Chris Nineham provides background on his political activism with the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and his roles in Globalized Resistance and the Stop the War Coalition. He strongly disputes intelligence reports and claims by undercover officer Simon Wellings that these organizations were mere 'fronts' for the SWP, arguing instead that they were broad-based coalitions.
00:18:22 Good afternoon everybody. This afternoon's proceedings are being uh transmitted but only after the usual 10 minutes elapsed uh since uh the
00:18:34 minutes elapsed uh since uh the recording was made. Those with mobile devices may use them to report what they hear in the hearing room, but only after 10 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're reporting. They may not be used for
00:18:46 reporting. They may not be used for recording or photography. Yes. Thank you, sir.
00:18:53 Repeat after me. I do solemnly I do solemnly sincerely and truly sincerely and truly declare and affirm declare and affirm that the evidence I shall give that the evidence I shall give
00:19:04 that the evidence I shall give shall be the truth shall be the truth the whole truth. the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And nothing but the truth. To sit down.
00:19:14 Thank you, Mr. N, and thank you for coming to give evidence to the inquiry today. Um, we'll have an afternoon break in the middle of the afternoon, but if you need a break at any time, please do just say, um, you've made a witness
00:19:27 just say, um, you've made a witness statement to the inquiry dated the 17th of April, 2025. Um, it's at UCPI 5037794
00:19:38 tab A1 of your bundle. Sir, can we go to the last page of that, please? There's a privacy box redaction over your signature, but can you confirm that you signed um that statement?
00:19:51 that you signed um that statement? I did.
00:19:51 I did. And is the content of that statement true and accurate to the best of your knowledge and belief? It is. Um, I'm not going to ask you about every single thing within the
00:20:02 about every single thing within the statement because that statement stands as your evidence to the inquiry, but I am going to ask you some questions about some topics within it. Um, Mr. Ninham, we have limited time this afternoon um,
00:20:14 we have limited time this afternoon um, as you know, and we've spoken um, about trying to keep your answers focused and concise so we can consider all of the material. and I know that you're well aware of that and I'm I'm grateful for
00:20:26 aware of that and I'm I'm grateful for your um assistance and cooperation in that regard. I'll do my best. Uh I want to start with just some background about your political activism, please. Generally speaking, um
00:20:38 activism, please. Generally speaking, um how would you describe yourself in terms of being a political activist? What do you mean by the term political activism? Um I'm a socialist and I'm involved in
00:20:50 Um I'm a socialist and I'm involved in and have been involved in um organizing um protests of different kinds. Um I'm also a writer. I've written on uh
00:21:03 also a writer. I've written on uh matters concerning politics in general but also the sort of big movements that I've been involved in over the last um few decades. Uh, and one of the things
00:21:15 few decades. Uh, and one of the things that I've been most involved in is um kind of coordinating and organizing some of the big protests uh particularly
00:21:26 some of the big protests uh particularly anti-war but not just anti-war protests over the last uh few decades in Britain. Thank you. Um I want to look first please at the Socialist Workers Party if I may. Uh you were a member of the
00:21:39 I may. Uh you were a member of the Socialist Workers Party. When did you join?
00:21:42 join? in 1985
00:21:45 in 1985 I think.
00:21:46 I think. Why did you choose to join the SWP at that time? Um partly it was a result of the experience of the minor strike actually which had
00:21:57 of the minor strike actually which had quite a big effect on me but also um I think the Falkland's war had had a big impact as well and those two things together led me to believe that
00:22:09 together led me to believe that there was things about the way British politics was run that were deeply kind of dysfunctional and I felt that there needed to be real opposition
00:22:20 needed to be real opposition U to the direction society was going in at the time. In you say in your witness statement at paragraph 3.1 page six uh that in 1993
00:22:32 paragraph 3.1 page six uh that in 1993 you were a rank and file member of the SWP and you describe yourself as an ordinary regular party activist. Um what do you mean by that? In distinction to what?
00:22:44 what? I mean I wasn't uh employed by the organization. and I was just a regular member of a an organization that had a number of thousands of members. I
00:22:56 number of thousands of members. I operated at a local level in you know where the area I lived. I didn't have a any kind of national um role.
00:23:07 any kind of national um role. Thank you. You say in 1997 you became a full-time organizer first in Hackne and then in uh South London. and you say full-time organizers were appointed by
00:23:19 full-time organizers were appointed by the SWP to the central committee. Uh can you just tell us a little bit more about what the role of a full-time organizer was?
00:23:28 was? Sorry, I think there's a slight confusion. I don't know if it's in my statement because I'm not reading it, but the what I what is the reality is not that full-time organizers were
00:23:40 not that full-time organizers were members of the central committee, but they were appointed by the central committee. I see. That's the um uh the role of an organizer was to coordinate
00:23:53 organizer was to coordinate um
00:23:54 um uh the members in that particular area to make sure they were meeting regularly, discussing what they were doing. uh getting feedback from experiences of protests and campaigning
00:24:08 experiences of protests and campaigning and meetings and trying to make sure that the operation. It was a two-way process really trying to make sure that what was happening locally kind of broadly speaking aligned
00:24:21 locally kind of broadly speaking aligned with the overall aims of the organization nationally but also making sure that local experience was fed back to the national elected national
00:24:32 to the national elected national leadership so that people understood uh you know how the kind of policies were playing out on the ground. Was it an influential position so far as you
00:24:43 an influential position so far as you were concerned in terms of driving policy and um strategy? Not particularly. I was a local organizer at the time. At the time you're talking about in 97 I was just a
00:24:54 you're talking about in 97 I was just a local organizer. Thank you. You say at paragraph 3.4 page 7 of your statement in 2000 you were elected as a member of the central committee of the SWP. What was the role
00:25:07 committee of the SWP. What was the role of the central committee? Can you just explain that a bit further? Well, as you say, it's a the central committee is kind of the leadership body. it's elected by the membership. Um and its role was to or is to
00:25:22 and its role was to or is to um set policy between conferences and national meetings of the organization to kind of carry out the decisions that are made by the organization as a whole to give some
00:25:34 organization as a whole to give some sort of leadership to the organization between conferences and um to make sure that to that those policies are kind of disseminated in so far as is possible through the through
00:25:45 far as is possible through the through the organization also to listen to the experiences of local members on the ground and adapt accordingly. And so would you say that was a more influential role within the party?
