Eco-Warriors Return In Force To London

Pictures of protestor’s glued to tube trains, office buildings and Jeremy Corbyn’s fence brought back memories of when Shergroup was in the thick of a wave of environmental protest affecting private land.

Today we are seeing the Met Police deal with protests in the heart of the capital which make them the focus of intense media coverage and 360-degree scrutiny.  Our CEO, Claire Sandbrook, writes, “I was watching SKY news last night and a seasoned protestor who is now a grandma was getting very upset about the state of the planet and what it meant for her children and grandchildren.  As a mum myself I can relate to what she is saying and I can see she genuinely believes in her cause”.

The lawful right to protest is what makes Britain great.  But as we have seen in London mayor, a light touch response to the determination of protestors can lead to chaos.  When Shergroup has been instructed to deal with these types of situations, involving the enforcement of large scale Writ of Possession, the police have always been a supporting presence – and have remained on hand to ensure that there is no breach of the peace.

But in the situations now unfolding in London, the protestors are on public land, and the response is led entirely by the Met. The police are having to move quickly to prevent protestors from becoming embedded in difficult spots – particularly those folk who scale walls to achieve height.  This type of activity raises the stakes when it comes to the form of response required. A carefully well thought out operational plan will be on someone’s desk as an operational command structure kicks in to oversee the operation. This will not be a new plan, it will be a rolling risk assessment for protests in the capital which has to be adapted, often in real-time to deal with the situations that present themselves to the police.

Claire Sandbrook remembers her own experience dealing with the 137 Days of Protest at St Paul’s Cathedral, saying “I had to make a decision outside St Paul’s Cathedral at 2.00 am in the morning to remove protestors from a heap of benches which had taken them over the 6 feet working at height regulation.  I made the call to remove the protestors one by one.  It wasn’t ideal but it was safe enough to get them off the benches and off the site. There wasn’t time to sit down and talk about the options, it just had to be done”.

As many of us know, eco-warriors are prepared to put themselves into extremely dangerous situations to bring attention to their cause. Every act of defiance, whether it be super glue, locking-on, or being over 6 feet off the ground, have potential risks that must be assessed and handled in accordance with health and safety guidelines. The police are under the same duties on this as every other agency to get this right. It can be nerve-racking – particularly for the Met who are under intense media scrutiny.

But these police officers have the experience of managing protestors from exercises such as St Paul’s Cathedral, Parliament Square, and numerous squats and fortified properties over the last 30 years. What we are seeing is the evolution of the protestor movement on the thorny issue of climate change. This is not going to go away. We see the police taking the same approach to the one we have taken over the years, and that is putting the safety of the public – even the protesting public – first and foremost.

Q1: What experience does Shergroup have with managing environmental protests?

A: Shergroup has extensive experience dealing with environmental protests affecting private land. The company has been involved in managing large-scale protest situations, including the notable 137 Days of Protest at St Paul’s Cathedral. CEO Claire Sandbrook has firsthand experience making critical decisions during protest removals, including a 2:00 am operation to remove protestors from benches that exceeded working at height regulations. Shergroup’s enforcement operations have always been supported by police presence to ensure no breach of the peace occurs during the enforcement of Writs of Possession and other legal actions.

Q2: What is the difference between protests on private land versus public land?

A: When protests occur on private land, enforcement agencies like Shergroup can be instructed to deal with the situations by enforcing Writs of Possession, with police providing a supporting presence to ensure there is no breach of the peace. However, when protestors are on public land, as seen in recent London demonstrations, the response is led entirely by the Metropolitan Police. The police must manage the situation from start to finish, including preventing protestors from becoming embedded in difficult spots and dealing with those who scale walls to achieve height, which raises the stakes for the required response.

Q3: How do enforcement agencies assess risks during protest situations?

A: Every act of defiance by protestors, whether it involves super glue, locking-on mechanisms, or being over 6 feet off the ground, presents potential risks that must be assessed and handled in accordance with health and safety guidelines. A carefully thought-out operational plan with a rolling risk assessment for protests must be adapted, often in real-time, to deal with situations as they present themselves. Operational command structures oversee these operations, with decision-makers on the ground having to make quick safety assessments, sometimes without time to sit down and discuss options, prioritizing safe outcomes for all involved.

Q4: What safety challenges do eco-warriors present during protests?

A: Eco-warriors are often prepared to put themselves into extremely dangerous situations to bring attention to their cause. These dangerous situations include using super glue to attach themselves to structures, employing locking-on devices, scaling walls to dangerous heights, and positioning themselves in locations that exceed working at height regulations (over 6 feet). Each of these tactics presents unique safety challenges that must be carefully managed. Enforcement agencies and police are under legal duties to handle these situations in accordance with health and safety guidelines while ensuring the safety of both the protestors and the public.

Q5: Is protesting a lawful right in Britain?

A: Yes, the lawful right to protest is what makes Britain great. People have the fundamental right to demonstrate and voice their concerns about issues they care deeply about, including environmental causes. However, while the right to protest is protected, there must be a balance between allowing peaceful demonstration and preventing chaos or danger to public safety. When protests move from lawful demonstration to actions that endanger public safety or violate property rights, enforcement action may become necessary. The key is managing this balance effectively while respecting democratic freedoms.

Q6: How does the police’s approach to protests compare to private enforcement agencies?

