“When tyranny is abroad,
submission is a crime”.
Andrew Elliot (Early American Rebel)
“When tyranny is abroad,
submission is a crime”.
Andrew Elliot (Early American Rebel)
For more about the CJA, check out my ‘historical’ site at: https://alanlodge.co.uk/OnTheRoad/cja
There’s been a ton of commentary since the new policing bill was thrust into public consciousness by the police attack on the Sarah Everard vigil in Clapham. A lot of it has drawn comparisons with the struggle against Thatcher’s Poll Tax , a real solid working class victory we can all be proud of. However, it’s unlikely to play out that way. The new bill doesn’t make the mistake of targeting every adult in the country at once. It targets people and groups who have already been demonised in the right wing press: Extinction Rebellion, Black Lives Matter and the GRT community. The lesser known, but more obvious jumping off point would be the campaign against the CJA.
KILL THE BILL
The Criminal Justice Bill 1994 was the last hurrah of Tory law and order before Blair came to power in ’97 . It was an attempt to, in one fell swoop, criminalise a growing counter culture and political movement, aimed squarely at travellers , ravers , eco activists , live exports campaigners, hunt sabs and squatters. Having smashed organised working class power in the 80s with the Miner’s and Wapping disputes the Tories turned the attention to those aforementioned methods of escape from neo-liberalism, and the resistance to it.
It was still possible (for some) to escape from a life of low pay and rental accomodation by squatting or living in a van, undermining the ability of the elite to discipline the working class. If life inside the system was being made intolerable, why not step outside it?
There were emerging new forms of resistance, focussed on ecological issues, the anti -roads and Reclaim the Streets movements are well known, the fight against live exports and the subsequent growth of the animal liberation movement less so.
Meanwhile new forms of “escape the drudgery” hedonism were invented as the rave scene crossed over with the free festival circuit. People getting out of the city and off their heads on the weekend were confronted with the new age travellers and the most subversive truth of all “It doesn’t have to be like this”. Obviously this had to be crushed!
This attempt to push this through as one act was designed to play well with the Tory base (the culture war is nothing new). Michael Howard, the Home Secretary called hunt saboteurs “Thugs, bullies and wreckers”, John Major, P.M said to one Tory conference “New Age travellers, not in this age , not in any age”.
The attempted criminalization of so many at once sparked the creation of genuine grassroots coalition that transformed into an anti capitalist movement. The first year of resistance to the CJB saw mass defiance, mass trespass (including on the roof of parliament!) , raves in Trafalgar Square and riots in Hyde Park. The protest culture it targeted only grew stronger and more radicalised.
The Land is Ours!
Central to this new act and the CJA is the struggle over land: who owns it, who has access to it and who can use it. This is not so much an anti capitalist fight as an anti feudalist one. Wat Tyler would have, in an instant, grasped the essence of this fight, this enclosure. The same struggle engaged in by Gerrard Winstanley, the Kinder Scout trespassers and thousands more.
The CJA created the offence of “aggravated trespass”. Aimed at hunt sabs and tree protestors it criminalised what had been for over a century a civil matter by making trespass with the “intent to disrupt lawful activity” illegal. Other sections of the act gave the police draconian power over temporary encampments. The sections of the act criminalising free parties and the “series of repetitve beats” were also triggered by the landed gentry’s fear of the temporary seizure of the property for illicit purposes.
The new legislation goes much further and simply criminalises the act of trespass itself. This will impact all the same targets and further strengthen the rights of the propertied over the propertyless. Mass trespass and an assertion of our right to the land have to be part of this new (and ancient) struggle.
Extra parliamentary resistance
This time round we find ourselves in the same position, but worse. Half of all the carbon ever emitted by fossil fuel extraction has been since the 90s. The culture war is fiercer. Doom is upon us. With the failure of the Corbyn project we have no parliamentary representation, nor the prospect of any. (Maybe the odd voice, Zarah Sultana or Caroline Lucas, maybe some amendments in the Lords but no prospect of defeating this legislation through parliamentary means). Blair’s government was to enact various expansions of the CJA, with new Police, Criminal Justice and Public Order acts coming thick and fast, each bringing in new restrictions on the right of assembly. A ‘law ‘n order’ Starmer government (however unlikely a prospect) would be much the same.
Resistance has to be on the streets and consist of direct action and disobedience. The act has to be made unenforceable. There were a few big marches in London and even a couple of riots but ultimately the struggle continues. Organised defiance of the act and the support of those victimised for breaking it will be key. It was widely assumed that the introduction of aggravated trespass as a criminal offence would be the final note for its intended targets, the hunt saboteurs. Hundreds were arrested, many taken to court and huge police resources were thrown at ending the sabs, but they’re still here! Thousands more were nicked during the road protests but ultimately it was the Tory road building program that was sunk. Squats are taken and free parties still happen.