00:25:57 influential role within the party? Definitely. Definitely. And in terms of uh policy and strategy and the direction of the party? Yeah.
00:26:04 Yeah. Thank you. How how would you uh at this time have described uh the SWP and its aims and objectives?
00:26:15 objectives? Well, the SWP is a socialist organization or was a socialist organization, a Marxist organization whose aim is whose fundamental practice
00:26:29 whose aim is whose fundamental practice is is really focused on trying to um build and organize two things. One is uh
00:26:40 build and organize two things. One is uh and the most important element is really um opposition and organized protest and and campaigning um against the kind of what what is
00:26:53 um against the kind of what what is regarded at the time as being the most egregious examples of um injustice or um exploitation or war very often that is
00:27:04 exploitation or war very often that is being um undertaken by the government. Um
00:27:09 Um so it's very much a campaigning organization. Um and its campaigns its campaigning is very often done in association with other organizations, trade unions um
00:27:23 other organizations, trade unions um other elements of the left uh and other organizations. And then on the other hand kind of promoting a a critique a broad
00:27:34 kind of promoting a a critique a broad critique of the way society capitalist society is operating and some of the big problems that it's creating. And so at this time there was a big focus on um on
00:27:46 this time there was a big focus on um on kind of corporate capitalism and there was a broad kind of feeling in society that things were at least sections of society that there was real problems with the way the kind of corporatization
00:27:58 with the way the kind of corporatization of society. And of course very soon afterwards there was the war on Iraq and Afghanistan. uh and the SWP was very very central to organizing resistance both physical and
00:28:12 organizing resistance both physical and intellectual to those two aspects of of the world that we lived in. Was the and indeed is the SWP a democratic organization? Yes.
00:28:23 Yes. You remained a member of the central committee from 2000 to 2008. Uh what were your responsibilities during that time as a member of the central committee?
00:28:34 committee? Two things mainly. First of all, I was um I was involved in the wider um campaigning around what was at the time
00:28:45 campaigning around what was at the time called the anti-globalization movement or sometimes called the anti- capitalist movement which was a very very big movement that um emerged at the end of the last century very end of the last
00:28:57 the last century very end of the last century and sort of uh started to become quite kind of um high-profile at the beginning of this century 200 2001 uh and onwards and I was for I don't
00:29:09 uh and onwards and I was for I don't know almost accidental reasons I was quite involved in that. So I was someone in the SWP who had a specific responsibility for being part of that and and putting certain arguments inside
00:29:21 and and putting certain arguments inside that. And then secondly um following on from that when the after 9/11 we saw the invasion of Afghanistan and then the invasion of
00:29:33 Afghanistan and then the invasion of Iraq and um obviously very big anti-war movements and I became um one of the people amongst others in the SWP who was
00:29:45 people amongst others in the SWP who was playing a role in that broader movement. Thank you. So the sorts of of actions and the sorts of demonstrations that the S SWP you and the S SWP were organizing
00:29:56 S SWP you and the S SWP were organizing or participating in during in this time would have been anti- capitalist or anti-war. Um anything else? I mean there was you know there's always
00:30:08 I mean there was you know there's always other things happening um that I'm sure there was um there was workers action and strikes that were taking place that we would have supported um and and organized
00:30:22 supported um and and organized solidarity for um no doubt other things as well but my particular focus on in terms of being a member of the central committee of the SWP was on the the sort
00:30:34 committee of the SWP was on the the sort of broad the anti-globalization movement and the anti-war movement. Those were the things that absorbed most of my time.
00:30:41 time. And so in relation to the anti-war movement in um the UK, uh the work that you were involved in as an S SWP uh full-time organizer and central
00:30:53 full-time organizer and central committee member at this time would have concerned
00:30:57 concerned things like, and you deal with this at paragraph 3.7, page nine of your statement, the first stop the war demonstration on the 18th of November, 2001
00:31:08 2001 under the slogan, don't attack Afghanistan. done. Justice, not revenge. Is that right? Yeah. Yeah. Uh an an a historic march against the Iraq war um in the demonstration on the
00:31:20 Iraq war um in the demonstration on the 15th of February 2003. You involved in that?
00:31:23 that? Yeah.
