sleeves up ready for another round in the campaign to save the Queensbury pub in Willesden Green.

Developers Fairview Homes lost an appeal against the refusal of permission to develop the site. Now it is the turn of Redbourne (Willesden) a subsidiary of the Winston Group to try and persuade the community and Brent Planning Committee to accept their plans for 48 flats and a pub with function room on the site.

The second day of an exhibition by the company's public relations company takes place today at St Gabriel's Church Hall, Chichele Road, NW2 3AQ 4pm-8pm.

No to privatisation of public assets - StopHDV latest

From StopHDV

A Judicial Review of the Haringey Development (Demolition) Vehicle  is being filed in the High Court this week on the grounds of it not having been consulted on, never having gone to a full Council, equalities impact not having been adequately considered, and on the risk to public finances not being made transparent or explained. There was a successful crowdfunding campaign which along with local collections and donations has raised  £25,000 towards legal costs. The last update on this is HERE

The campaign is a broad coalition of forces including both constituency Labour parties, LibDems, Greens, trades unions, community organisations, residents and leaseholders associations. Despite this the ‘red Tory’ Labour Cabinet led by Claire Kober, who also is chair of London Councils, are determined to go ahead with the £2 Billion transfer of the local authority’s Council estates, land and property including over 500 business units to a partnership with Lendlease. We believe however they cannot sign any contracts while this in legal dispute and a hearing could be any time through the autumn.

September is a critical month in linking this — the biggest attempted privatisation of local authority assets in UK history — with the various similar attempts at social cleansing and depriving ordinary people of their rights to housing across London in favour of corporate developer-led ‘’regeneration’’. We are aware particularly of what Lendlease has done in Southwark, of the Cressingham Gardens campaign in Lambeth, and of new developments in Tower Hamlets, and possibly Camden, and in most cases in Labour-controlled authorities. We wish to mobilise with groups such as the Radical Housing Network, ASH, Defend Council Housing, those demanding justice for Grenfell in K and C, and others to build a fightback across London sufficient to turn the tide against these ‘’regenerations’’ which are attacking the very lives of our communities.
StopHDV is calling a march on Saturday 23 September in Haringey which will have key speakers from elsewhere as well as local and we want as many as possible from across the capital to join. First details below:

The plan so far is to assemble on Saturday 23rd September at around noon at Tottenham Green (150 yards up the hill from Seven Sisters Tube station), then march from 1pm to assemble around 2.30 - 3  at Finsbury Park.  The route should take us past Seven Sisters up West Green Road along Green Lanes to Finsbury Park. Depending on consent from the authorities, we may have to reverse the route and start at Finsbury Park.

Finsbury Park is close to two tube stations (Manor House and Finsbury Park.). It is also where Haringey, Hackney and Islington meet and not far from the Camden borders. No local Spurs match that day  (they'll be playing at Wembley) and no Arsenal one either, so no congestion on transport from football crowds.  

The start and end points should make it fairly easy for most of London to get to and from. It just needs building across London. Please tell your contacts!
More information HERE

Fair Funding for All Schools - Get Your Voice Heard

Preston Library Campaign builds ahead of Tuesday's Cabinet decision

Ahead of Tuesday's Cabinet Meeting, Roxanne Mashari, has written to Philip Bromberg in response to his letter LINK about the future of the former Preston library building (referred to in the Cabinet report at the Preston Park Annex LINK)

For the record, I have met with you and your group on a number of occasions and have found our conversations constructive which ultimately have led to the operation of the community library. 

I hope we can collectively find a solution to this as I think your community library is a fantastic example of community action to keep services running in the face of government cuts and I hope the council can support your hard work, passion and commitment as much as possible.

As I said previously, unfortunately property has been removed from the regeneration portfolio but I expect the leader will respond to you fully as soon as possible.

 Cllr Mathew Bradley has also responded to correspondents with the following generic reply:

As I have received a large number of emails about this, I've put together this standard response which I hope will answer all your questions.

Thank you for the numerous emails I received about the Preston Community library. As per your requests, we raised your concerns at the Labour group meeting to try and give a clear steer to the cabinet about what we, as Labour councillors (and specifically Preston ward councillors) wanted to see the building being used for - a community library. I think we made this clear in the meeting. The case for the library has been made well by all of you and I want to thank you all for writing in as the level of public support for the community library was made very clear and lent weight to what we had to say.

As an educator, I am firmly on your side in this matter, and I know my fellow councillors, Pat and Jean, feel the same way. We have been impressed at the service which has been provided by the Preston library community group (often in adverse conditions) and hope that this will continue into the future.

At the next meeting of cabinet, they will be deciding whether to enter negotiations with the business next door to see if this property can be purchased by the council in order to start re-development with a mind to building a structure on both sites. The ground floor of this will be reserved for community use, the upstairs area may become flats, or something else, but as far as I am aware the purpose for this has not been decided.