A: The police are taking the same approach that private enforcement agencies like Shergroup have taken over the years: putting the safety of the public—even the protesting public—first and foremost. Both entities operate under the same health and safety duties to manage situations properly. The police have experience managing protestors from exercises such as St Paul’s Cathedral, Parliament Square, and numerous squats and fortified properties over the last 30 years. Whether it’s police or private enforcement, the priority is always public safety, proper risk assessment, and adherence to legal and safety guidelines during protest management.

Q7: What was the 137 Days of Protest at St Paul’s Cathedral?

A: The 137 Days of Protest at St Paul’s Cathedral was a significant environmental and anti-capitalist demonstration that Shergroup was involved in managing. During this extended protest, CEO Claire Sandbrook had to make critical operational decisions, including a 2:00 am decision to remove protestors from a heap of benches that had taken them over the 6 feet working at height regulation. The operation required removing protestors one by one in a manner that wasn’t ideal but was safe enough to get them off the benches and off the site. This protest exemplifies the complex, long-term challenges that enforcement agencies face when dealing with determined protestors.

Q8: What is a Writ of Possession and how is it enforced during protests?

A: A Writ of Possession is a legal document that gives someone the right to take possession of a property or land. When Shergroup is instructed to enforce a large-scale Writ of Possession in situations involving protestors occupying private land, they carry out the legal removal of those occupying the property. During such enforcement actions, police maintain a supporting presence to ensure there is no breach of the peace. The enforcement must be carried out carefully with proper operational planning and risk assessment, particularly when protestors have embedded themselves or created dangerous situations that complicate removal.

Q9: Why is media scrutiny important during protest management in London?

A: The Metropolitan Police face intense media coverage and 360-degree scrutiny when dealing with protests in the heart of the capital. This scrutiny is important because it ensures accountability and transparency in how law enforcement handles protesters’ rights while maintaining public safety. Every decision made during protest management is watched and analyzed by the public and media. This can be nerve-racking for officers, but the experienced Met Police have handled numerous high-profile protests over 30 years. Media attention also highlights the seriousness of the protesters’ concerns while documenting whether authorities respect lawful protest rights while preventing chaos.

Q10: What happens when a ‘light touch’ response is taken to determined protestors?

A: As seen in recent London protests, a light touch response to the determination of protestors can lead to chaos. When enforcement agencies don’t act decisively enough, protestors may become more embedded, scale dangerous heights, or create increasingly complex situations that are harder and more dangerous to resolve. The challenge is balancing respect for lawful protest rights with the need to prevent situations from escalating into public safety hazards or complete disruption. An effective response requires careful planning, quick decision-making when necessary, and appropriate intervention before protestors establish themselves in dangerous or highly disruptive positions.

Q11: How do police prevent protestors from becoming embedded in difficult spots?

A: Police must move quickly to prevent protestors from becoming embedded in difficult spots, particularly targeting those who scale walls to achieve height. Speed is essential because once protestors establish themselves in dangerous or hard-to-reach locations, removal becomes significantly more complex and risky. This requires operational command structures, rolling risk assessments, and pre-planned response protocols that can be adapted in real-time. The goal is intervention at the earliest safe opportunity before protestors create situations that raise the stakes dramatically, such as being at dangerous heights or using locking devices in precarious locations.

Q12: What operational planning goes into managing large-scale protests?

A: A carefully well thought-out operational plan will be prepared with an operational command structure to oversee protest management operations. This is not a new plan created from scratch for each protest, but rather a rolling risk assessment for protests that must be adapted, often in real-time, to deal with situations as they present themselves. The plan covers everything from initial assessment, resource deployment, safety protocols, removal procedures, and contingency measures. Command structures ensure clear chains of responsibility and decision-making. These plans draw on decades of experience managing protests at locations like St Paul’s Cathedral, Parliament Square, and various occupied properties.

Q13: Can enforcement officers relate to protestors’ concerns about environmental issues?

A: Yes, enforcement professionals can understand and relate to protestors’ genuine concerns. As Claire Sandbrook noted about watching a seasoned protestor and grandmother expressing distress about the planet’s state and what it means for her children and grandchildren: “As a mum myself I can relate to what she is saying and I can see she genuinely believes in her cause.” Understanding and empathy for protestors’ motivations doesn’t conflict with the need to enforce the law and ensure public safety. Many enforcement officers recognize that climate change is a serious issue and that protestors have genuine concerns, even while they must manage the situations according to legal and safety requirements.

Q14: How has the protestor movement evolved regarding climate change?

A: What we are seeing is the evolution of the protestor movement on the thorny issue of climate change. Modern environmental protests have become more determined and creative in their tactics, from gluing themselves to tube trains and office buildings to scaling structures and using sophisticated locking devices. This evolution reflects the urgency protestors feel about climate change and their willingness to put themselves in increasingly dangerous situations to draw attention to their cause. This movement is not going away—it represents a sustained and growing concern about environmental issues. Enforcement agencies and police must continually adapt their approaches to manage this evolving protest landscape while respecting democratic rights.

Q15: What is the primary priority when managing protest situations?

A: The primary priority when managing protest situations is putting the safety of the public—even the protesting public—first and foremost. This principle guides both police and private enforcement agencies like Shergroup. Despite the need to enforce legal rights, clear occupied spaces, or maintain public order, no action should compromise the safety of protestors, enforcement officers, police, or members of the public. This means taking time to properly assess risks, having appropriate operational plans, making careful decisions even under pressure, and sometimes accepting less-than-ideal but safer solutions. Safety concerns must override all other considerations in protest management.