00:31:24 Yeah. Uh and then between March and May there were 2003 there were various protests um during and after the invasion of Iraq. You say and you would have been involved along with other SWP members in those
00:31:36 along with other SWP members in those demonstrations. Is that right? I would. And just to be clear, those demonstrations were organized by a much broader coalition, the stop the war coalition. So it I was acting um as uh a
00:31:51 coalition. So it I was acting um as uh a member of the SWP, but I was elected actually within the broader movement to be one of the organizers of those demonstrations and I was actually um chosen to be the head steward of those
00:32:03 chosen to be the head steward of those demonstrations. What did you see as the key features of anti-war demonstrations um at the time? Well, for us um well actually for
00:32:15 Well, for us um well actually for everyone really. I mean the thing that really marked them out was their size and therefore their kind of social reach and we hoped their social impact or their political impact. Um and this was
00:32:30 their political impact. Um and this was um partly a a product of the fact that there was a kind of spontaneous um sense of concern and anxiety and and anger actually over the uh Afghan and
00:32:42 anger actually over the uh Afghan and Iraq wars in society. But also this was partly a deliberate uh a result of our we we hope a result of our deliberate kind of strategy or
00:32:55 of our deliberate kind of strategy or policy which was to build the biggest possible broadest possible movement that involved that reached into society as deeply as it possibly could. And in the
00:33:06 deeply as it possibly could. And in the latter part of the 2000s, 2006 to 2011, um you say in your statement that the stop the war coalition was also mobilized in solidarity with Palestine
00:33:17 mobilized in solidarity with Palestine and Lebanon, especially during the 2006 Lebanon war and subsequent Israeli attacks on Gaza. Is that right? Yeah, that's correct. Yeah. And did those um protests have the same
00:33:28 And did those um protests have the same features as the other um the other anti-war protests that you were involved in?
00:33:33 in? They did. They were very big. The 2006 demonstration against the Lebanon war is kind of forgotten historically, but actually it was a very very big demonstration and there's an argument that it was the demonstration that
00:33:44 that it was the demonstration that finally forced Tony Blair to resign or certainly it was part of that protest process. The Palestine demonstrations involved the same a similar coalition
00:33:55 involved the same a similar coalition but actually involved even wider not necessarily wide force but slightly different array of of polit of of organizations of different kinds. But yes, they all were um uh the product of
00:34:09 yes, they all were um uh the product of alliances between the widest possible range of different actors and different organizations u with a view to mobilizing on the streets the biggest possible expression
00:34:21 streets the biggest possible expression of what was very often in this period a majority opinion that the government had got things wrong. Thank you. I'm going to come to some of the uh individual reports in relation to
00:34:33 the uh individual reports in relation to some of those demonstrations in a further detail in due course but I just want to ask you about the other two organizations that you were involved in. Um the firstly can I ask you about globalized resistance? Um you were one
00:34:46 globalized resistance? Um you were one of the founding members of Globalized Resistance. Um it the idea for the organization having originated within the SWP
00:34:56 the SWP but having quickly expanded to include a broad range broad coalition of other groups, individuals, trade unions and NOS's you say at paragraph 3.9 page 10
00:35:07 NOS's you say at paragraph 3.9 page 10 of your statement. Um is that right that it started in the SWP and originated there? And was it you and Guy Taylor who were founding members of Globalized
00:35:18 were founding members of Globalized Resistance? Yeah, I mean it's right in a sense, but it's also worth saying that globalized resistance was a kind was a was a product of a a movement that already exist that
00:35:30 of a a movement that already exist that was growing internationally and so it wasn't something that we plucked out of our out of our heads in the sense that it was similar things have been happening in diff in countries across Europe and the world and so we took some
00:35:42 Europe and the world and so we took some of the exper international experiences and and actually in Europe and and elsewhere where in some ways the movement uh emerged quicker than it did in Britain. So it wasn't just a a sort
00:35:54 in Britain. So it wasn't just a a sort of brilliantly original idea. It was something that had was kind of replicating um uh organization that was that was happening anyway. Um and yes, we kind of
00:36:05 happening anyway. Um and yes, we kind of proposed it if you like uh to the wider movement as something we thought was a a good idea and we from the start tried to involve as many of the different
00:36:16 involve as many of the different components possible components of the movement that we felt we could. And Guy Taylor was a founding member with you. Was he a friend of yours at the time?
00:36:26 the time? Not particularly. He was he was a he was a member of the SWP. Um, I don't think I particularly knew him. I mean, I might have known him, but he wasn't a friend, but he became a
00:36:37 he wasn't a friend, but he became a friend.
00:36:38 friend. Thank you. Um, you mentioned in paragraph 3.9, um, that the coalition expanded to include other groups, including trade unions. What What connection did you have to trade
00:36:49 What connection did you have to trade union movement? Um well previously I'd been um working as a technician in the BBC and I had been involved in the organizing in trade
00:37:01 been involved in the organizing in trade unions in broadcasting um previously. So I had some knowledge of that aspect of the trade union movement and actually that led me to have a certain um kind of familiarity
00:37:13 have a certain um kind of familiarity with trade unionism. Um and then once you know once we sort started to and also I'd been a member of the SWP that is engaged very much with
00:37:25 the SWP that is engaged very much with the trade unions anyway. Um and then with the establishment of globalized resistance, we we we we kind of tried to reach out as systematically
00:37:37 of tried to reach out as systematically as we could to those elements of the trade union movement who um felt there was some significance and sympathize with the the anti-globalization movement which was
00:37:48 anti-globalization movement which was quite serious. I mean if you look around the world the end this movement that developed at the end of last century had a very strong trade union component within it. So once again, we were kind of picking up on a trend that already
00:38:00 of picking up on a trend that already existed, but trying to make it um give it the maximum kind of, you know, reality.
00:38:08 reality. And was it through globalized resistance that you first came to meet HN118, Simon Wellings?
00:38:15 Wellings? Yes.
00:38:16 Yes. And how well I'll come to his the detail of his reporting uh in a moment but how how well did um you get to know him in relation to his involvement in
00:38:28 relation to his involvement in globalized resistance? I mean he was quite involved. So I did I knew him uh as a kind of colleague and a comrade but not much more than that. I
00:38:39 comrade but not much more than that. I mean occasionally we probably with others went for a drink or a meal after a particular event but beyond that I wasn't I wouldn't say I was a friend of his.
