Police wrong to join Pride march, judge rules
Linzi Smith, 34, a gender-critical lesbian, brought a case against Northumbria Police after officers, including Vanessa Jardine, the head of the force, took part in last year's parade in Newcastle.
Ms Smith argued that it was wrong to allow uniformed officers to actively participate in an event that promoted gender ideology and was supported by transgender activists.
Responding to the ruling, Ms Smith said: 'I am delighted with the judgment of the court. It is terrifying to live in a community where the police have abandoned their duty of impartiality and embraced a highly controversial political cause.'
In the legal claim, officers were accused of joining in the march; stationing a police van decked out in Pride colours at the event and associating with messaging that supported gender ideology.
The hearing was told there was also a Northumbria Police static display staffed by uniformed officers and a transgender Pride flag incorporating the force's insignia.
Ms Smith argued that while she accepted it was necessary for the Pride march to be policed it was wrong for officers to actively participate because it breached their professional oath to operate with impartiality.
Allowing the judicial review, Mr Justice Linden said: 'The fact that the officers had publicly stated their support for transgender rights by taking part in the 2024 march would be likely to give the impression that they may not deal with the matter fairly and impartially.'
He went on: 'It is not hard to imagine circumstances in which the officers in question might be called on to deal with a clash between gender critical people and supporters of gender ideology, and therefore situations where the former had cause for concern as to whether they were being dealt with impartially.'
The court also heard how during the march there were pro-Palestinian protesters chanting slogans such as: 'From the River To The Sea, Palestine Will Be Free', 'No Pride in Genocide' and 'Toute le monde deteste la police'.
The case was supported by Kathleen Stock, a gender-critical professor, and Harry Miller, co-founder of the campaign group Fair Cop, which seeks to 'remove politics from policing'.
Professor Stock said: 'For me, the sight of the Northumbria Police either participating in Pride marches, supporting Pride events in public statements, or using or encouraging the use of Progress or rainbow flags, emblems, lanyards or other symbols associated with trans causes in a public-facing way, conveys its support for gender ideology.
'If that is not the force's intention, it is certainly its effect.'
It is not clear how the ruling will impact on the force's plans to police this year's event, which is taking place this weekend.
Mr Miller said: 'The significance of this ruling means that in future the police will attend events like this at their peril.
'But it is sad that we had to go to court to challenge something that was so blindingly obvious.'
He said the ruling should bring an end to police officers attending such events and wearing associated livery.
'The clarity in the ruling should have a profound effect on Chief Constables across the UK,' Mr Miller told the Telegraph.
'Pride is political in the same way that any protest is political. Police engagement should therefore be solely operational. No lanyards, flags, whistles or painted cars. Just good, honest bobbies remaining polite and keeping the peace.'
In his concluding remarks the judge said the findings only related to the 2024 event, adding: 'It will be a matter for the Defendant to consider, in the light of what I have said in this judgment, whether her current proposed approach to the 2025 Event should remain as it is.'
In a statement following the ruling, a spokesman for Northumbria Police said: 'The officers, staff and volunteers of Northumbria Police are dedicated and passionate about providing each and every person of our wonderful region with an outstanding policing service.
'In doing so, we recognise not all communities share the same level of confidence in policing for a variety of reasons. We want to ensure everyone knows that we are absolutely here for them when they need us.
'Part of that is us being visible in those communities and playing an active part in our force area. Throughout the year, we will have an important role to play in a variety of events, including parades and festivals.
'During these events while our primary aim is to keep people safe, it also provides us with an opportunity to engage with people including those who may have less confidence in policing. It is vitally important they feel supported and we continue to build their trust in us.
'That is why we felt it important to challenge the case which was brought against us and which has implications for wider policing.
'We will work through the ruling to understand the implications, while staying true to our values of fairness, visibility, and support for all.'
Other forces are currently looking at the ruling to see how it could impact on their approach to the policing similar events.
Gavin Stephens, chairman of the National Police Chiefs' Council, said: 'Every week police officers and staff will as part of their duties take part in thousands of events up and down the country, from community events at village halls through to large scale events like carnivals, parades and festivals.