If the community library were to take up residence on the ground floor this would get the library a permanent home, and I believe would be an excellent solution to the many issues the library group has been facing when working with the council. While I can see positives and negatives to this, as a supporter of the library, I feel that this might be the best possible outcome.

Of course, if this happens, the next big fight would be ensuring that the ground floor of this building is indeed used for the library. The work on achieving this is far from over and I thank you all for continuing to support the community library as robustly as you have.

Regards,
Cllr Matthew Bradley

Philip Bromberg replied:

First of all, I'd like to thank you and Jean (Cllr Hussein)  and Pat (Cllr Harrison) for the support we've had from you over the last two years. Some of the recipients of this email will be unaware that you have done valuable work for the library, and that you've offered to do more for us in the future. We are grateful for your help.

However, I'm afraid that what you say about next week's Cabinet is highly misleading. The report is not simply about negotiations with the business next door. There are two recommended proposals, and both involve the re-development of the library site. In both cases, the ground floor community space will be put out to open market tender, with a target rental income of £51,000 per annum. How, in these circumstances, will it be possible to ensure that there is a library on the ground floor?

Two years ago you and Pat and Jean and every other Labour councillor fought an election on a promise to offer the current building for use as a library at a peppercorn rent, and without an open tendering process. Is this promise about to be broken?

I hope you have read the attached letter from the Chair of SKPPRA, which casts considerable doubt on the wisdom of the current plans. Our strong preference is to continue to run the library in the existing building. This is what was promised in May 2014. But any re-development of the site must be done in a way which is consistent with those promises made two years ago. On Tuesday the Cabinet must say clearly that any community space must contain our community library, which must be offered to us for a peppercorn rent. That is what you now need to tell Mo and the other members of the Cabinet.

WHAT MIGHT BE LOST 

The decision about the library building is due to be made on Tuesday but both Brent Conservative groups have put it on the agenda for the following Full Council meeting on September 19th.

Cllr Reg Colwill  of Kenton conservatives has submitted this question to Cllr Michael Pavey, lead member for Stronger Communities:

The residents of the Preston Ward have done a fantastic job in keeping the library active and working to make sure that all the residents have access to books in a very professional manner.

Will the Council now honour what they told the residents that is that they would give them the library to continue their good work?

If yes, the Committee running the library would like to know when.

Brondesbury Park  Conservatives have submitted the following motion:

This Council confirms its previous promises and pledges of support for the continued existence of the four voluntary - run Brent libraries: Preston Community, Barham Park , Kensal Rise and Cricklewood.

A correspondent has submitted the following regarding the report's figures:

According to the Cabinet report:

5 flats built on the library site, will produce an income £158,000, less £51,000 from 'community' provision comes to £107,000, or £21,400 for each flat [£411.54per week].

19 flats on larger site, income £420,000, less £51,000 from community space comes to £369,000, or £19,421 per flat, which is £373.48 per week.

Council rents for a one bed are £102, 2beds are £116, and 3 beds are £128.

So Council tenants will not be able to afford the homes.  Housing Benefit does not seem to have been accounted for in the calculations.

So the income for the Council as indicated in the report seems inaccurate. It is cheaper to rent out a private flat in the area, so the proposals don't seem viable and won't meet housing need.

Green Brent and Harrow GLA candidate pledges support for 'Save the Bridge' campaign

The Green Party's candidate for the Brent and Harrow GLA constituency, Jafar Hassan, today put his party's weight behind the 'Save the Bridge' campaign.

  Jafar said:

As Green Party GLA candidate for Brent and Harrow I am strongly opposed to the closure of The Bridge in Harrow.  It is a vital service, one that is  a lifeline to many in the Harrow community.  Mental health problems are common and rising, often as a result of current widening inequality and economic uncertainty and we should therefore be protecting these professional services rather than cutting back. Greens support the 38degrees petition, calling on Harrow Council to reconsider the decision to withdraw this service.  We hope that the council acknowledges the strong public opposition and act accordingly.

The petition can be found HERE

This is what it says:

To: David Perry, Leader of Harrow Council 

Please don't close 'The Bridge', next to the Harrow Leisure Centre, in Christchurch Avenue, Harrow.

Why is this important?

The Bridge is a purpose built place for the Mentally ill people. It's an activity centre and a drop in centre with a cafe. The building is all on ground floor. There are gardens at the back and side for people to relax.

The activities include Arts and Craft, Music Learning, Guitar Learning group - 'Dont Fret', Tabla (Indian drums) learning, Library, Choir meeting -- 'More than Just a Choir', WhyFI - for Paranoia, Pilates, Yoga, 30 Clients with Personal Independence Budgets attend for therapy. People with depression, Bipolar, Schizophrenia etc. etc. attend with great benefits to their daily life. The Northwick Park Hospital's Mental Heath Unit refers clients for further support from the services available at The Bridge.

