Latest news with #RiotAct
The Independent
17-04-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
‘How dare the US attack the UK's free speech': Independent readers call out trade deal demands
US calls to weaken the UK's hate speech laws in exchange for a trade deal have sparked a strong reaction from Independent readers, with many alarmed at what they see as foreign interference in British democracy. While a few acknowledged problems with how free speech is handled in the UK, most were strongly opposed to the idea of giving in to pressure from Washington – particularly from US Vice President JD Vance, who has reportedly demanded the scrapping of protections for minorities. Many voiced concern that free speech is being weaponised by powerful figures – including President Donald Trump – not to defend open debate, but to shut down criticism while playing the victim. One reader even described his conditions as 'neofascist' and out of step with Britain's democratic values. Others warned that the UK's need for a post-Brexit trade deal is being exploited, putting Britain in a weaker position. Overall, our readers had a clear message for Prime Minister Keir Starmer: don't trade away British laws and values for a quick economic boost. Many argued that any deal undermining protections, particularly for LGBT+ people and other minority groups, would be not only politically reckless but morally indefensible. Here's what you had to say: The UK will never capitulate Vance's proposed "terms and conditions" regarding the tariff negotiations are a step too far. As a long-recognised democratically ruled country, the UK will never capitulate on our humane laws governing free speech, abortions, gay/transsexual/lesbian/bisexual rulings and the rights of our disabled community too. I'm so grateful to live in a country that advocates freedom and fairness for all. Some sections of the community in the USA suffer so many hardships and indignities on account of the extreme right-wing views and attitudes emanating from Trump and his sidekicks. It's absolutely horrendous! In the fullness of time, it may well be that the current discussions will never "bear fruit" and the UK will choose instead to sever commercial ties with the USA and trade with Europe and the rest of the world instead. I'll keep my fingers firmly crossed for this option! JanetC A breach of our sovereignty The price the Trump administration is demanding to do a trade deal is surely too high. Telling us what laws our Parliament can or cannot pass is a breach of our sovereignty. I wanted rid of the Tories, as many others did. But this government has become a big disappointment, even beyond what I expected. That is one reason why I did not vote Labour. If Starmer and co sign up for US demands on free speech and other contentious matters, many others and I will be outraged. We need our government to stand up for us and our right to make our own laws. If it does not, then it is simply letting us all down. 49niner This is not a free speech issue Vance wants us to open the prison doors to people who incited rioters online to set fire to hotels full of human beings. We have had a Riot Act since 1714. This is not a free speech issue. He is also concerned that we allow no protests within 150 metres of abortion clinics. That is a decision of our Parliament. Our abortion laws are supported by 90 per cent of the British people. Again, this is not a free speech issue. They can protest all they like in the remaining 99.9999 per cent of the country. But they cannot intimidate people undergoing traumatic medical procedures, which are a confidential matter between them and their doctors. Again, not a free speech issue. We must not give way on this. I won't even mention the rapidly growing limitations on free speech in the USA or the fact that I would certainly be denied entry if they searched my phone for unkind mentions of Trump. SteveHill Unbelievable This is truly unbelievable. This is exactly why progressive politics are losing across the world. No one is willing to defend our values. Instead, there's always a full apology for laughable accusations. But in doing so, you confirm the myth that free speech, in the true sense, is under threat. How dare the American Right attack the UK on free speech? The US has banned any number of books, academics, journalists, influencers, protestors – anyone who speaks out. Scientists and researchers who publish climate reports have been suppressed. Academics banned from teaching. The list goes on. Not only that, but Americans are attacking libraries here. Not a word was said. Apart from all that, who are the Americans to interfere in our internal affairs? Whatever the rights and wrongs of free speech in this country, the Americans would never accept us interfering in their internal affairs. Jim987 Concentrate on the EU Trying to do a trade deal with Trump's USA is a complete waste of time, in my opinion. Starmer should concentrate on the EU and make steps to rejoin – at least start by joining the customs union and single market. I think that Starmer should put the country to a vote to rejoin the EU, and this time the Brexiters would lose – possibly handsomely as well. The vote to