'However, we recognise that policing must also maintain its impartiality, including in the types of events it supports and plays an active part in.
'We are working through the detail of this judgment and will ensure this decision is communicated to forces for them to consider.
'We are also working with the College of Policing on broader guidance which will help local forces make decisions around participation in events to maintain their impartiality.
'Policing values all our communities and will continue to police in a way that aims to build trust and confidence, including among those who have less confidence in our service.
'This is the cornerstone of good policing and especially neighbourhood policing. Our desire to ensure we recognise and provide good policing for all communities will remain unchanged.'
Newcastle United ban
Earlier this year Northumbria Police apologised to Ms Smith, who is a season ticket holder at Newcastle United, following an investigation that took place when she expressed gender critical views on social media.
She was accused of being transphobic by a complainant who told Newcastle United that trans people would not feel safe sitting near her.
A hate crime investigation was launched and she was banned by the club.
Northumbria Police later admitted crucial elements of their investigation into the claims were not acceptable.
It said that while there was no misconduct by its officers, the way they handled her case and similar hate crime reports in future should be subject to further training.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
15 minutes ago
- The Independent
Imported dogs could carry disease or behaviour risk, RSPCA warns
An animal charity has called for stricter regulations on animal rescues importing dogs into the UK, citing concerns about disease risks and behavioural issues Government statistics reveal that in 2023, 320,000 pets were brought into the UK under travel pet schemes and 44,000 entered as commercial imports. RSPCA spokesman David Bowles likened the process to ' Deliveroo for dogs' and called on the Government to tighten regulations on animal rescues. He told the BBC: 'The RSPCA's major concern is these dogs are essentially ticking time bombs – coming over, not being health tested. 'Diseases are now coming in through these dogs. They're affecting not just the dogs that are being imported, they could also affect the dogs already in this country and their owners. 'They've almost set up a Deliveroo for dogs and that is a real problem.' There is no requirement for rescue organisations to be licensed in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. It comes weeks after a bill that aims to stop animal smuggling and cruelty cleared the Commons with cross-party support. Legislation put forward by Liberal Democrat MP Dr Danny Chambers will reduce the number of animals for non-commercial entry into the UK, ban the import of puppies and kittens under six months old or heavily pregnant dogs and cats, and introduce a halt on the import of dogs and cats who have been 'mutilated', including having their ears docked. The MP for Winchester's Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill was supported by the Government, and will now proceed to the House of Lords on its passage to becoming law. Dr Chambers said: 'As a vet, I've seen the devastating consequences of puppy smuggling. It's unimaginably cruel to separate puppies and kittens from their mothers at a very young age, and then bring them across borders in substandard conditions where they're then sold for maximum profit by unscrupulous traders who prioritise profit over welfare.' He added: 'Careful consideration has been given to setting these limits, balancing the need to disrupt illegal trade with minimising impact on genuine pet owners. To underpin this, only an owner, not an authorised person, will be permitted to sign and declare that the movement of a dog or cat is non-commercial. He criticised the influence of social media on the increased demand for dogs with docked ears, and a party colleague hit out at the platforms' role in publishing animal abuse. He said: 'One reason that there is such an interest in dogs with cropped ears is that a lot of influencers on Instagram and other social media platforms pose with these dogs or show they have these new dogs with cropped ears. Many people aren't aware that this is a mutilation. 'They think it's how the dogs' ears normally look, and it drives a demand for dogs that look like this.'
