What are the limits of freedom and regulation?

Woke up to the Today programme discussing the Manifesto Club's latest report.

The group's press release is worth reading in full:

Councils' bizarre new bans are 'return to 19th century'

A new law which allows councils to ban activities in public spaces is leading to bizarre new criminal offences.

Councils are using the 'public spaces protection order' power, contained in the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, which allows them to ban activities they judge to have a 'detrimental effect' on the 'quality of life'.

A Manifesto Club briefing - published on Monday 30 March, and available to view here - has identified eight already enacted 'public spaces protection orders' (PSPOs), which create new criminal offences. These include:

• In Colchester it is now a crime to drive into a retail park after 6pm unless you are using the retail park facilities;

• In Poole 'begging for money' is now a crime;

• In Cambridge it is a crime to have an 'open container' of alcohol;

• In Oxford it is a crime for a young person to enter a tower block unless they are visiting a resident of the block;

• In Lincoln, from 1 April it will be a crime to consume any 'intoxicating substances' in the city centre (defined as 'substances with the capacity to stimulate or depress the central nervous system').

Another four PSPOs are out for public consultation, and 19 are under consideration. These include:

• Bath City Council wants to ban amplified music in parts of the city centre.

• Oxford City Council has proposed a series of restrictions on activities in the city centre, including bans on unlicensed busking, begging, rough sleeping, pigeon feeding, drinking and dogs off leads.

• Kettering Borough Council is currently consulting on a similarly broad PSPO to restrict: street drinking, skateboarding, charity collectors, 'using a motor vehicle in an anti-social manner', begging, 'anti-social parking', 'loitering' and 'obstructing the highway'.

• Blackpool Council is proposing an order to ban activities including 'loitering around cash machines', street drinking, legal highs, 'rag mag sellers', and the sale of lucky charms and heather.

Josie Appleton, director of the Manifesto Club and author of the briefing on PSPOs, said:

"These powers are so broad that they allow councils to ban pretty much anything. The result is a patchwork of criminal law, where something is illegal in one town but not in the next, or in one street but not the next. This makes it hard for the public to know what is criminal and what is not.

"These orders will turn town and city centres into no-go zones for homeless people, buskers, old ladies feeding pigeons, or anyone else whom the council views as "messy". It is astonishing that in the 21st century you could be punished for the crime of selling a lucky charm, 'loitering', or failing to leave a retail park within 20 minutes. This looks like a return to the meddling and moralism of nineteenth-century bylaws."

The Manifesto Club is calling for greater restraints on the use of these powers to be included in the Statutory Guidance accompanying the Act.

The Manifesto Club is also calling for councils to consult widely before introducing these orders, since legally an order can be passed by a single council officer - and for councils to explore alternative solutions to local problems before leaping to criminalisation.

See Council ban legislation creating 'bizarre' laws, campaigners say (BBC News).

Much as I support it in theory, this is what decentralisation does. It gives powers to every local Tom, Dick and Harriet to introduce the weirdest of rules and before long you have the most extraordinary array of laws up and down the country.

The Manifesto Club report also begs the question, how soon before smoking in a public space is a crime in some areas, and how will the innocent visitor know whether he or she is breaking the law?

But the bigger question is this: who controls our quality of life and in an urban environment, where large numbers of people have to co-exist together, what are the limits of freedom and regulation?

For example, as someone who hates loud music and has suffered in the past from a noisy neighbour, I'm not averse to laws restricting their freedom to turn up the volume.

But where should my 'right' to a quiet life and someone else's 'right' to make a terrible racket begin and end?

I'm not sure I have the answer. Over to you.

Comments

[Manx Gent]

We've also had a rash of these over here, and with chums of the infamous Bath and Sheffield programmes in our public health team I fear we will see many more.

In addition to the vaguely understandable ones (prohibitions on public drinking, mainly to allow police to confiscate booze from kids in a small town play area) one village council demanded truly bizarre ones, such as preventing loitering in a church doorway or fitting an unlicenced condom machine in a pub.

Amazingly, an Act to sanction this passed through Tynwald (our national parliament) without so much as one question or dissenter

[Pat Nurse]

In Lincoln, our vile, abusive and very small minded (mostly Labour) councillors have even put up posters warning people not to feed the homeless as if they are wild dogs.

No these thugs want rich people to ignore the homeless and instead give that money to charities favoured by the Labour councillors. What is worse, is that we now have a newspaper that once scrutinised such power mad thugs but now meekly backs every thing they do.

My city, and my once great local paper, have become laughing stocks.

[Zippgun]

I think the enabling legislation here was the work of odious, authoritarian Theresa May's odious, authoritarian home office - having been built upon Anthony Bliar's pioneering punish without due process invention, the Asbo System. A few, such as Manifesto, saw where these would lead when they were first mooted, and issued warnings. As usual the pathetic MSM ignored the whole thing. It's astonishing the Lords let this legislation through - being precisely the sort of authoritarian garbage from the Executive the Lords exist to throttle at birth.

Coming down the pike are May's Extremist Dispersal Orders (EDOs) which give even more powers to branches of state authority to impose censorship and punishment without bothering about due process or the actual proper laws concerning any limits on free expression. The lurch into fascism began with New Labour, but the Tories have enthusiastically followed the same path - that alone makes them, like Labour, very dangerous and equally unworthy of our vote in May.

[Vinny Gracchus]

The march toward totalitarian lifestyle control is eroding civil liberties and must be stopped.

[Misty]

Just OT for a moment, but did anyone on here know that there was a motion in the HoC back in 2010 to relax the smoking ban to exempt private members’ clubs and pubs not serving food? I don’t remember reading/hearing about it anywhere and hadn’t even realised it had happened – only found out about it by chance when looking up something completely different a minute ago. Did you know about it, Simon, and, if so, did you do a piece (or run a campaign) about it? If so, then I missed out on both!

[Simon]

Smoking Bill - how MPs voted (October 2010).

[Misty]

Thanks, Simon. Damn this Alzheimer's! I even put a comment in under the blog piece!

I'll go and take my medication now ......