rejoin the EU would, of course, be democratic, in the same way as the vote to leave was in 2016. Getting rid of hate speech and accepting chlorinated chicken is not the way forward. Christopher1959 Patriotism and xenophobia go hand in hand When Parliament was recalled last Saturday for the debate on Scunthorpe, it reminded me of Hilary Benn's rousing speech to Parliament, which had Emily Maitlis in tears, urging us to bomb Syria for the sake of our great nation and its democracy. As always, such appeals to patriotism invariably hide darker motives, and last Saturday, Parliament was unanimous in its condemnation of China, which, in my view, is being scapegoated for decades of government incompetence. Patriotism and xenophobia so often go hand in hand. However, I suspect that UK politicians are completely unaware of the deep and widespread disgust felt by ordinary people in the UK at the actions of Trump and his cronies, which assail us daily. That the Labour Party, which I used to support, is even considering changes to the laws on tax and hate speech in response to Vance's absurd right-wing ideological ranting is unforgivable. The arrogant spin from Starmer is, 'We know how to handle Trump' – he really doesn't know what he's doing. He knows exactly what he's doing. It's called bullying. It's degrading to us, and our government is rolling over. I will not vote Labour again as long as Starmer is leader. Paddly If you tolerate this... To quote the Manic Street Preachers, "If you tolerate this, then your children will be next." Why should we allow the US to interfere in our national life, in the way our laws are created and implemented? Why should anyone in the UK feel that they can be intimidated by others because the law no longer protects them? Hate speech can be used to incite violence; it can be used as a rallying cry for those with hatred in their hearts to enact that hatred. It doesn't support the far-right agenda, and that alone is why Vance is against it. And let us not forget the personal angle that Musk brings to this agenda because of his transgender daughter. Personally, I would make sure that we join the Customs Union and tell the US where to send its chlorinated chicken, steroid-filled beef, fruit juice with permitted maggots, and candies with banned colourants. TigerMother Brexit made us weaker This is not entirely surprising. I had said before Brexit that leaving the EU didn't mean that we could suddenly just do whatever we want. It would mean sucking up to countries and regimes that may be dubious, because we would have to trade with them—but we would be the weaker partner outside the EU. However, I didn't expect that the freedom to set our own laws would be so blatantly tested. I would say it will be interesting to see how the anti-EU Reform and Tory-type voters react to this (other countries telling us, a sovereign nation, what laws we should have), but I imagine most of them will actually love it, as they don't really care about sovereignty—they just hate Europeans. I hope Labour don't bow to this. If they do, I would say it's game over for them for 2029 (already). Someone182 Free speech double standard The issue I have with free speech is that if you criticise Trump negatively, then you're likely to be sent back to whatever country you came from when you try to visit America. It happened to a few people this year: they had their phones confiscated and searched, and once the negative criticism they had against Trump was found, they were told to go back to the country they had travelled from. So basically, if you use free speech to attack someone else, then it's a-ok, but if it's to attack someone like Trump, then you're being hateful—even if you are using your right to free speech. Certain powerful people have made free speech a double standard. PrinceYamiUchiha The US doesn't get to make our laws We should tell Trump and Vance where to get off. I've no problem with us exploring a trade deal with the US, as long as it meets UK standards on aspects like food hygiene and digital safety. But the US government doesn't get to make our laws. We have our own legal system, with our own legal framework on equality, freedom of speech, and related issues such as libel, defamation, incitement, and hate speech. Those are non-negotiable and have zero relevance to a trade deal. Intellectual conformity to Trump's crazy libertarian views isn't part of the package. Tanaquil2 Trump is unstable Just goes to show that Starmer is not even listening to the MPs, who have said a deal with the EU will be far better than a deal with the USA. It's a well-known fact that the USA wants the NHS, which would force everyone to pay for hospital treatment, just like in the USA. Trump is unstable, and what's to say that if Starmer signs a trade deal, Trump won't go back on his word and hit the UK with higher tariffs? Markcarlisle Vance has no loyalty to Trump Obviously, the UK Parliament will never agree to pass a Bill that changes our laws on the order of a foreign power. What most people are missing is who is making these statements. It is not the President, but the Vice President, who is voicing these demands. He has zero authority on any such matter. His