For the past two years at climate camps parents have been told that such and such would happen on the main marches, keeping them safe from police aggression. In practice this didn't quite happen. I originally thought this was because others on the march didn't care too much about prior agreement eg to all stay together there and back. But I've come to realise that many people on the march didn't go to planning meetings, and so didn't know about such agreements.

Blaming others wont help, but we need to communicate more before going on future marches, actions etc. If we are creating an event to be as safe and non-confrontational as possible, so families, locals, and anyone who wants to feel safe can participate, then we need to make sure everyone who participates knows the 'guidelines' for the march.

Us climate campers are responsible, extraordinary, wonderful, resourceful people, and we can create safer spaces in the future, as well as other confrontational spaces. I don't want to deter anyone from participating in future events, they are fabulous life-changing experiences!

Thanks, Tracy

can some-one arrange something amongst the organisors so we don't get arrested and hit with batons? giving my details to police was also really annoying, can i submit them before hand and get speedy entry next time like on easyjet?

peace power

I think your comment about submitting details in advance is a bit tongue in cheek, but it might be useful to make this suggestion to the head of the regional police force wherever the next climate demo is. Not just because it's a useful suggestion, but it makes a point about aggressive and stupid policing.

If you go on a climate demo (or almost any demo these days), expect the police to hit you with their batons regardless of who you are or what you are doing. They don't like demonstrators, especially those who are dedicated enough to actually go camping (!) in order to demonstrate. And nowadays, they don't acknowledge that anybody has the right to demonstrate peaceably. Also, they might be hoping that if they use violence they will discourage people from demonstrating in future, and thus save their regional force the cost of policing the demo. Have you ever watched the Smash EDO film? It seems the police tried to break this ongoing demo against an arms manufacturer because they didn't want to have to pay the cost of policing dedicated demonstrators. It could be they want to try to break other protests for the same simple (and depressing) reason.

Don't be put off. Take numbers and sue the bastards for assault. We'll win in the end. And maybe people need to discuss tactics for dealing with out-of-control coppers on horseback. It's worth knowing that horses are generally placid beasts and are not really all that stupid. They won't charge at a solid object, such as a row of people linking arms across the road in front of them for example. And they are only controlled by the reins, and the person holding the reins doesn't necessarily have to be the person sitting on the horse's back. If you get my meaning! I did once see footage of Australian demonstrators using this knowledge to their advanage against mounted police.

I'm not sure I agree with the first comment. Yes, I went to the orange meetings as a parent who wanted to help ensure it was a safe space. The meetings decided that marching on one lane with traffic next to us was unacceptable, so we were on both lanes. The person arrested was removig the tape between the lanes, so in effect he was carrying out the consensus of the orange meetings!! Besides, the police just decided to do a snatch to see what would happen and attempt to stir up trouble. people peaceably tried to dearrest by holding on, and were only dispersed by the horses. i think they then realised that a) they wouldn't get away with more arrests and b) that we wouldn't react how they wanted, with violence. So all in all, I think the people at the front ensured a safe space for the kids. No?

My comments were on the movment of the marches as a whole. At Heathrow, some parents felt that families and locals should be allowed to stay in a unified group at the front of the march, and keep themselves distinct from campers who might be more confrontational / do direct action. My understanding was that our keeping separate had been agreed by the camp as a whole. (I was with my daughter last year.)

The Heathrow march set off, and the police started to form a line behind the kids/locals block, forming a barrier between them and the rest of the marchers. Marchers behind the kids block then shouted "the police are trying to separate us! Mix in with the kids block!" So the other campers ran into the kids block, and our distinct group was no more. At the time I thought, well these climate campers are great people, but consensus decisions mean nothing to them when they are actually on an action. I later realised they probably didn't know that parents were told we could stay in a distinct group.

At Kingsnorth, parents wanted to stay mixed in with the other campers, so the other campers could act as a buffer between their kids and the police. People in the meetings said we should all go and return as a unified group. I might be wrong but I think this was agreed by the meeting as a whole. However, on the return journey, some of the march stuck to the dual carriageway, and about half (maybe more) split off and went through the village.

Later I heard that families with small children were physically harrassed by the police as they trailed at the back of the dual carriage-way return march. Of course this is the 'fault' of the police, but I wondered if we had stayed together then the police may not have reacted in this way? They may have been lashing out because they'd failed to stop the march going through the village? And failed to get everyone moving nicely away from the gate at 1pm?

I was one of the first to break away from the main march and go through the village. So I'm not proclaiming judgment from on high. It seemed like a good idea at the time. But with hindsight, I think we (especially me) need to stick to what's been agreed, otherwise families and other 'vulnerables' may lose trust in us. We can't control police behaviour but we can control our own. Either we say to marchers, OK, we're not making any guarantees, the march may split up. Or we say, everyone (within reason) who participates needs to stick to these agreements: stay together, leave for the return journey together on time etc. And we need to publicise these agreements, on flyers, posters, using megaphones BEFORE we set off, so those who didn't attend meetings will know.

Again, I don't want to put anyone off from attending future actions, they are generally fun and inspiring, and we are resourceful enough to resolve these problems.