Can any one give us the exact words of this new parliament act. I can't find it anywhere.

ASS has the draft bill here:  http://www.squatter.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=264&Itemid=66

it's not an act, it's a bill. this is significant because of what those two words mean. a bill is like a proposal, something to be discussed and voted upon. if it gets enough votes it eventually becomes an act - in other words it becomes law.

this doesn't happen overnight though. squatting IS STILL ENTIRELY LEGAL and will remain so for several months at least, possibly longer. as the article explains, even after this bill becomes law, many forms of squatting will still be legal, and even those deemed illegal may get away with it because nobody knows to what degree the proposed new law will be enforced.

DON'T GIVE UP!

DON'T STOP SQUATTING!

the more squats there are, the harder it will be for them to enforce... and there are still lots of possible ways to fight it legally if/when it does become law.

agree with lawyer, this will take a while to actually become law..

you can find the bill documents here:
 http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-12/legalaidsentencingandpunishmentofoffenders/documents.html
[be aware it gets amended over time, the squat bit is clause 145]

the status of the bill is here:
 http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-11/legalaidsentencingandpunishmentofoffenders.html

don't ask me why it's at the "pingpong" stage now

145


Offence of squatting in a residential building


(1)


A person commits an offence if—




(a)


the person is in a residential building as a trespasser having entered it


as a trespasser,


(b)


the person knows or ought to know that he or she is a trespasser, and


(c)


the person is living in the building or intends to live there for any


period.


5

(2)


The offence is not committed by a person holding over after the end of a lease


or licence (even if the person leaves and re-enters the building).


(3)


For the purposes of this section—


(a)


“building” includes any structure or part of a structure (including a


temporary or moveable structure), and


10

(b)


a building is “residential” if it is designed or adapted, before the time of


entry, for use as a place to live.


(4)


For the purposes of this section the fact that a person derives title from a


trespasser, or has the permission of a trespasser, does not prevent the person


from being a trespasser.


15

(5)


A person convicted of an offence under this section is liable on summary


conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks or a fine not


exceeding level 5 on the standard scale (or both).


(6)


In relation to an offence committed before the commencement of section 281(5)


of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the reference in subsection (5) to 51 weeks is


20

to be read as a reference to 6 months.


(7)


For the purposes of subsection (1)(a) it is irrelevant whether the person entered


the building as a trespasser before or after the commencement of this section.


(8)


In section 17 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (entry for purpose


of arrest etc)—


25

(a)


in subsection (1)(c), after sub-paragraph (v) insert—


“(vi)


section 145 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and


Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (squatting in


a residential building);”;


(b)


in subsection (3), for “or (iv)” substitute “, (iv) or (vi)”.


30

(9)


In Schedule 10 to the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994


(consequential amendments), omit paragraph 53(b).

From my (fairly limited) knowledge of how parliament works...

While this is still not law, or even an act, it is towards the end of the process in that it has passed through both Houses. I think 'ping-pong' is when the amendments the Lords have proposed need to be given the green light by the Commons, if they're not then it goes back to the Lords where they change the amendments then back to the Commons and so on.

Unfortunately no significant amendments have been made to the clause around squatting (though I think at some point they added an exemption to the police needing a warrant to kick in the door - or maybe that was always there and I just didn't notice it). However the bill they hid the clause in is pretty controversial so hopefully it will spend quite a bit more time caught up in the bureaucracy, though I think the Tories might force it through and bypass the Lords at some point.

While I'm pretty sure it will become law at some point, how the law works in pratice depends on the courts and cops. Hopefully they'll treat it as seriously as they do fox hunting in which case we'll be fine, but I doubt it.

In Holland they managed to challenge the law through the European Courts and won forcing the police to get a judge to sign off on any eviction - this has created a situation no that disimilar to how the UK has been for 35 years, anyone know if this is likely or even possible here?

It only applies if:
the person is in a RESIDENTIAL BUILDING as a trespasser having entered it as a TRESPASSER,

Trespass:
To commit an unlawful injury to the person, property, or rights of another, with actual or implied force or violence, especially to enter onto another's land wrongfully.

So that clearly can not apply to any abandoned residential buildings,
or any non residential buildings,
or any land.
And it doesn't apply to staying in a house after your tenancy contract has expired.

And it doesn't affect: section six, criminal law act, 1977.

So it can only really apply to houses which you have to "break and enter" to squat.
As "breaking and entering" is already illegal, I can't see much change really.

This isn't really anymore than a bit of huffing and puffing about MP second homes being squatted.

Full support to all those fighting to keep their only chance of a home.