only element of power is to break any tied vote in the US Senate. He has constantly proven that he has no specific loyalty to President Trump, only to a specific extremist group within the Republican Party and to himself (in no fixed order). His comments to date on Canada, Greenland, Ukraine, trade, and Nato allies are not Republican Party policies, and are not reflected by the majority of Senators, Representatives, or party members. All the VP's comments are aimed solely at annoying others, muddying waters, dividing allies, and making US governance and policies more problematic – simply to further the longer-term aims of his extremist group. Trump is simply a vehicle for this purpose, and will likely be jettisoned at the appropriate time. Jonathan Mills Political suicide If Starmer signs a trade deal anything close to what is being mooted, then he will be committing political suicide – and he could quite possibly take the Labour Party down with him. He should remember that he and the Labour Party are not, and have not been in the past few years, at all popular: 34 per cent of the vote and the votes of 20 per cent of the electorate is very, very unstable. arboreal1 Vance has the upper hand Many of the other comments are highly unrealistic in their assessment of the UK's strength in the trade negotiations. The hard reality is that the UK, post-Brexit, desperately needs a trade deal with the US, not the other way around. So JD Vance has the upper hand in any negotiations and, I predict, will drive a very hard bargain indeed. We have to deal with reality as it is, not as we might like it to be. Musil Starmer should stall Trump is negotiating from a position of extreme weakness. For him, the clock is ticking, and his numbers are getting worse and worse by the day. Starmer's smartest move would be to stall and delay, sign or agree to nothing, and not get bullied or intimidated. Every day that Starmer stalls and delays, his position strengthens. The question is: is he smart enough to realise this, or will he be intimidated by all the noise? HamishCrawford UK should examine its own free speech issues It's a strange world when a government perceived as ultra-right wing and authoritarian by the corporate media lectures a so-called Labour Party on the need for freedom of speech and association. Perhaps instead of the knee-jerk condemnations of Trump and Vance, we should look closely at the UK's laws and policing, and consider whether we, in attempting to protect certain communities, have overstepped the mark and silenced debate and discussion through draconian measures. FaithofOurFathers Let's be grown-up about hate speech I'm gay and never did get the hate speech thing. Threatening speech or behaviour, sure – but let's be grown-up about someone calling you names. Although I do not think we should do it at the behest of Trump. Morgan Unrelated conditions I thought a trade deal was a deal whereby one country says, 'We'll take XYZ from you with or without tariffs,' and expects a reciprocal deal. What the US wants is to add certain other conditions completely unrelated to trade? So I go to a shop to see the owner and tell them that I want to buy XXX, but first they must take down their sign above the door because I'm a signmaker and I should have had that job. When he refuses, I then sit outside the shop and refuse entry to other shoppers until further notice? attilathenun Pointless A trade deal with Trump's America is pointless. No one there is going to rush out and buy British goods, especially since Trump's tariffs will probably cause a recession in the States. Peter Mandelson is no doubt involved in the trade deal discussions, making overly generous offers to the Yanks. If a trade deal is sorted –one which involves removing every other US firm in London from corporation tax – it will be an insult to most UK workers. BenSouthwold Wait... "Mr Vance… is 'obsessed by the fall of Western civilisation'" and will demand that the Labour government roll back laws against hateful comments, including abuse targeting LGBT+ groups or other minorities, as a condition of any deal. Wait – roll back the laws protecting people, minorities, and children from abuse in the digital and real world? Let's all align with the US, where now hate toward people of non-MAGA mindset, any minority, and all who criticise Trump may face arrest, deportation, or worse – ignoring court orders? These neofascist laws? Amsivarian At odds with Western liberal democratic ideals A deal with the Trump "administration" would be disastrous for the UK and for the government that signed it, on so many levels. The Trump administration's social, political, and environmental "policies" are at odds with Western liberal democratic ideals, and selling out those ideals for Chevies and chlorinated chicken won't sit well with the British public or be remembered favourably. This administration has taken the side of Russia, threatened to invade Greenland and Panama, picked fights with neighbours (one of which is a Commonwealth country), and started a disastrous trade war to enrich the president's backers. Sir Keir, please ensure your legacy – do the right thing and do not sell out for thirty pieces of silver.