Times
15 minutes ago
- Times
Financial Ombudsman Service boss paid £230,000 after ousting
The ousted head of the Financial Ombudsman Service received a pay-off of almost £230,000, it has been disclosed in the annual report. Abby Thomas, who left abruptly on 6 February, was paid £229,869 in severance payments on top of her normal salary. The payoff included £100,000 for loss of office, £107,692 in lieu of notice and £22,177 for a period of gardening leave that began on the day she left, the FOS said. MPs on the Treasury select committee have hit out at the manner of her departure and criticised the FOS chairwoman Baroness Manzoor for refusing to answer questions on why Thomas left and whether she was forced out. The FOS, which rules on complaints by consumers about financial services firms and can set compensation orders, is under pressure to reform. Rachel Reeves has pledged to curb its powers so it no longer acts like a regulator after complaints from the industry that it has increased the cost of 'mass redress events'. It has been dealing with a significant rise in claims, mainly related to car finance loans, but also because of concerns about other consumer loans and more people complaining about banks' handling of frauds. Dame Meg Hillier, chairwoman of the Treasury committee, said this month: 'The handling of this situation by the senior leadership has been deeply disappointing.' Thomas, a former Virgin Media executive, served for less than three years. She has been replaced by James Dipple-Johnstone as chief ombudsman and Jenny Simmonds as interim chief executive. Manzoor is due to retire on August 1. The FOS received 450,000 new inquiries in the year to March, up from 330,000. The motor finance industry is braced for a judgment from the Supreme Court this Friday that could determine the scale of compensation payments for failing to disclose commissions paid to dealers.
Times
28 minutes ago
- Times
Great British Railways ‘risks repeating the mistakes of the past'
The government's state-owned framework for the railways risks 'morphing into the ghost of British Rail' unless ministers find ways to boost competition and develop fresh income streams, a new report warns. Concerned that Great British Railways is about to 'repeat the mistakes of the past', the study urges ministers to drop their 'profound and misguided hostility to open access rail competition' and seek ways to cut annual subsidies. It finds that, with railway revenue at only at 89.1 per cent of pre-pandemic levels, thanks to working from home and a drop in season ticket sales, the taxpayer is spending £12.5 billion a year in subsidy. That is despite the sector accounting for only 2 per cent of all journeys taken by the public. Tony Lodge: How to make Great British Railways a success The report, Rail's Last Chance, is from the Centre for Policy Studies think tank. Its author, Tony Lodge, outlines a four-point plan to get the industry back on track. 'It is hard to avoid the conclusion that Great British Railways is a solution looking for a problem — prioritising the nationalisation of the railways over their effective and efficient operation,' he says. His study follows a damning report last month from the management consultancy Arthur D Little, which found that Britain is embarking on a new era of nationalised railways, including taking back control of private franchised train operators, with no coherent strategy. It quoted one senior rail executive saying the railway was stuck with the Albert Einstein maxim that 'the definition of madness is to do the same things and expect a different outcome'. Lodge is particularly critical of the government's antipathy to open access rail operators, which run without government contracts or public subsidy. After heavy pressure from the transport department, the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) blocked applications earlier this month for new services from Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Group, FirstGroup's Lumo and the Wrexham, Shropshire & Midlands Railway Company citing 'insufficient capacity on the west coast main line southern section'. Calling for a minimum of 10 per cent open access on intercity routes by 2030, Lodge argues that they deliver 'better services, more routes, faster trains and cheaper tickets', while lifting the performance of the incumbent operator. He cites the east coast main line, where Hull Trains, Lumo and Grand Central compete with the state-backed LNER. He says quarterly data shows that LNER has grown passenger numbers by 28 per cent since 2019, while on the west coast the monopoly operator Avanti is 'still struggling to get passengers back' to pre-Covid levels. • Alistair Osborne: Great Bolshevik Railways going the wrong way Pointing to the 'enormous missed opportunities for the rail estate to generate wider ancillary income', Lodge's second recommendation is for ministers to examine the potential for property, retail and green energy income across 'the rail sector's 52,000 hectares'. He says there is scope to develop 34 sites for solar energy — enough to power at least 140,000 homes — and room for health hubs at stations. Thirdly, he calls for the ORR to 'retain its independent regulatory powers' to scrutinise Great British Railways, saying it 'should not be able to mark its own homework'. His final plea is not just for an 'easy, cheap and user friendly' ticketing app but one that also offers such things as a 'rail miles loyalty scheme'. British Rail was the name for the monolithic state-owned railway business until 1997 by which time the industry had been broken up and part privatised.
