Are the Just Stop Oil Protests Disruptive or Democratic?
Heightened media attention surrounding ‘Just Stop Oil’ protests over the past two years has resulted in a government crackdown on the legislation surrounding non-violent protest. This development raises concerns about the maintaining of public order and protecting democratic rights, prompting scrutiny over the implications of this debate.
(Hickson, 2023)
Introduction
Protesting can be defined as a non-institutionalised form of political participation by ordinary citizens to try influence the policies of the state. Understanding whether a protest will impact a policy also means to look at how it will impact public opinion. Just Stop Oil has sparked some controversy due to their protest methods causing disruption to the public, facing large attention in the media. In response to these protests, the government has introduced new legislation that will increase policing powers to help crack down on the disruption caused. However, many activists, such as Amnesty International (www.amnesty.org.uk, n.d.), have called for a change in legislation due to a threat on free speech and democracy. The first section of this blog will investigate the organisation ‘Just Stop Oil’, with the second section then looking at the government’s response to this method of non-violent protest.
Just Stop Oil
Just Stop Oil are a climate led organisation with a want for the UK to stop approving new fossil fuel projects (Just Stop Oil., 2024). They claim to use non-violent civil resistance, and that protest action will end once their demands have been met. Thus far, there has been no violent protest action from the group, however they have taken part in some rather large-scale protest in the last two years, to list a few (BBC, 2023):
- Targeted Wimbledon and the world snooker championships in Sheffield.
- Shut down M25 and Dartford crossing.
- Targeted artwork such as Van Gogh’s paining, Sunflowers and Velazquez’s Rokeby Venus.
- Targeted cultural events such as a performance of Les Misérables, and a BBC Proms concert at the Royal Albert Hall.
- Blocking roads, including glueing themselves to the ground, blocking ambulances and members of the public.
This therefore triggers the question is this method of disruption protest efficient in meeting their demands? A survey conducted by (Ozden, J and Glover, S., 2022) showed that most people in the survey did not support what Just Stop Oil were doing- with only 18% of people saying that they did support the movement. The study also showed that despite negative public opinion towards the protests there was no loss of support for climate policies. So, they have not impacted public opinion in a negative way however, there is also no evidence to suggest that they have in any way impacted government policy towards climate issues. This can be seen as a double-edged situation; due to the levels of media coverage they have received over the previous two years being seen positively.
(Gayle, 2022)
Government legislation
The UK governments response to these protests has not been to change policies, but instead to crack down on protesting legislation. This is in response to the disruption caused by Just Stop Oil and affiliated groups. Due to the policy of dissent towards fracking in the UK, there has been increased rights given to police to deal with these disruptive protests. Including lesioning with local police forces and public-private security partnerships, enabling the outsourcing of police communications to the drilling companies (Brock, A., 2020). Fracking operations are now classed as ‘nationally significant infrastructure projects’, this therefore allows for more coercive policing of protests.
On top of this, new legislation was put into place in February of this year to crack down specifically on blocking roads, covering faces when protesting, and the use of pyrotechnics. The minister for security, Tom Tugendhat says at the parliamentary debate that people can ‘no longer cite the right to protest as a reasonable excuse to get away with disruptive offences such as blocking roads’(Home Affairs Committee , 2024). There has been a negative response to this from activists stating that it threatens the future of democracy (www.amnesty.org.uk, n.d.). The debate leads to the position that there needs to be a balance between safeguarding the right to protest, and the importance of safeguarding the public.
Conclusion
The controversial nature of disruptive protest methods, exaggerated by the ‘Just Stop Oil’ movement, stems from their inherent risk to public safety and the lack of evidence regarding their efficiency in achieving their goals. Nevertheless, their ability to capture media and government attention highlights their significance in contemporary discourse. As legislative changes surrounding protests continues to spark debate, it is evident that the line between democratic protesting and safeguarding the public is blurred.
Reference list
BBC (2023). Just Stop Oil: What Is It and What Are Its goals? BBC News. [online] 8 Nov. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63543307.
Brock, A., 2020. ‘Frack off’: Towards an anarchist political ecology critique of corporate and state responses to anti-fracking resistance in the UK. Political Geography, 82, p.102246.
Gayle , D. (2022). Available at: https://grist.org/climate/inside-just-stop-oil-the-youth-climate-group-blocking-uk-refineries/ [Accessed 22 Apr. 2024].
Hickson, A. (2023). Just Stop Oil Activists Walking Up Whitehall. [Sony ILCE-7RM4 E 20-40mm F2.8 A062] 40.0mm. Available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/alisdare/52926777514 [Accessed 22 Apr. 2024].
Home Affairs Committee (2024). Policing of protests – Report Summary. [online] UK Parliament , House of Commons : UK Parliament , pp.1–52. Available at: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmhaff/369/summary.html [Accessed 22 Apr. 2024].
Just Stop Oil (2022). Just Stop Oil – No More Oil and Gas. [online] Just Stop Oil. Available at: https://juststopoil.org/ [Accessed 21 Apr. 2024].