The Independent
16-04-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
‘How dare the US attack the UK's free speech' Independent readers call out trade deal demands
US calls to weaken the UK's hate speech laws in exchange for a trade deal have sparked a strong reaction from Independent readers, with many alarmed at what they see as foreign interference in British democracy. While a few acknowledged problems with how free speech is handled in the UK, most were strongly opposed to the idea of giving in to pressure from Washington – particularly from US Vice President JD Vance, who has reportedly demanded the scrapping of protections for minorities. Many voiced concern that free speech is being weaponised by powerful figures – including President Donald Trump – not to defend open debate, but to shut down criticism while playing the victim. One reader even described his conditions as 'neofascist' and out of step with Britain's democratic values. Others warned that the UK's need for a post-Brexit trade deal is being exploited, putting Britain in a weaker position. Overall, our readers had a clear message for Prime Minister Keir Starmer: don't trade away British laws and values for a quick economic boost. Many argued that any deal undermining protections, particularly for LGBT+ people and other minority groups, would be not only politically reckless but morally indefensible. Here's what you had to say: The UK will never capitulate Vance's proposed "terms and conditions" regarding the tariff negotiations are a step too far. As a long-recognised democratically ruled country, the UK will never capitulate on our humane laws governing free speech, abortions, gay/transsexual/lesbian/bisexual rulings and the rights of our disabled community too. I'm so grateful to live in a country that advocates freedom and fairness for all. Some sections of the community in the USA suffer so many hardships and indignities on account of the extreme right-wing views and attitudes emanating from Trump and his sidekicks. It's absolutely horrendous! In the fullness of time, it may well be that the current discussions will never "bear fruit" and the UK will choose instead to sever commercial ties with the USA and trade with Europe and the rest of the world instead. I'll keep my fingers firmly crossed for this option! JanetC A breach of our sovereignty The price the Trump administration is demanding to do a trade deal is surely too high. Telling us what laws our Parliament can or cannot pass is a breach of our sovereignty. I wanted rid of the Tories, as many others did. But this government has become a big disappointment, even beyond what I expected. That is one reason why I did not vote Labour. If Starmer and co sign up for US demands on free speech and other contentious matters, many others and I will be outraged. We need our government to stand up for us and our right to make our own laws. If it does not, then it is simply letting us all down. 49niner This is not a free speech issue Vance wants us to open the prison doors to people who incited rioters online to set fire to hotels full of human beings. We have had a Riot Act since 1714. This is not a free speech issue. He is also concerned that we allow no protests within 150 metres of abortion clinics. That is a decision of our Parliament. Our abortion laws are supported by 90 per cent of the British people. Again, this is not a free speech issue. They can protest all they like in the remaining 99.9999 per cent of the country. But they cannot intimidate people undergoing traumatic medical procedures, which are a confidential matter between them and their doctors. Again, not a free speech issue. We must not give way on this. I won't even mention the rapidly growing limitations on free speech in the USA or the fact that I would certainly be denied entry if they searched my phone for unkind mentions of Trump. SteveHill Unbelievable This is truly unbelievable. This is exactly why progressive politics are losing across the world. No one is willing to defend our values. Instead, there's always a full apology for laughable accusations. But in doing so, you confirm the myth that free speech, in the true sense, is under threat. How dare the American Right attack the UK on free speech? The US has banned any number of books, academics, journalists, influencers, protestors – anyone who speaks out. Scientists and researchers who publish climate reports have been suppressed. Academics banned from teaching. The list goes on. Not only that, but Americans are attacking libraries here. Not a word was said. Apart from all that, who are the Americans to interfere in our internal affairs? Whatever the rights and wrongs of free speech in this country, the Americans would never accept us interfering in their internal affairs. Jim987 Concentrate on the EU Trying to do a trade deal with Trump's USA is a complete waste of time, in my opinion. Starmer should concentrate on the EU and make steps to rejoin – at least start by joining the customs union and single market. I think that Starmer should put the country to a vote to rejoin the EU, and this time the Brexiters would lose – possibly handsomely as well. The vote to rejoin the EU