00:38:50 his. Uh Globalized Resistance was founded at um I think he said was it 1999 or the early 2000s is that right I think it was the early 2000s 2000 20ou in the year 2000. And um in
00:39:03 2000 20ou in the year 2000. And um in terms of you you've talked about the global movement but in terms of globalized resistance in the UK and you as founding members uh what were the aims and objectives so far as you were
00:39:14 aims and objectives so far as you were concerned of globalized resistance trying to give some organizational coherence to what was a widely felt um view that the corporations in general
00:39:26 view that the corporations in general capitalist corporations in general were causing a lot of damage and were too influential in society and even to the extent of having a corrosive effect on political life. Uh and so I think there
00:39:38 political life. Uh and so I think there was a widespread feeling that environmentally in terms of trade union rights in terms of individual freedoms in society and democracy itself there was this widely discussed feeling that
00:39:51 was this widely discussed feeling that corporate power had uh become too influential and was beginning to really cause a lot of damage to society. Uh you say that it had it had started
00:40:04 Uh you say that it had it had started with members of the SWP. Generally speaking, how linked was it to the NS SWP? Was there a degree of independence or was it very closely associated? There was a strong degree of
00:40:15 There was a strong degree of independence and that was something that we uh everyone involved insisted on rightly both people in the SWP and people not in the SWP. I mean,
00:40:26 SWP and people not in the SWP. I mean, we we had a series of meetings with individuals and organizations to try and set up this new um this new network. Um
00:40:37 set up this new um this new network. Um that involved uh setting up a steering committee. It involved having annual conferences at which supporters and members would elect
00:40:48 members would elect uh or reelect uh a steering committee or a new steering committee. uh it had financial independence. It had its own finances. So yeah, it was it was an independent
00:41:00 So yeah, it was it was an independent organization although there were a number of there were quite a lot of SWP members involved in it and there were a number of SWP members on that steering committee
00:41:11 members on that steering committee most all the time actually. Um can we look at a document please at MPS0027847
00:41:18 and it's at tab B73 of the bundle.
00:41:25 This is um an intelligence report entitled globalize resistance relationship with the socialist workers party and the report sets out at the top
00:41:37 party and the report sets out at the top that it seeks to explain the relationship between the SWP and global globalized resistance described as the Londonbased anti- capitalist group. Uh and in that second paragraph it says
00:41:48 and in that second paragraph it says this GR is often described as a front organization of the SWP or the anti- capitalist arm of the SWP. And whilst there is more than a considerable amount of truth in this assertion, it may be of
00:42:01 of truth in this assertion, it may be of use to clarify the exact relationship between the two. Uh and then it the next paragraph talks about um Mr. Taylor and you uh in the wake of the Seattle anti-
00:42:14 you uh in the wake of the Seattle anti- capitalist process protests being instructed by the central committee of the SWP to go off and build a broad-based anti-globalization stroke anti- capitalist movement.
00:42:27 anti- capitalist movement. It uh continues with some information about um the central committee and an assessment of the situation. And uh it it continues further down in the middle
00:42:38 it continues further down in the middle of that paragraph. Ninham remained in his position at the S SWP center but was and also remains centrally involved in every aspect of globalized policy. The SWP's real control comes via the
00:42:50 SWP's real control comes via the steering committee of GR. It is dominated by party activists and of course Taylor remains a fully paid up party member and being in the office full-time has a huge influence on the
00:43:01 full-time has a huge influence on the day-to-day running of things. Uh further down it says Nina acts as the conduit from the SWP central committee and where necessary this is where the
00:43:12 and where necessary this is where the party is able to inject influence and steer the group in a particular direction. In truth though little direction needs to be given. Uh both Taylor and Ninham have an enormously
00:43:24 Taylor and Ninham have an enormously long pedigree of revolutionary Marxist activism.
00:43:29 activism. Uh it continues uh this system can be effectively evidenced by the existence of the premes where Taylor and Ninham draw together those members of the steering committee who are party members
00:43:40 steering committee who are party members and plan how they want the real steering committee meeting to go. Uh
00:43:47 Uh and it continues in a in a similar vein about essentially the theme being that the SWP through perhaps most directly you and Mr. Taylor control um the
00:43:59 you and Mr. Taylor control um the direction uh and influence uh the policy of globalized resistance and I just want to ask you how accurate this report is. Um do you agree with the
00:44:10 Um do you agree with the characterization of the relationship between the two organizations as set out in this report? No, not at all. I mean it the whole thing is couched in a kind of McCarthyite sort of sinister
00:44:22 McCarthyite sort of sinister manipulative kind of um caricature of how the left operates which is absolutely not uh the case and anyone who's ever been involved or ever thought about the process of building alliances
00:44:33 about the process of building alliances would know this is utter rubbish. What we're talking about is the attempt to build a broadbased campaign or as broader based campaign as
00:44:45 campaign or as broader based campaign as was possible to build around these general ideas which as I say is something that had been achieved in lots of parts of the world to the extent that hundreds of thousands even millions of
00:44:57 hundreds of thousands even millions of people were involved in being mobilized and you cannot create an alliance with groups like trade unions um NOS's like war and want um people in the Labor
00:45:08 war and want um people in the Labor Party, people in the Green Party um by pulling the wool over their eyes, they're just not going to wear it. If you if you actually end up
00:45:19 you if you actually end up wanting seriously to construct this kind of organization, it has to be something that people feel comfortable in and they they don't feel they're being manipulated
00:45:30 manipulated uh in. And that is exactly what we were trying to construct. And this idea that there's something odd about SWP members being on the one hand involved in a broad coalition and on the other hand
00:45:42 broad coalition and on the other hand meeting amongst themselves as if that's something sinister. I mean there were people in the Labour party who were part of globalized resistance. And I'm sure they met at times with other Labour
00:45:53 they met at times with other Labour Party members. Uh and no one would call that sinister or suggest that that was in any way sinister or manipulative. It's just part and parcel of building coalitions. That's how coalitions work.