Coalition building – the anti roads movement and anti capitalism
The coalition against the CJA morphed into a movement. Obviously the roots were already there but the synergy of moving together brought a new intensity and bigger numbers. What worked about it was perhaps largely accidental, firstly the organised Trotskyist left never gained a commanding position, so despite some efforts there was never a steering committee. Secondly while there were numerous media projects associated with the struggle e.g SchNEWs, Squall, Indymedia (later on) , Do or Die, Undercurrents and others , all of them were voices of the movement, not the voice of the movement. So rather than a forced amalgamation, there was something of a co-evolution. This gave space for a diversity of tactics.
There were huge debates within the movement about violence and non violence initially, the whole”fluffy” v “spikey” debates. In hindsight these were quite fruitless and a massive distraction. There has to be respect for different forms of struggle. Both dogmatic pacifism and violent posturing proved to be dead ends.
The movement broadly developed in an anti-capitalist direction, despite the fact that the the rave and road protest scenes particularly were more based on New Age spirituality and what would now be considered tinfoil hat conspiracy theorising (lots of Druids, Khaos Sword Magick and leylines). By 1999 , the movement’s high point, it was hosting “The Carnival Against Capitalism” on June 18th , a global day of action called by the Zapatistas. 10,000 people, masked, with no identified organisers, no speeches and no police liaison danced and then rioted in the Square Mile, the financial centre of London.
Noisy defeats and quiet victories.
One thing that became obvious during the anti- roads movement was that once the diggers and bulldozers were moving on a given site , the fight was lost. But that wasn’t the end. All the high profile sites that became famous like Newbury, Fairmile or Solsbury Hill are all under tarmac now. But tens of dozens of other sites were saved as the road building programme collapsed.
In the early 2000s the government floated the idea of compulsory national I.D cards. There was a brief groundswell of resistance and despite having spent millions they folded their hand. I’m in no doubt that this was due to the Poll Tax struggle and the lesson they learned that they couldn’t make all the people angry at once and hope to stay in control.
Another important victory was that over the introduction of genetically modified crops. A real cross class alliance was built over this and a struggle that involved everything from letters to M.Ps, village hall meetings to night time sabotage and mass trespass and vandalism. The fight over fracking looks to be heading the same way!
The lesson is that demonstrating resistance on one front and causing problems, even if you lose, can mean you don’t have to fight elsewhere. Fighting now brings the opening for a new future. See you on the streets.
John Lilburne – Freedom News

Over the last few weeks we’ve seen the passing of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill in the House of Commons turn the right to protest into a hot topic and rightly so. The Suffragettes, Chartists and Civil Rights campaigners would be turning in their graves at legislation that seeks to curb the democratic right to object to unjust laws and to campaign for change. Protests have won us many basic legal protections that today we all take for granted including the right to vote, workers rights and to not be discriminated against on grounds of difference.
One human right that we take for granted is a legal respect for family life and home (Article 8, Human Rights Act 1998.) The bill has another section of concerning content, part 4. Unauthorised Encampments and Trespass, that threatens that basic right for many. With that wording you’d be forgiven for thinking that it’s only fair for landowners to be able to evict those who trespass without permission, but the current laws already enable this so what’s being changed?
Trespass is in fact changing from a civil matter and becoming a criminal offence. Offenders risk arrest, imprisonment, return to an area being prohibited and property being seized including vehicles. The proposals not only cover private land in the way we think of it as homes and gardens, business or farm land but also vast private estates with many acres owned by wealthy and aristocratic landowners who were gifted it, along with their titles, for supporting Kings of old in battles many centuries ago. When you consider that over half of the land in the UK is owned by less than 1% of the population then the stark reality is that there’s not a fair share left for the rest of us to live on. The proposals also cover public land which includes land and car parks managed by local councils, The National Trust and Forestry Commission which are the most likely places these trespass laws will be used.
Those who live full time or part time in vehicles will be most affected by the new laws;
*Roma, Gypsies, Irish and Scottish Travellers whose nomadic way of life and ethnic minority status is protected under the Equality Act 2010.
*New Age Travellers who first adopted a nomadic lifestyle in the 1960’s with 4th and 5th generations now born into a distinct culture which is intrinsically connected to travelling.
*Vanlifers who are the newcomers to nomadism swapping the modern economic reality of unaffordable, overpriced rents and perpetual house sharing well beyond student days for instagrammed adventures.
*The laws will also catch Motorhomers and Campervanners who “wild camp”.