would, of course, be democratic, in the same way as the vote to leave was in 2016. Getting rid of hate speech and accepting chlorinated chicken is not the way forward. Christopher1959 Patriotism and xenophobia go hand in hand When Parliament was recalled last Saturday for the debate on Scunthorpe, it reminded me of Hilary Benn's rousing speech to Parliament, which had Emily Maitlis in tears, urging us to bomb Syria for the sake of our great nation and its democracy. As always, such appeals to patriotism invariably hide darker motives, and last Saturday, Parliament was unanimous in its condemnation of China, which, in my view, is being scapegoated for decades of government incompetence. Patriotism and xenophobia so often go hand in hand. However, I suspect that UK politicians are completely unaware of the deep and widespread disgust felt by ordinary people in the UK at the actions of Trump and his cronies, which assail us daily. That the Labour Party, which I used to support, is even considering changes to the laws on tax and hate speech in response to Vance's absurd right-wing ideological ranting is unforgivable. The arrogant spin from Starmer is, 'We know how to handle Trump' – he really doesn't know what he's doing. He knows exactly what he's doing. It's called bullying. It's degrading to us, and our government is rolling over. I will not vote Labour again as long as Starmer is leader. Paddly If you tolerate this... To quote the Manic Street Preachers, "If you tolerate this, then your children will be next." Why should we allow the US to interfere in our national life, in the way our laws are created and implemented? Why should anyone in the UK feel that they can be intimidated by others because the law no longer protects them? Hate speech can be used to incite violence; it can be used as a rallying cry for those with hatred in their hearts to enact that hatred. It doesn't support the far-right agenda, and that alone is why Vance is against it. And let us not forget the personal angle that Musk brings to this agenda because of his transgender daughter. Personally, I would make sure that we join the Customs Union and tell the US where to send its chlorinated chicken, steroid-filled beef, fruit juice with permitted maggots, and candies with banned colourants. TigerMother Brexit made us weaker This is not entirely surprising. I had said before Brexit that leaving the EU didn't mean that we could suddenly just do whatever we want. It would mean sucking up to countries and regimes that may be dubious, because we would have to trade with them—but we would be the weaker partner outside the EU. However, I didn't expect that the freedom to set our own laws would be so blatantly tested. I would say it will be interesting to see how the anti-EU Reform and Tory-type voters react to this (other countries telling us, a sovereign nation, what laws we should have), but I imagine most of them will actually love it, as they don't really care about sovereignty—they just hate Europeans. I hope Labour don't bow to this. If they do, I would say it's game over for them for 2029 (already). Someone182 Free speech double standard The issue I have with free speech is that if you criticise Trump negatively, then you're likely to be sent back to whatever country you came from when you try to visit America. It happened to a few people this year: they had their phones confiscated and searched, and once the negative criticism they had against Trump was found, they were told to go back to the country they had travelled from. So basically, if you use free speech to attack someone else, then it's a-ok, but if it's to attack someone like Trump, then you're being hateful—even if you are using your right to free speech. Certain powerful people have made free speech a double standard. PrinceYamiUchiha The US doesn't get to make our laws We should tell Trump and Vance where to get off. I've no problem with us exploring a trade deal with the US, as long as it meets UK standards on aspects like food hygiene and digital safety. But the US government doesn't get to make our laws. We have our own legal system, with our own legal framework on equality, freedom of speech, and related issues such as libel, defamation, incitement, and hate speech. Those are non-negotiable and have zero relevance to a trade deal. Intellectual conformity to Trump's crazy libertarian views isn't part of the package. Tanaquil2 Trump is unstable Just goes to show that Starmer is not even listening to the MPs, who have said a deal with the EU will be far better than a deal with the USA. It's a well-known fact that the USA wants the NHS, which would force everyone to pay for hospital treatment, just like in the USA. Trump is unstable, and what's to say that if Starmer signs a trade deal, Trump won't go back on his word and hit the UK with higher tariffs? Markcarlisle Vance has no loyalty to Trump Obviously, the UK Parliament will never agree to pass a Bill that changes our laws on the order of a foreign power. What most people are missing is who is making these statements. It is not the President, but the Vice President, who is voicing these demands. He has zero authority on any such matter. His only element