00:46:04 coalitions. That's how coalitions work. Thank you. So, you disagree, I take it, with the characterization of globalized resistance as a front organization for the SWP.
00:46:12 the SWP. Well, it's not that I disagree with it. It's just not true. And um Simon Wellings um in his witness statement MPS0748847
00:46:23 at paragraph 137 page 50 has uh said that essentially the SWP set up globalized resistance as a spikier more youthful organization and by that I
00:46:35 youthful organization and by that I think he intended to mean one more willing to engage in um action that might lead to criminal activity or disorder. Would you agree with that? No, not at all.
00:46:46 No, not at all. Um,
00:46:48 Um, did you do the types of things that are mentioned in this report? Have secret um pre meetings or nominate particular comrades to be ready to answer difficult lines of questioning if a non-party
00:47:00 lines of questioning if a non-party individual raised them. I mean, we had, as I say, as every organization does, who's involved in some kind of alliance. There were times when we met as members of the SWP to
00:47:13 when we met as members of the SWP to discuss the the way the coalition was going and and even how we could influence it because clearly we wanted to put certain arguments at different times about how we should operate. But
00:47:25 times about how we should operate. But um the idea that we trained people up to answer particular lines of questioning is again ludicrously sinister and massively overestimates the extent to
00:47:37 massively overestimates the extent to which we were organized and sort of you know on top of the situation. This was a fastmoving um broad movement that was uh beginning
00:47:49 um broad movement that was uh beginning to mobilize large numbers of people and therefore was much more of an open process than um than Simon Wellings suggests. Um, Simon Wellings suggests
00:48:00 suggests. Um, Simon Wellings suggests uh, and just for reference, it's at paragraph 85, page 30 of his statement, that, um, even though the SWP wanted publicly to maintain a distance between it and GR, GR was a more direct action
00:48:13 it and GR, GR was a more direct action and youth focused organization that was effectively subordinate to the SWP. Um, would you say that that's accurate or inaccurate? It's definitely inaccurate
00:48:24 inaccurate? It's definitely inaccurate in in the sense that there was no way that GR could have been subordinate um to the SWP. As I say, it was run by an elected committee that was much that
00:48:36 elected committee that was much that that had I don't remember exactly at different times up to 20 people on it representing significant organizations including trade unions um uh who would
00:48:47 including trade unions um uh who would simply not allow that to have taken place. So I completely disagree with that in so far as it was uh aimed at attracting young people. I don't see
00:48:59 attracting young people. I don't see that as being um you know that was no doubt part of the of the of the general approach of the organization as a whole. Was it a more direct action focused organization than the SWP? Would you
00:49:11 organization than the SWP? Would you agree with that part? Not really. um in the sense that I don't think the SWP while it didn't prioritize direct action, I don't think the SWP had
00:49:22 direct action, I don't think the SWP had any problems with direct action uh at all. So I think it was more an organization specifically designed to to as I say to bring some sort of strategic
00:49:33 as I say to bring some sort of strategic coherence to what was a wide political mood and and and a kind of emerging movement
00:49:41 movement um that was objecting to the way that um you know corporate power as I say was was was kind of impacting on society. Um, Simon Wellings describes you and Guy
00:49:54 Um, Simon Wellings describes you and Guy Taylor as de facto leaders of globalized resistance. Would you agree with that? We were elected leaders. And did you amongst others? Yes. And did you take your direction
00:50:05 Yes. And did you take your direction from the SWP's central committee
00:50:09 in terms of the kind of things that we argued within globalized resistance? Yes, to a certain extent. I was a member of the central committee. We had discussions about what we thought uh the
00:50:21 discussions about what we thought uh the way we thought things should go if possible. But when it came to um translating those uh priorities into globaliz resistance, we w we we won some
00:50:33 globaliz resistance, we w we we won some we lost some because that's the way discussion and voting goes. So you know there were things we had lots of big arguments. anyone who was involved um in the in the whole process will know we
00:50:44 the in the whole process will know we had lots of very big debates both in the conferences and in meetings and in the steering committee of globalized resistance about things that we should do and things that we shouldn't do and
00:50:55 do and things that we shouldn't do and everyone knew the SWP probably had and I don't necessarily remember them all at the moment but SW had probably had particular um suggestions and and and sort of strategic ideas but we didn't
00:51:07 sort of strategic ideas but we didn't always win them in the organization Um there there's a report at um MPS 0036507
00:51:16 0036507 tab B88 of the bundle. We don't necessarily need to bring it up, but it's a profile of um privacy. Uh and if you want to know the name under the privacy reduction, it's the document is
00:51:28 privacy reduction, it's the document is number two on the cipher list that you have beside you. But I just want to get um your comment on this. This is a member of um GR and it states she's not a member of SWP. She will never be
00:51:41 a member of SWP. She will never be brought into the heart of things by Guy Taylor and Chris Ninham. And paradox paradoxically privacy is one of the few GR steering committee who would argue that GR is not a front organization for
00:51:52 that GR is not a front organization for the SWP when of course it is very much. The report states you disagree that GR is a front organization for the SWP. Would the fact that a member of
00:52:03 Would the fact that a member of globalized resistance not being a member of the SWP prevent you and Mr. Taylor from bringing her into the heart of things as this suggests? No.