As for those who could get a job, could get a place of their own, and could generally support themselves - I won't lift a finger to protect you. I hope you don't get evicted and this new law doesn't change anything, but I don't see why I should risk anything to help who could but won't help themselves. I'll dedicate myself to helping the working class, not the middle class posing as working class.

Moving into a squat doesn't magically make you part of the solution.

>> As for those who could get a job, could get a place of their own, and could generally support themselves - I won't lift a finger to protect you. I hope you don't get evicted and this new law doesn't change anything, but I don't see why I should risk anything to help who could but won't help themselves. I'll dedicate myself to helping the working class, not the middle class posing as working class.

Are you suggesting that the Middle class have jobs and therefore that the Working class don't have jobs?

I put it to you that:
Some Working class do actually work in a job.
And that some Middle class don't have a job.

What about broadening your horizons to helping middle class who are actually now working class and don't have a job?

"residential" is a legal land status. If a planning application goes through, changing use from residential to demolition/development, then can you can still squat homes that are due for demolition?

Since the act defines residential as somewhere 'designed or adapted, before the time of entry, for use as a place to live' so I don't think that somewhere due for demolition would necesarily fall outside of that.

'anarchist' I don't know where you're definition of trespass comes but as far as I'm aware (in the UK) it is merely being on land without the consent, implied or otherwise, of the owner. So unfortunately, no matter how abandoned a building is or whether or not you commit damage are irrelevant. And it does effect section 6 as it allows police to force entry in order to arrest suspected squatters. I suspect they will use it to prevent any new squats opening by kicking in the door and arresting people if they refuse to leave, I doubt they'll be keen to prosecute though.

And as for 'one anarchist' - what do you mean by 'a place of their own'? Do you mean people should work 9-5 all their life in order to get a loan off multimillionaire bankers so that they can prop up an over inflated property market - property that is divided up based on a fucked up system in the first place? Squatting is not the answer to all problems but it is an act of resistance in itself and as such the principle and the squats should be defended as strongly as possible. So fuck off you judgmental prick.

There was not squatting before the Roman Slaveholders Conquest of the British Tribes and there never existed a Criminal Class. However, since the conquest Squatting became a needed fact of life of the dispossed classes and the runaway slaves. Squatting was caused by the dispossession of the lands of the tribes and Imperium owned dictate.

All lands became the property of the Emperor and his officials. The Roman War machine called the Slaveholder pens, which are now renamed as 'Modern Prisons' are a new enforced Squatting House, and purveyor of the Criminal Class status. It therefore has existed for millenium in the fact of squats and landlord evictions. Such laws were not possible under the British Tribes free lifestyle, but only made possible by Empire and the lords rules of private huge estates. In point of fact the proles were never since the conquest allowed guaranteed full housing.

From the conquest to this day the workers have sweated under the rules of the elite rulers who make the laws to the benefit of the rulers not the workers. In point of fact the workers state serves the workers ( Squatters) while the Monopoly Capitalist state serves the elite capitalists.

The Feudal state serves the big landlords and big estate owners, not the peasants-workers. The enslavers state served the slaveowners not the enslaved workers. It is so in class societies that the exploiters, since empires have been passing laws against the dispossessed classes and chasing them out of vacant lots and houses and other abandoned buildings etc.
More News From Nowhere

Passing so-called new laws against squatting is not at all new. The only question since the triad conquest of the workers is how long or how well can the squatter hold on to the new squat. Usually not very long, as the state contol of law making, courts, police and the standing army is definitely not for the orginal free lifestyle we all long for but have not been allowed to live again as before the conquest, and imposition of the varieties of elite one percent control over the 99%.

Don't forget folks the liberation of the working classes takes place when the workers take ownership and control of the main means of production for the good of us all. Then they can use the last classist society to put an end to the exploitation and oppression of all the workers forever and abolish all forms of exploitation. Such as prisons, private cops and standing armies of pollution conquesting.

The law then becomes--- from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs. Harmony and joy resides in the return of the matriachy and the natural electing 50-50 thusly doubling democracy at all levels and providing women access to half the law making, wealth, and religio authority, which the empires has denighed them since original conquest of all empires.

Workers of the world, unite!! You yet have a world to win!! Retool to the renewables such as wind, tidal, and solar power and get out of coal, gas, oil, and atomic energy. End pollution wars, not endless wars for more and more pollution.

State enforced aggregation of labour, aka. slavery.
The land is ours, not the fucking governments. They can only control the land if they can control us.

There will be a pro-squatting march in Bristol on Saturday 14th April to protest against the anti-squatting law. Please meet at 1:00PM outside Metropolis, Stokes Croft! Bring banners, placards, flyers, megaphones, soundsystems & anger!

Whatever they say, squatting will stay!