of power is to break any tied vote in the US Senate. He has constantly proven that he has no specific loyalty to President Trump, only to a specific extremist group within the Republican Party and to himself (in no fixed order). His comments to date on Canada, Greenland, Ukraine, trade, and Nato allies are not Republican Party policies, and are not reflected by the majority of Senators, Representatives, or party members. All the VP's comments are aimed solely at annoying others, muddying waters, dividing allies, and making US governance and policies more problematic – simply to further the longer-term aims of his extremist group. Trump is simply a vehicle for this purpose, and will likely be jettisoned at the appropriate time. Jonathan Mills Political suicide If Starmer signs a trade deal anything close to what is being mooted, then he will be committing political suicide – and he could quite possibly take the Labour Party down with him. He should remember that he and the Labour Party are not, and have not been in the past few years, at all popular: 34 per cent of the vote and the votes of 20 per cent of the electorate is very, very unstable. arboreal1 Vance has the upper hand Many of the other comments are highly unrealistic in their assessment of the UK's strength in the trade negotiations. The hard reality is that the UK, post-Brexit, desperately needs a trade deal with the US, not the other way around. So JD Vance has the upper hand in any negotiations and, I predict, will drive a very hard bargain indeed. We have to deal with reality as it is, not as we might like it to be. Musil Starmer should stall Trump is negotiating from a position of extreme weakness. For him, the clock is ticking, and his numbers are getting worse and worse by the day. Starmer's smartest move would be to stall and delay, sign or agree to nothing, and not get bullied or intimidated. Every day that Starmer stalls and delays, his position strengthens. The question is: is he smart enough to realise this, or will he be intimidated by all the noise? HamishCrawford UK should examine its own free speech issues It's a strange world when a government perceived as ultra-right wing and authoritarian by the corporate media lectures a so-called Labour Party on the need for freedom of speech and association. Perhaps instead of the knee-jerk condemnations of Trump and Vance, we should look closely at the UK's laws and policing, and consider whether we, in attempting to protect certain communities, have overstepped the mark and silenced debate and discussion through draconian measures. FaithofOurFathers Let's be grown-up about hate speech I'm gay and never did get the hate speech thing. Threatening speech or behaviour, sure – but let's be grown-up about someone calling you names. Although I do not think we should do it at the behest of Trump. Morgan Unrelated conditions I thought a trade deal was a deal whereby one country says, 'We'll take XYZ from you with or without tariffs,' and expects a reciprocal deal. What the US wants is to add certain other conditions completely unrelated to trade? So I go to a shop to see the owner and tell them that I want to buy XXX, but first they must take down their sign above the door because I'm a signmaker and I should have had that job. When he refuses, I then sit outside the shop and refuse entry to other shoppers until further notice? attilathenun Pointless A trade deal with Trump's America is pointless. No one there is going to rush out and buy British goods, especially since Trump's tariffs will probably cause a recession in the States. Peter Mandelson is no doubt involved in the trade deal discussions, making overly generous offers to the Yanks. If a trade deal is sorted –one which involves removing every other US firm in London from corporation tax – it will be an insult to most UK workers. BenSouthwold Wait... "Mr Vance… is 'obsessed by the fall of Western civilisation'" and will demand that the Labour government roll back laws against hateful comments, including abuse targeting LGBT+ groups or other minorities, as a condition of any deal. Wait – roll back the laws protecting people, minorities, and children from abuse in the digital and real world? Let's all align with the US, where now hate toward people of non-MAGA mindset, any minority, and all who criticise Trump may face arrest, deportation, or worse – ignoring court orders? These neofascist laws? Amsivarian At odds with Western liberal democratic ideals A deal with the Trump "administration" would be disastrous for the UK and for the government that signed it, on so many levels. The Trump administration's social, political, and environmental "policies" are at odds with Western liberal democratic ideals, and selling out those ideals for Chevies and chlorinated chicken won't sit well with the British public or be remembered favourably. This administration has taken the side of Russia, threatened to invade Greenland and Panama, picked fights with neighbours (one of which is a Commonwealth country), and started a disastrous trade war to enrich the president's backers. Sir Keir, please ensure your legacy – do the right thing and do not sell out for thirty pieces of silver.