I had asked my family, two years ago, to take me to the Switzerland clinic to 'have me put down'. Then I heard of 'The Bridge' and attended the Choir -- ''More Than Just A Choir'' every Tuesday evening. This has turned my life around.

The people receiving a great deal of therapeutic benefits will have to revert back to the overloaded GP services and the NHS -- waiting list. The attempt to close The Bridge will end up costing the community far greater!

Free Speech Campaign launched to challenge 'broad and vague' Extremism Disruption Orders

Britain’s most eclectic, unlikely campaign group - Defend Free Speech - has been launched this week, in a bid to halt the Government’s planned introduction of Extremism Disruption Orders (EDOs), which it says will threaten free speech.

The Defend Free Speech campaign is spearheaded by normally rival groups, the Christian Institute and the National Secular Society. It is backed by former shadow Home Secretary David Davis MP, Caroline Lucas MP, ex-Chief Constable Lord Dear – who will lead the campaign in the House of Lords – and human rights defender Peter Tatchell. Other supporters include Big Brother Watch, English PEN, the Manifesto Club and the Peter Tatchell Foundation. 

The campaigners warn that the Government’s proposals to tackle extremism - in particular far right and Islamist extremism - are so broad and vague that they could penalise a range of dissenting and minority opinions.

They say the sweeping new powers will have a chilling effect on free speech because the Government has repeatedly failed to set out a definition of what will be considered extreme. Ministers have, however, confirmed that the legislation will clamp down on extremists even if they have not broken the law - a very sinister and menacing attack on liberty and human rights.

Simon Calvert, Director of Defend Free Speech, noted:

Defend Free Speech believes innocent people will fall foul of this unnecessary and dangerous piece of legislation. It will criminalise those who hold unpopular, unfashionable or challenging views. This could include pro- and anti-religious groups, trade unionists, environmental and animal rights activists, critics of UK foreign policy and people campaigning for LGBT rights. Indeed, we have already seen police urging teachers to report on parents who go to anti-fracking protests.
 
We are deeply concerned with the Government’s plans. The complete absence of safeguards and any clear definition of what is deemed to be extreme will have a chilling effect on free speech and campaigners.
 
We might be Britain’s most unlikely campaign group, but we are united in our belief that free speech is a vital civil liberty and must be protected. This legislation is badly conceived and will be bad for society.

Peter Tatchell, Director of the human rights lobby, the Peter Tatchell Foundation, added:

Extremism Disruption Orders are too sweeping and too open to abuse. They risk transforming lawful activities into criminal offences in a way that threatens freedom of expression. The definition of extremism is far too wide and the threshold for an EDO is way too low. It could be imposed for words or actions that are ‘on the balance of probabilities’ extremist, rather than ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ extremist. Even the mere causing of offence or distress may be sufficient to trigger an EDO.
 
Proponents of a range of unpopular, controversial and dissident views may be liable to an EDO, including opponents of western foreign policy, campaigners against nuclear weapons and energy, animal rights activists, people who express bigoted opinions and supporters of legitimate democratic liberation movements in the Western Sahara, Palestine, Syria, Balochistan and West Papua.
 
Hateful and extremist ideas should be challenged, protested and refuted. Bad ideas are most effectively countered by good ideas backed up by rational argument and evidence. Heavy-handed legal restrictions on free speech undermine the democratic, liberal values that extremists oppose and that we cherish.
 
Free speech is one of the most precious of all human rights and should be defended robustly. It can only be legitimately restricted by the law when it involves harmful libels, harassment, menaces, threats and incitements to violence.

Defend Free Speech highlights that earlier this year the Prime Minister David Cameron introduced the proposals with the chilling words: “For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone.” He then went on to promise that the Government “will conclusively turn the page on this failed approach.”

Chancellor George Osborne wrote to a constituent that the remit of the legislation would go “beyond terrorism” and that it would seek to “eliminate extremism in all its forms.”
He went on to say that it would apply to “harmful activities of extremist individuals who spread hate but do not break laws.” His letter failed to define what harmful activities are or even what is extremism.

The Defend Free Speech campaign warns EDOs could be used to prevent individuals from going to certain places, mixing with particular people or even using mobile phones, the internet and social media. 

Crucially, the group says the Government will use the lower civil law test of “the balance of probabilities” rather than the stronger criminal test of “beyond reasonable doubt” and that even the mere risk of causing “distress” could be enough to trigger the new powers.

To highlight their concerns, the campaign has published a number of examples on its website of people and groups it believes could be affected by EDOs: www.defendfreespeech.org.uk
It says the Government needs to urgently engage with campaigners, parliamentarians and pressure groups who could end up on the wrong side of the law if EDOs are approved without safeguards. 

Caroline Lucas MP warned:

I’ll be taking every opportunity to oppose Extremism Disruption Orders when the relevant legislation comes before the House of Commons. This kind of draconian crackdown lacks a credible evidence basis, represents an infringement of basic rights, and may well actually be counterproductive.