00:52:13 No. Um I just want to look then at one further report. Can we look at MPS 0037026
00:52:22 tab B 114 um sir of your bundle? And again, this is a report about globalized resistance and preparations for the European Social
00:52:35 and preparations for the European Social Forum, the ESF. And it says, it details a great deal of tension between all the various groups. And it says this, as might be expected, the SWP is desperate
00:52:47 might be expected, the SWP is desperate to maintain as much influence as possible. They have been up to all of their old tricks. Packing meetings to win crucial votes. Holding secret meetings to formulate strategy and then denying they have taken place.
00:52:59 denying they have taken place. Exploiting personal relationships to influence others and just good old-fashioned bullying and intimidation. Do you have any comment on um the
00:53:12 Do you have any comment on um the contents of that report? I just don't recognize it as what happened at the time. I'm not saying there weren't lots of arguments and debates. There were, but
00:53:23 debates. There were, but um this idea about exploiting personal relationships and it's just not part of um the kind of operation that went on at the time.
00:53:34 the time. Um this then seems to be a theme of of these various examples of reports of um you and indeed Guy Taylor as members of the SWP and you as a central committee
00:53:46 the SWP and you as a central committee member seeking to in some way in some sinister way to control globalize resistance and as globalized resistance as a front organization. Um and that as
00:53:58 as a front organization. Um and that as I say that seems to be a theme through these reports and and Simon Welling's reporting. Why do you think he sought to port portray that type of picture when on your account it's not true?
00:54:09 on your account it's not true? Well, I mean that's obviously a very good question. And I I think what it suggests to me and it's something I have been thinking about is that um I mean it reflects
00:54:23 that um I mean it reflects stereotypes in society about the way that um the far-left organizes and operates.
00:54:33 operates. And it suggests to me, I think, that perhaps one of the roles that undercover, well, certainly this particular undercover officer had in their mind was
00:54:47 undercover officer had in their mind was to help give evidence to promote um the kind of demonization of of far-left organizations to to provide ammunition to this image that is widely
00:55:01 ammunition to this image that is widely circulated of a manipulative, secretive, you know, type of um type of organization as being characteristic of the left. Um so I suspect there's an element of that. There may also be an
00:55:13 element of that. There may also be an element of um I don't know how to put it exactly but self-justification in terms of if if what he said is true which it wasn't
00:55:24 which it wasn't um then it kind of maybe gave uh the his employers a reason to continue to um fund his operation.
00:55:35 fund his operation. Yes. Thank you. I'd like to move on to the stop the war coalition please. Um, you were a founding member of the Stop the War Coalition. Is that right? Yeah.
00:55:45 Yeah. Um, you worked with Guy Taylor. Uh, was he also a founding member? Uh, Guy Taylor was more involved in Globalized Resistance. I mean, I think he was probably a member of Stop the
00:55:56 he was probably a member of Stop the War, but he wasn't central to it. Thank you. Uh you say in your uh statement at paragraph uh 2.1 page two that the stop the war coalition was
00:56:07 that the stop the war coalition was founded 10 days after the 911 attacks on New York and Washington in 2001. Um why was it founded? It was founded because a number of us felt that um
00:56:21 felt that um the the horrific events on 911 were going to lead to um perhaps equally horrific and possibly even more serious
00:56:32 horrific and possibly even more serious um uh responses from uh the US and and possibly Britain. In other words, we were very very worried that it would be used as a as a as a reason for lashing
00:56:45 used as a as a as a reason for lashing out and for um attacking different countries which is exactly what turned out to happen. Um, briefly then, can you explain, so far as you
00:56:57 then, can you explain, so far as you were concerned, what the aims and objectives of the stop the war coalition were?
00:57:01 were? To stop that process taking place, to stop the possibility of um of the West launching wars on countries in the Middle East or Central Asia, which is
00:57:12 Middle East or Central Asia, which is what we feared. Um, what happened at the founding meeting?
00:57:17 meeting? Well, we we launched we we we we decided with a few other people to um uh to launch um this a new campaign, a
00:57:28 uh to launch um this a new campaign, a new coalition. We got in touch with some leading figures in the peace movement in the Muslim community on the left uh and we we we kind of announced a meeting. Um
00:57:41 we we we kind of announced a meeting. Um I think it was literally 10 days after 911 the meeting. uh we booked one of the biggest venues in central London and we just publicized it and in a way we were
00:57:53 just publicized it and in a way we were just like seeing what would happen. Um at that meeting which was at friends the Quaker meeting house in Houston Road um
00:58:04 Quaker meeting house in Houston Road um not only was the main hall full which I think held maybe 1500 people but there were other halls that we we we we had overflow meetings in and even there was
00:58:15 overflow meetings in and even there was an overflow meeting in the Houston road outside. So we were overwhelmed by the response. There must have been 3,000 people came to that first meeting. Um
00:58:26 people came to that first meeting. Um the as the name suggests it was a coalition formed as a coalition. What was the nature of the coalition? Was it narrowly based again on the SWP or was it broader than that?
00:58:37 it broader than that? Well it I would as I say I don't think globalized resistance was based on the SWP in the way that Wellings claims at all. But the stop the war coalition
00:58:50 all. But the stop the war coalition because of the kind of absolute shock that these events had created was even broader was way broader actually than globalized resistance in terms of the forces that it brought together very
00:59:02 forces that it brought together very very quickly including trade unions. Most of the British trade union signed up in the weeks or months that followed. Lots of people from the Labour Party, the Labour left were uh in particular,
00:59:15 the Labour left were uh in particular, but even beyond the Labour left, some of them spoke at that initial meeting. There were people from the the peace movement. There were people from Christian groups. There were people from large sections of the Muslim community,
00:59:27 large sections of the Muslim community, Muslim organizations who came on board. There was an absolutely huge number of organizations and individuals who came to that first meeting and then a follow-up meeting we had a few days later which was a kind of to try and
00:59:39 later which was a kind of to try and create some sort of organization some sort of structure out of uh the initial impetus. Uh but it was a very very broad um campaign that came to obviously
00:59:50 um campaign that came to obviously mobilize millions of people and uh as much as possible tried to reflect and represent what became majority opinion in British society against the Afghan
01:00:02 in British society against the Afghan and Iraq wars. So was the stop the war coalition then formally constituted and a leadership elected?
