This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/6299561.stm

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Peers protest at curbs on protest Peers protest at curbs on protest
(about 18 hours later)
A group of Liberal Democrat peers are to protest outside Parliament - against laws curbing their right to do so. Baroness Williams earlier led a Lib Dem protest outside Parliament calling for the end of restrictions on protests.
They will hold a demonstration outside, before entering the building to debate a bill to repeal parts of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. A controversial 2005 law created an "exclusion zone" around Parliament, within which police must be given notice before a protest is held.
The Act made it illegal to protest within 1km of Parliament, without first getting permission from the police. Lib Dem peer Baroness Miller has brought forward a Bill to abolish the sections which impose the restrictions.
On Monday, anti-war protester Brian Haw won his latest court fight to continue his five-year vigil outside Parliament. During the demo outside the House of Lords the peers read out names of people arrested under the Act.
Lib Dem Baroness Miller said her group had got permission, but said that it was "ridiculous" they had to do so. The protest came as peers prepared to debate repealing parts of the Serious and Organised Crime and Police Act.
What these laws have actually done is waste immense amounts of police time on paperwork Baroness Miller A Liberal Democrat spokesman confirmed they had registered with police to hold the demonstration.
"In a democracy, citizens should not have to apply for police permission to peacefully protest outside Parliament," she said. "It comes to something when Parliamentarians can't even protest outside their own House without say so from the police," he said.
"These laws were designed purely to stop Brian Haw protesting, and then issues about terrorism were raised to justify them. Loudspeakers
"What these laws have actually done is waste immense amounts of police time on paperwork and on arresting people who have done nothing more than hold a placard outside Parliament." The requirement for police permission, introduced in the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, was the Government's and Parliament's response to a round-the-clock vigil in Parliament Square by anti-war protester Brian Haw.
Protests doubled Mr Haw's placards and his supporters' use of loudspeakers had annoyed MPs and peers.
Her Public Demonstrations (Repeals) Bill, which would remove the clauses of the 2005 act limiting demonstrations, will be debated in the House of Lords from 1300 GMT. But the law has since been used to arrest individuals for unauthorised peaceful demonstrations, such as Maya Evans reading out the names of Iraq war dead in Whitehall, or people wearing politically offensive tee-shirts.
Mr Haw, who has camped outside Parliament since 2001, won his latest legal battle to remain there on Monday, when a judge ruled that restrictions imposed by the police were invalid. Baroness Milller, introducing her Public Demonstrations (Repeals) Bill, said the 2005 Act had had a "chilling" effect on demonstrations, with many people believing they were totally banned.
Meanwhile other protesters - many protesting against the law itself - have fallen foul of the new law. She said: "Freedom to demonstrate outside Parliament is one of the most important freedoms of expression that Britain has.
Police figures show that since it was introduced, demonstrations around Westminster have doubled. "This government changed that fundamental freedom to a conditional one."
The government has said the law is necessary for security reasons and was not about denying the right to protest. 'Spontaneous'
"There is, of course, a balance to be struck between protecting the rights of those working around Parliament and the rights of protesters," a spokesman said. Lady Miller said other laws already guarded against violent or disruptive protests.
"Now people are afraid they will get a criminal record for simply holding a placard or even wearing a tee-shirt in the environs of Parliament," she said.
The requirement for 24 hours' notice meant "spontaneous" protest was illegal, said Lady Miller.
She dismissed the counter-arguments of security, aesthetics and access to Parliament.
But her call for a change in the law was rebuffed by the government.