Norris P, Walgrave S, Van Aelst P (2005) Who Demonstrates? Antistate Rebels, Conventional Participants, or Everyone? Comparative Politics 37 (2): 189–205.
Özden, J. and Glover, S., 2022. Disruptive climate protests in the UK didn’t lead to a loss of public support for climate policies.
Walker, I., 2024. Right to Protest: UK’s New Policing Bill is a Threat to Democracy–The New Federalist.
www.amnesty.org.uk. (n.d.). Scrap new anti-protest laws. [online] Available at: https://www.amnesty.org.uk/actions/scrap-new-anti-protest-laws#:~:text=They%20are%20trying%20to%20restrict [Accessed 22 Apr. 2024].
Firstly, this blog post is well laid out and makes good use of images and headings to make it easy to break down and understand. The author provides an interesting overview of the actions of the well-known group, as well as defining what protesting actually is. They make a good note of the fact that the group has gained a wide breadth of controversy due to their often-disruptive methods. Just Stop Oil has opened up conversations amongst the public about how far non-violent protests can go before they ‘push it too far’. It is interesting that only 18% of those surveyed said that they did support the movement, as on paper they are promoting a good cause. However, this goes to show that their choice of methods and where and when they choose to employ them has seemingly garnered them less support. This post discusses how police are being given increased powers to deal with these disruptive, albeit non violent, protests. It displays that the government is able to react to groups which pose a threat of public disturbance, and that by enacting specific legislation to deal with issues it can help the government regain control of issues such as Just Stop Oil. Overall, I think this blog is cear and concise, and provides a good insight into the group and their discourse.
This blog post is formatted well and provides a clear overview of the controversy surrounding legislation induced by Just Stop Oil. Both sides of the argument are presented comprehensively, invoking thought from the reader. The Just Stop Oil movement brings up several persistent issues in British Politics such as the complex policy cycle and the complications of an uncodified constitution. The agenda setting power of the party in government allows them to control what issues will make it to the floor of the Parliament and when. This can make it difficult for opposing parties to get their policy ideas through to legislation. As the Conservative Party has been in power since Just Stop Oil was established in 2022 and does not prioritise climate change policies, the organisation’s protests have a hard time manifesting into political reality. The legislation passed in order to limit public disobedience as a form of protest highlights the uncodified component of the UK’s constitution. As there is no set definition of what a legally protected protest is, the government is able to shape the definition through legislation.
This is a very interesting blog post discussing an overly complex issue within the UK specifically in recent times. The post brilliantly presents the behaviour of the Just Stop Oil group and also the issues that have arisen from such actions. The author has provided excellent graphics of the protests to support the discussion and has also provided extremely compelling statistics on the public perception of the group and their impact on government policy for their cause. The post also discusses the government’s reaction to the disruptive protests and highlights the capability of the government to suppress what are mostly non-violent protests, and this draws out questions of should the government and police have ultimate control over bringing such protests to a halt.
Overall, this is a well-written and thought-provoking blog post on a pressing issue and there are no suggestions that one could recommend to enhance this blog post any further.
The Just Stop Oil protests are a great example of political participation outside of its traditional realms and the blog post provides a good analysis into their actions and the effects that the groups work has on support for their cause. Just Stop Oil has used disruptive tactics which have proven extremely unpopular with the public as shown through the polling data provided by the author of the post. The post continues onwards to analyse the government response and new bills that they have introduced along with the criticism by groups such as Amnesty International and this raises pertinent questions in British politics of where the line between a civilised society and a liberal society where all people can raise issues to the table and mainstream conversation. The conclusion of the blog allows for the paradox of the action to be truly shown, a much lower approval by the public but an increased coverage of their demands as a group. This blog therefore gives a concise and well written summary of the issues of Just Stop oil but also where the line of civil disobedience and the right to protest is drawn in the UK.
This blog provides a great overview of protest groups using Just Stop Oil as their case study. The author starts off well, outlining what a protest is. I like the layout of the article. Each section is clearly signposted, making for a much easier read. I believe that the way in which Just Stop Oil conduct themselves in relation to how they protest is wrong and they should employ peaceful protesting from campaigns like Black Lives Matter. I believe the author could have improved the article by discussing why more people have chosen to go into protesting as opposed to party politics. Overall, I think that this blog post is formatted very well, informative and concise.
This blog post does an effective job of highlighting the impact of the pressure from Just Stop Oil on the government and both positive and negative effects its campaign has had. The blog itself is laid out in an impressive manner which engages the reader. The headings simplify the post and offers an easy-to-read introduction to the group. The polarisation of Just Stop Oil is an interesting one. The group’s message is one I am sure many in the UK agree with, with the negative impact of fossil fuels being widespread common knowledge. However, their approach to protest is one of controversy, which at times has caused outrage due to its disruptive and at times harmful nature. The author does a compelling job of highlighting this and the response from the government, showing their response was not to produce legislative change on the issue but rather crack down on protesting. Overall, this is an engaging and effective analysis on the issue of political participation in a modern UK.