Red tape bollocks

It seems that the margins in which a person is labelled a criminal are getting smaller and smaller. In Orwell’s’ 1984, he painted a portrait of a society that was watched over and moderated by authoritarian forces. Although at the time this represented an exaggeration of a view of society, years on the comparisons seem less far fetched. We are being made to fear a shadowy world where even your neighbour could be a potential threat, but does this world really exist to the extent that the press and government would have us believe? Are all these measures in their scope really necessary for our protection?

Newspapers like the Daily Mail are feeding into a distorted hysteria, portraying sections of society as the scapegoats of wider national problems. Their definition of people who are criminals is ever expanding, to now include Graffiti artists, people from minority backgrounds, and even a load of people standing muddy in a field, who just want to listen to music. The red tape is being bound so tight it now feels like an ever increasing struggle to breathe.

Labour’s prevailing legacy (apart from war with Iraq and Afghanistan) is their tightening up of anti-social behaviour legislation. In 2003, the Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) Act was passed. Championed by David Blunkett it strengthened existing laws. The act contained new measures of control, first on the hit list seemed to be Graffiti artists. Under 16’s were no longer allowed to purchase spray paint aerosols and councils were given new powers to order the removal of graffiti from private, yes private, premises even when it had been authorised.

Next on the hit list unsurprisingly were free parties, with a new zero tolerance approach. In 2004, the Act was amended, so that the number of people required to constitute a public assembly was reduced from 20 to 2. With breathtaking hypocrisy, this completely defies the European convention on human rights (ECHR), article 11 of which states that “everyone has the right to peaceful assembly, and the freedom to associate with others”. The convention goes further also stating that “everyone has the right to freedom of expression…without interference by public authority”.  In a statement issued by Blunkett, required of him from the convention, he stated that in his view “the provisions of the ASB Act are compatible with the ECHR”

Pirate radio stations are not escaping either. Currently there are about 150 in the country, most of which are centred round London. Last year there were approximately 150 seizures, and 2005 saw the launch of Operation Leopard (at taxpayers expense) where the police launched massive raids all over London to seize broadcasting material. Yet research from Ofcom, the office of communication, has found some interesting if not predictable findings. It found that 16% of the whole population of London listened to pirate for it’s unique music content that could be found nowhere else. In another report it was found that communities actually felt that pirate was an important medium for the “development and promotion of grass- roots talent”, and also important to give minority groups a voice. Of course pirate does have its issues, such as interfering with the signal of licensed radio stations, but surely a measured approach needs to be taken, against those that organise it.

There’s also the contentious issue of licensing music performances. On paper I can see why the Performing rights society want payment for the broadcasting of their music, but cases have come to light that show how the line has become blurred. One such example was a bike repair shop that played music in their workshop. Sometimes customers came into the workshop, in which case the owner insisted it was turned off. The owner then received a letter from the performing rights society, telling him that the music was to go off permanently, unless he paid £85 license fee, as playing tunes in the workshop constituted a public broadcast, and as such, had to be licensed.

In another case the owner of a record shop played tunes in the background for customers (as was the case with all record shops before most got squeezed out the market through exorbitant rent) He was also told unless he coughed up money, the playing of music was illegal and had to be switched off- despite the fact the owner argued that it was free promotion for the artists, because he sold their music. To add to the madness those who get caught breaking this rule can receive a maximum of £20,000 fine and six months in prison. Even charities are no longer safe; performances that are raising money for a good cause must also pay the licence fee.

To add to the blurring of human rights Ministers are currently considering plans to hold a database of electronic information. In this database will be very single phone call made in the UK and also every email that has been sent. Service providers, will then pass on the information for the government to scrutinise. A report from Richard Thomas, the information commissioner stated that in his opinion, by enforcing such big brother measures we are committing “slow social suicide” as mistrust is built up between communities and the fragile trust between government and society is eroded.

The big brother analogy is one seems increasingly relevant. The introduction of loudspeakers in town centres that bark orders at you, should you drop a piece of litter, smacks of the nanny state gone mad. Of course no-one is arguing that for social cohesion we do not need to control anti-social behaviour, of course we do, but to treat people like they are small children again is a regressive step.

Our right to free speech and action seems to be increasingly under threat, thanks to post 9/11 and 7/7 paranoia. There has been a whole raft of new legislation that has hurriedly been ushered into place to restrict people’s opinions and right to free speech. Norm Chomsky summed up the principals of democracy when he stated that “if you believe in the freedom of free speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like”.

So now more than ever we must see the red tape that binds us, and fight for resistance, through music, creativity and art, no matter what the cost. In the words of a Zen proverb, ‘better to live one day as a tiger than a thousand years as a sheep’.

Other related entries:

1. Five Missions More Live! ft Speech Debelle