Yahoo
23-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
When the nation's press descended after howling mob took over town
IN 1910 news editors all along Fleet Street were dispatching their top reporters by the fastest train possible to Droitwich, a fairly sleepy mid-Worcestershire town not particularly known for undue violence or steamy scandal. But in January of that year everything changed because there was a riot going on. It made national headlines when the mayor of Droitwich felt forced to read the Riot Act to quell a hostile mob in the centre of the gentile spa town. The so-called Droitwich Riot led to a major case at Worcester Assizes a few weeks later when 12 local men stood in the dock accused of 'unlawful riotously and tumultuously assembling to the disturbance of the peace'. However, by the end of the headline-making two-day trial the whole affair had descended into a complete farce. The riotous events in Droitwich were on the General Election night of January 29, 1910, when votes in the Mid-Worcestershire constituency were being counted. It became clear the seat had been won from the Liberals by the Unionist (Tory) candidate, the Hon JC Lyttelton, who was later to become the ninth Viscount Cobham of Hagley Hall. This sparked fears among some people the local salt-making operations would come to an end. Droitwich had been famous for its salt for centuries but there was a wind of change in the air. Political feelings were running high in the town although there emerged two sharply-differing accounts of what happened on the night. The police were to paint a picture of 'a howling, hostile and vicious mob' terrorising the streets of Droitwich. Yet several witnesses at the Assize hearing maintained there had been little more than 'good-humoured hooting and shouting and the singing of political songs'. What could not be concealed, however, was a trail of damage, including broken windows at two pubs, the Barley Mow and the Waggon and Horses, as well as at the Conservative committee rooms. And as midnight approached the mayor of Droitwich, Councillor Gabb, felt he had no alternative but to read the Riot Act. This he did with some bravery, albeit with the local deputy chief constable at his side, when he walked into the centre of the crowd and read the text by the light of a candle. It was a wonder none of the rioters blew it out. Shortly afterwards a contingent of at least 50 policemen 'charged' the assembly and 'wielded staves' to disperse it. After hearing all of the evidence and on the advice of the judge, the Assize jury decided not to convict any of the men. All of whom were salt-makers or labourers. The jury said they felt just one man 'deserved much censure'. But the judge pointed out it would be difficult to find one man guilty of a riot and so everyone dispersed again. This time the defendants to the local pubs and the newshounds back to Fleet Street. Only 12 years later the Droitwich salt-making industry, which dated back to Roman times, was to close because of its relatively small output. After 1922 the UK sourced its salt primarily from the Winsford rock salt mine in Cheshire, which is the UK's largest and oldest working mine, while today much is imported from Spain.