All Travellers regardless of descriptor, cultural differences or how long we’ve lived this way belong to communities and identities that hinge entirely upon living a nomadic way of life. At all times in human history there have been groups and individuals who have lived nomadically and whose work has depended on travel. Nomadism has existed for eras longer than being settled has been viewed as the accepted norm. Living in bricks and staying in one location doesn’t and has never suited everyone.
In the past common land was the accepted location for Travellers to camp but that option no longer exists. There is a huge problem of having nowhere to go for Travelling people today. Councils have been required by law to provide official sites but the need massively outweighs provision. Disused and derelict wasteland (usually council owned), quiet car parks by woods and beaches or industrial areas are therefore the only options left to make camp. The new laws cover all of these options of places we currently stay and basically make living in a vehicle only possible on a holiday camp site which would be more expensive over time than renting a house or paying a mortgage and so not a feasible reality for most people who live this way full time. Also many if not most sites only accept holiday camper vans and not Traveller vehicles.
Whatever our destination there’s no real end goal of an official place we are allowed to stay. Nomadic life is already a succession of finding new places we can camp without being moved on. When we park up we are often subjected to discrimination, unkind comments and even vigilante attacks by locals driven by prejudices that come from disdainful depictions in the media or stereotypical narratives of problem Travellers passed on from one person to the next. This can mean we seek to find safety in numbers, travelling with friends or stopping for longer periods in small communities of those we share a way of life with. This is especially true if we experience ill health, need to work in a local area for a while or have kids in local education provision and so need to remain in one place which is why more fixed Traveller communities evolve.
The proposed new laws say that we can and will be moved on if we cause “damage, disruption or distress” but these are pretty subjective descriptors as us just being there is deemed to be distressing or disruptive to many people because their stereotype driven fear of us stops them from walking past. Damage could be as little as tyre tracks or a washing line tied to a tree or our camps being viewed as “untidy“. We live outside our homes as much as within and often have items outside. People also hold aesthetic prejudices towards the type of vehicles we live in.
There’s no guidance in the wording of the proposals as to what will be accepted forms of the “three D’s” and no requirement for court proceedings prior to evictions and homes being seized to decide whether this is just or fair in each case. That means no legal process or scrutiny to rule whether we truly have committed a criminal act worthy of punishment prior to being evicted and made homeless. It will be at the discretion of an individual landowner, agent or police officer, who could hold their own prejudices about our way of life, to determine whether our homes being parked somewhere constitutes a crime.
Their individual judgment will also decide what they deem is a “reasonably practicable” time scale for us to move off that land before it’s deemed that we’ve broken the law by not doing so. In that moment they will decide whether our reasons for not moving off the land are justified or criminal. A mechanical issue, children sleeping in their beds, driver tiredness, working locally or needing to access local services such as schools or hospitals or the myriad of different circumstances that can and will present themselves to the individual making the decisions. There’s a long history of police, councils and those who own or manage land not treating Travellers with much respect so having to rely on trusting that an individual will treat us reasonably with no due legal process to check that they are using these powers justly doesn’t fill many of us with much confidence.
The consequences of not moving on to the satisfaction of the officer or landowner are arrest and imprisonment and of course a criminal record, heavy fines, being banned from a local area potentially where we have work, family connections and our kids attend local schools. The powers extend to allowing police to seize and destroy vehicles which for us are our homes and contain all of our possessions. Seizing them means leaving us homeless. For those of us who carry the tools of our trades and/or need to travel to different areas to work this will leave us without any way of making a living. The most worrying consideration is that if we are locked up and made homeless what happens to our children? They will of course be taken by social services and as our homes will have been destroyed along with all of the possessions we need to provide and care for our kids (including their own personal possessions such as beds and clothing and toys) we are unlikely to get them returned to our care. It’s pretty much our entire way of life that’s being criminalised and our families’ security and assurance that we will still be together and able to live in our home tomorrow that’s under threat. We are left with the only option being to live a life of perpetual motion, ready to move on at a moment’s notice and feeling like we are on the run. Daily fear of losing our freedom, our homes, everything we own and our children is no way to live. Any knock at our door could be the one that decimates our lives.
Please join us in opposing this bill. Help us to show that criminalising us, displacing us and dramatically driving up the homelessness statistics and the number of kids in care is not the answer to achieving social harmony. Nobody deserves to live with the threat of losing their home just for living in it. Nobody deserves to be turned into a criminal overnight on an individual’s definition of whether their way of life causes damage, disruption or distress without the due legal process of court. As well as threatening a nomadic way of life this sets a very dangerous legal precedent. We can already be evicted from land under current law, criminalising us, casting us out of the area and taking our homes in the process is unjust.