01:00:09 elected? Yeah, a follow-up meeting or two follow-up meetings. And were you elected as a leader from the very beginning? I was elected as one of the officers.
01:00:20 I was elected as one of the officers. Yes.
01:00:20 Yes. And h how many were there? Just to give a sense of how big that group was. Well, there was two there was there was as well as the conferences that were broadly open conferences. There was sort
01:00:32 broadly open conferences. There was sort of two levels of leadership. There was a there was a steering committee that met um at different periods at different times, but probably met pretty much once a month, which I
01:00:45 met pretty much once a month, which I guess uh which represented all sorts of different organizations. Um and probably had about 40 50 people on it. And then there was a what was called an officers
01:00:56 there was a what was called an officers and still is actually called an officers group which was elected from the steering committee to um carry out the kind of dayto-day week-to-eek work which
01:01:07 kind of dayto-day week-to-eek work which normally I think it probably has on it about 18 or 20 people now and probably did roughly the same at the time. So can I just unpick that a little? I think that you said the stop the war
01:01:18 think that you said the stop the war coalition held national conferences. Was that around every 12 to 18 months? Yeah, exactly. Um at those conferences a steering committee was elected. Is that right?
01:01:29 right? Um what was so what was the the purpose of the steering committee? What was the role of a member on the steering committee? Um to
01:01:41 Um to develop policy to um to analyze the situation with the war or wars at the time to develop policy and strategy for the movement. Um and and kind of chart a
01:01:56 the movement. Um and and kind of chart a a a way forward in terms of what are the what are the main issues we should be uh pursuing, what are the main slogans we should adopt, what are the main tactics
01:02:07 should adopt, what are the main tactics we should use, when we should have our demonstrations, the sort of broad brushstroke of the of the of the of of the running of the organization. And there was then you said a small officers
01:02:18 there was then you said a small officers group which met more often weekly or fortnightly. Uh and you say in your statement of paragraph 2.4 page two to guide the day-to-day work. And you were elected to this group and became vice
01:02:30 elected to this group and became vice chair of the officers group. Is that right?
01:02:33 right? Yeah. Vice chair of the of the coalition. Yeah. And and what did the dayto-day work of that small officers group involve in practice?
01:02:42 practice? Oh. Oh, so much. I mean um making sure that the demonstrations took place, getting in getting involved with the kind of the absolute detail of the demonstrations, who should speak on
01:02:53 demonstrations, who should speak on them, where they should go, relations with the police, uh but also thinking about um organizing public meetings around the country. Um any other
01:03:05 around the country. Um any other protests that would take place. Um all of those kind of you know kind of detailed
01:03:13 detailed concrete organizing matters. Thank you. Uh you also served as chief steward at demonstrations. Is is that right? Um what was the role of a chief steward in terms of the stop the war
01:03:26 steward in terms of the stop the war coalition? What was your role as chief steward? Um well partly having a a a role in the in the in the setting up and the negotiation around the demonstrations, the the roots, selecting
01:03:39 demonstrations, the the roots, selecting roots, infrastructure, um uh as I say, publicity, slogans, all of those things. And then on the actual in the run-up to the demonstration,
01:03:50 in the run-up to the demonstration, organizing groups of stewards to um to make sure that the demonstrations took place safely, took place along the lines that we wanted them to
01:04:02 along the lines that we wanted them to take place, to make sure there wasn't any issues on the day. um and um
01:04:10 um and um making sure as well that they were kind of coherent because one of the purposes of the demonstration obviously is to is to project a certain set of arguments and certain set of demands. So one of
01:04:22 and certain set of demands. So one of the things we always tried to ensure is that the the first part of the demonstration very clearly represented the um the demands that we were putting
01:04:33 the um the demands that we were putting at that particular time. Don't attack Iraq.
01:04:36 Iraq. um you know no war in Iran whatever it might be um so it's to make sure that they were organized and orderly events without being boring or stayed I mean
01:04:48 without being boring or stayed I mean they were quite boisterous demonstrations they were had a carnival sort of feel to them but at the same time they were disciplined in the sense of being very very focused on trying to
01:04:59 of being very very focused on trying to put across our message and to try and leverage the the uh the attendance on the demonstration to put pressure on the government. And you say there was demonstrations in
01:05:10 And you say there was demonstrations in 2001 and then the first really significant demonstration, your first massive demonstration, you say at paragraph 2.9, page four of your witness statement, took place in November 2002
01:05:21 statement, took place in November 2002 against the threat of attack on Iraq when some 250 to 300,000 uh came out on the streets. Is that right?
01:05:30 right? It is. That sound doesn't sound like a monster demonstration by today's standards. At the time it was very very big and people hadn't seen anything like it for for many many years.
01:05:41 it for for many many years. And did you act as chief steward for that demonstration? Yes.