CBC
05-03-2025
- Entertainment
- CBC
Saint John's trolley-toppling railway strike of 1914 inspired N.B. playwright's new work
Social Sharing Just two weeks before the outbreak of the First World War, a railway strike that turned into trolley-toppling riots broke out in Saint John. More than a century later, one New Brunswick playwright is taking that pivotal moment in labour history and bringing it back to the forefront. "You have to imagine, in the main uptown street in Saint John, 10,000 people rioting, turning over streetcars, setting them on fire, cavalry charge from the barracks by the Royal [Canadian] Dragoons to try to disperse the crowd," said playwright and Université de Moncton professor Thomas Hodd. "It's just this amazing, epic event that happened in Saint John history, and almost nobody in this province probably has ever heard of it." Hodd's play, titled O'Brien, will be touring the province starting Wednesday with Theatre New Brunswick. The play is based on the July 1914 event which started with simmering tensions between the newly formed union and the railway company. According to the website for the Frank and Ella Hatheway Labour Exhibit Centre in Saint John, the railway company fired the union leader and more than 130 men walked out on strike. A crowd of supportive citizens began to form over the next three days and a riot eventually broke out. The mayor at the time read the Riot Act and authorized the deployment of a small detachment of Dragoons. The crowd overturned two stalled streetcars and took to the company's powerhouse, causing a city-wide blackout. Eventually, a deal was negotiated between the sides and trolley service returned to normal. And while Hodd is only now bringing the story to the stage, this event has been on his mind since the early '90s when he worked for the New Brunswick Museum as a historical interpreter. He was given the task of sharing stories with the public relating to objects in the museum. Using the trolley strike and a military uniform, he wrote a five-minute monologue to share with tourists. Then, just a couple of years ago, the story came back to him with international conflicts growing — such as the invasion of Ukraine — and the fight for reproductive rights in the United States. Coupled with that, Hodd learned that 2023 was an exceptional one for labour strikes. The amount of disruption — measured using person-days not worked — reached an 18-year high in 2023. Hodd said everything happening in the world sounded similar to the larger issues at play in 1914. "I thought, 'Wow, maybe this is the time to try to finally put the story to paper and to put it on stage,'" he said. But when he decided to write the story, he didn't want to write about the mayor or the union head or a military leader. He wanted to tell it using the average working-class union member. "Having grown up as the son of a working-class union worker, I understood a bit about what it means to have to make those choices and what it means to deal with striking and putting food on your table," said Hodd. So the story is told from the perspective of a third-generation Irish New Brunswick family. The family dynamic is one of dysfunction, with one extended family member being a prominent local suffragist, a few of them working for the railway company and one of the sons being a member of the local militia. Hodd said he likes to describe the play as a heritage drama as opposed to a historical drama because the story is rooted in the family, exploring the real conflicts and tensions that would have existed at the time. Hodd said he hopes people can see themselves in the family — from the dysfunction to the real situation of potential job loss and struggling to make ends meet.
South China Morning Post
29-01-2025
- Sport
- South China Morning Post
Lee Man coach vows to ‘shake club up' after questioning players' attitudes
Matt Holland has questioned the attitude and commitment of his Lee Man squad and vowed to 'shake the club up' as the defending champions prepare for Thursday's Senior Shield final against Eastern. Head coach Holland, who replaced title-winning boss Tsang Chiu-tat in November, read his players the Riot Act at half-time of their 4-3 victory over lowly North District on Saturday. 'Mr Lee [club president Norman Lee Man-yan] is amazing. He looks after people the right way, you get your salary and bonus on time – and people take it too easy here,' Holland said. 'I'm not here for an easy ride. I'm here to shake people up and shake the club up, and make sure they can win a title again. Players can't take things for granted.' Last week, Holland completed the loan signing of 33-year-old defender Ryan Tafazolli from English League One club Wycombe Wanderers. The club have allowed foreign summer recruits Jiloan Hamad and Gaizka Martinez to leave. Everton Camargo (right) tussles with Kitchee's Aaron Rey in Lee Man's Senior Shield semi-final win. Photo: Nora Tam '[Tafazolli] is a good signing for Hong Kong football – a lot of people here love football and they deserve a better league,' Holland said. 'I'm not interested in signing players who are 37 or 38 and coming for a holiday and a last pay cheque.