Written by Jess Fox
Jess Fox is a New Age Traveller, Dressmaker, Autistic blogger, Single parent, Home Educator and Carer for her son who is also Autistic. She collects vinyl records and Irregular Choice trainers. https://theeverydaymagazine.co.uk/opinion/the-impact-of-the-bill-on-travellers

Every spring, as daffodils and primroses bloom, Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) communities follow the ways of our ancestors and hit the road. Around the same time each year, rosette-wearing politicians start pounding pavements and knocking on doors ahead of local elections.
The two groups rarely meet, but in recent weeks our worlds have collided. How both major parties treat Britain’s estimated 600,000 Gypsies, Roma and Travellers is finally getting some attention. But it’s not just the discrimination of home secretary Priti Patel’s police, crime, sentencing and courts bill that has provoked anger and upset, but the actions of a hapless Labour MP in Warrington.
It’s something you shouldn’t see on a Labour leaflet. But there on the seventh line it is: right between the issues of anti-social behaviour and traffic concerns is a pledge to “deal with traveller incursions”. Whether Labour MP Charlotte Nichols didn’t read the leaflet properly or she just didn’t care is unclear, but we can safely say she now regrets the photo taken while out campaigning in Orford, Cheshire. The controversy has led to an embarrassing apology from the MP along with Labour’s general secretary – and a promise that all the leaflets will be pulped. But what was so wrong with it?
A Labour leaflet attacking GRT communities, from a now-deleted tweet by Labour MP Charlotte Nichols.
For most members of GRT communities, the phrase “deal with traveller incursions” is abhorrent because it frames these people as a problem to be “dealt with”. Suggesting such a thing about any other minority would be a scandal, and rightly so. The fact that Labour – a party supposedly founded on principles of equality – thought it acceptable to put this phrase on campaigning materials shows just how normalised prejudice against Gypsies, Roma and Travellers still is.
Embracing diversity means embracing difference. For some minorities that’s having a different faith – for us it’s a different lifestyle. GRT communities – recognised ethnic groups under race relations law – are groups for whom the tradition of nomadic family life is a non-negotiable part of our identity. An “incursion” is the attack of an invader or coloniser – not the practices of a minority that’s been present in Britain for over 500 years. For far too many Labour members, racism towards GRT communities is still a blindspot, with our issues framed as simply those of an errant subculture or the anti-social behaviour of the ‘travelling fraternity’. People need to accept that our communities are ethnic groups (as the courts have done), and deal with our issues as those of racial equality.
It’s undeniably true that a lack of legal stopping places still puts Gypsies, Roma and Travellers in conflict with local councils and communities. But somehow I don’t think that genuine measures in Warrington to address these conflicts – such as building new legal stopping sites – is what the authors of the Labour leaflet had in mind. The sad truth is that while promises to “deal with traveller incursions” are far more likely to be found on Conservative party leaflets, 20 years of reporting on GRT issues have taught me it can often be Labour councils that have the most aggressive eviction policies – and that Tory councils, like Fenland in Cambridgeshire, can sometimes be the most accommodating.
There are many Labour MPs who do understand our struggles. Bell Ribeiro-Addy and Zarah Sultana are two of those for whom opposition to the police bill is in part based on the recognition that it will criminalise GRT culture. If the government succeeds in redefining criminal trespass as the use of just one vehicle with an intent to reside on land not owned by the occupant, it will have fundamentally altered the right of all British people to access the landscape. In this respect, GRT communities are a canary in a coal mine when it comes to our collective liberty. If our culture is stamped out, then everyone’s freedoms – as evidenced by other parts of the bill – are just one step behind.
Today the Conservatives are proposing laws that:
– Attack the right to protest
– Attack the rights of Gypsy, Roma & Traveller communities
– Dramatically increase prison sentences, without evidence it will make people saferThis descent into authoritarianism must be resisted 1/2
— Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) March 15, 2021
This week marks 50 years since Romani activists from across Europe gathered in London to give their transnational nation a flag, an anthem and political direction. Half a century on, many of the lives of Europe’s 12 million Romani people are still blighted by racism, hatred, and the denial that we are even a people at all. From the Warrington leaflet to the police bill to the poverty and violence that have led over 300,000 Eastern European migrant Roma to Britain, there is a lot of work left to do – and it’s high time all left-leaning people got on board. A country – or indeed constituency – without room for the liberty of its Gypsies isn’t free for anyone. We need you on our journey with us.
Jake Bowers is a Romani journalist, broadcaster, filmmaker and artist blacksmith.
To find out how to support Gypsies, Roma and Travellers across Europe, click here.
video, thanks to kthtrnr
Tash in action again [photo: Laura Wilson]

Tash in action again [photo: Laura Wilson]
