Why were we the only ones to report on a rooftop protest at MP’s home?
A message from the Editor at the consumerwatchfoundation.com, Leigh G Banks …
We at the consumerwatchfoundation.com are a professional news organisation.
And we were the first to report about an attack on the home of a government minister by a group of protesters… it was more than fifty hours later that reports on the protracted incident began to appear on two local new sites.
So, the incident went largely unreported and now it can’t really be talked about because protesters have been arrested.
This is the official police statement … Shortly after 9am on Saturday, May 6 police were informed of a small number of protesters gathering at a residential address in Utkinton, near Tarporley.
Initially two males climbed up onto a roof of a residential premises as part of this process. Officers remain at the scene in an attempt to bring the matter to a safe and peaceful resolution.
The law provides for peaceful protest that allows others to go about their normal business. Where this is not complied with, appropriate action will be taken.
A 52-year-old man from Buxted was arrested and later charged with using threatening and abusive language. A 51-year-old man from Cardiff was arrested and later charged with resisting arrest and breaching bail conditions.
We have calls into the group and Mr Timpson but they have failed to get back to us.
Here at the consumerwatchfoundation.com we do not condone the actions of the group who chose to attempt to highlight their campaign against forced adoption in this way.
However, as I write only the consumerwatchfoundation.com has covered the story from the beginning and we did so for two reasons (1) to examine the methods used by these protesters and (2) to ask, in the wake of attacks on parliament and the murder of Joe Cox, was Mr Timpson properly protected at home?
First then, the feeling towards the forced adoption group within groups battling for the rights of children and families, is one of anger.
For instance, Andrew John Teague from D.A.Ds said: “I’m feeling pretty damned angry, protecting children from any form of abuse is what we should be concentrating on… although I understand the frustration, there is a time and a place and we strive to keep vulnerable children out of adult disagreements. We need to do what’s right and yes it will take time done right – we will get there in the end. We are not terrorists we are family members.”
Helen Gordon, another campaigner, said: “The Minister is a Dad too and his children should not have had to see this. I agree the system is warped, and we have a right to protest peacefully and challenge for change… It’s really a sad state of affairs in a modern 21st century Britain. Sadly these people think their children will be proud of them and their rooftop protests. Maybe it’s good the media have been kept away.”
And secondly, was Mr Timpson properly protected, particularly as this is the second siege he has been subjected to in a few months, his profile is high because of the election and his addresses are in the public domain?
The Prime Minister, past prime ministers and senior front benchers have close protection officers from the Metropolitan police’s specialist Protection branch (SO1).
But most MP’s want to be seen as accessible to the public and shun bodyguards.
The death of Jo Cox MP was an attack on a wife, mother and parliamentarian.
However, this incident shows that people who say they are fighting for the rights of children and families need to think how a noisy and invasive protest outside – and on top of – a family home where a child is hiding can actually garner support for their cause.
And surely we all need to ask about security for our parliamentarians … if a group of disaffected protesters can cause this kind of chaos, how easy is it in reality for the next violent attack against democracy to take place?