01:05:47 Yes. And um what was your role in relation to that demonstration as a steering committee member? Well, I was involved in the negotiations with the police, but I was also involved
01:05:58 with the police, but I was also involved in all the discussions around um where the demonstration should go, what should its
01:06:05 its symbolic impact be, what should its slogans be. I was involved in in the help helping to organize the mobilization for the demonstration, the publicity, the promotion alongside many
01:06:16 publicity, the promotion alongside many others. I wasn't, you know, um and um and then on the day making sure that it all passed off safely and in an orderly way in a in with the greatest possible
01:06:30 way in a in with the greatest possible um impact. I want to ask you a little bit more detail about the liaison you say you had with the Metropolitan Police Service in relation to these type of demonstrations. Um you say at paragraph
01:06:43 demonstrations. Um you say at paragraph 2.10, 10 page four of your witness statement that you engaged in dozens of meetings with the Metropolitan Police through the tranch three period to agree roots for the demonstrations and protest
01:06:55 roots for the demonstrations and protest protests against the Iraq war. Um can you can you tell us um in terms of from the stop the war coalition side um who
01:07:06 the stop the war coalition side um who attended
01:07:08 attended uh as well as you? Was it just you or were there others? There was definitely others. Um,
01:07:14 Um, just being careful with names. Yeah. Well, there was there was normally I would say there were at least two others pretty much always and sometimes maybe three others that we'd have a team
01:07:26 maybe three others that we'd have a team going into the negotiations which the police also had. They there would normally be two or three um and sometimes more on the police side as well. And in terms of who attended from
01:07:38 well. And in terms of who attended from the MPS side, um I can well understand you may not necessarily remember names, but um how many you said two or three or was it more or less than that?
01:07:51 was it more or less than that? Normally I'd say it was a minimum two, but normally there'd be at least three. Sometimes, especially when there was anything difficult or contentious, there
01:08:02 anything difficult or contentious, there might they might have a team of a number of others, including um people specializing in, for example, transport um or um uh you know, road closures,
01:08:15 um or um uh you know, road closures, specialist um members of the of the police would come along as well. And in terms of the um police officers attending, of what sort of rank were they?
01:08:27 they? Well, a mixture. There was police liaison people. As I say, there were sometimes sort of traffic um police uh uh people with responsibility for
01:08:39 uh people with responsibility for traffic and transport. And then there would normally be, I would say, a senior member of the public order um team present at almost all of the meetings.
01:08:51 present at almost all of the meetings. And do you have any idea of the sort of rank of that senior person? um
01:08:59 um chief inspectors and above commanders sometimes. Thank you. Uh in terms of the purpose of of these meetings, uh you mentioned to agree
01:09:11 meetings, uh you mentioned to agree roots for the demonstrations uh and protests against the Iraq war. Was was that the primary purpose, the only purpose or was there uh a more general more general or different purposes?
01:09:23 more general or different purposes? Normally that would be the main question would be where where the demonstration was going to go. Um and sometimes there'd be discussions and debates about that and and arguments even um and those
01:09:37 that and and arguments even um and those were the and sometimes there was just occasionally maybe we'll come on to it there'd be a kind of breakdown um and disagreement and failure to agree on those issues. But they were broadly speaking those are the those are the
01:09:49 speaking those are the those are the central questions. And so that seems to be the police seeking information from you about the the route you wish to take and and and whether they agreed or wanted to give some input into that. Is
01:10:01 wanted to give some input into that. Is that right? Yeah.
01:10:02 Yeah. What about um numbers of demonstrators? Would they be asking for information about how many people you expected? Yes, they would. Yeah. And were you happy to give all of that
01:10:13 And were you happy to give all of that information? as far as we were able to and in some cases there was quite strong disagreements about numbers. Was there any other information that you
01:10:24 Was there any other information that you were particularly concerned to pass on to the police or draw to their attention in terms of um these these types of protests and and demonstrations particularly where the numbers were very high?
01:10:35 high? Well, the there were you know there were there were questions about health and safety and so on that sometimes were brought up. Um but mainly it was the the
01:10:47 brought up. Um but mainly it was the the job of these negotiations was to try and find a way to make sure that um we were going to to the to the to where we
01:10:58 going to to the to the to where we wanted to go symbolically very often whether it was White Hall or Trafalga Square or Hide Park. um and that um you know the roads will be closed in
01:11:10 know the roads will be closed in sufficient time for us to have the to to to rally and organize people those kind of questions. And what about stewarding? Would would the the number and the nature of what
01:11:21 the the number and the nature of what stewards would do on the day be discussed with the police? Certainly the numbers of stewards. The police always ask the number of stewards. And were the police making any particular demands that you do anything
01:11:34 particular demands that you do anything or do not do anything in relation to these type of discussions about how the protests or the demonstration would go? Not really because they knew very quickly. I mean they might have done I
01:11:45 quickly. I mean they might have done I can't really remember it's a long time ago. They might have had been nervous at the first uh before the first couple of demonstrations, but very quickly they knew that these were peaceful demonstrations involving a very often
01:11:57 demonstrations involving a very often hundreds of thousands of people and they knew that we had a good stewarding operation. They knew we could pull it off. So they were with certain exceptions, they were basically routine
01:12:09 exceptions, they were basically routine meetings to kind of just make sure that we were all um that that they knew what we were going to do. And how many meetings were there on average for any one given demonstration? I'd say on average
01:12:22 I'd say on average probably two or three and and they would be what over the the weeks in um before the demonstration or a longer period of time varied because sometimes our our
01:12:33 varied because sometimes our our demonstrations were responding to immediate events. But normally we'd have a meeting say maybe about a month, the first meeting would be about a month before the demonstration, maybe sometimes a bit longer.
01:12:45 sometimes a bit longer. And and so how did those meetings generally go? What was what was the mood of the room? Normally they were fine. I mean there was always some tension. I mean, the there were there were debates and
01:12:57 there were there were debates and arguments about where we would be allowed to demonstrate and where we wouldn't or where they tried to stop us demonstrating in certain places, which I'm guessing we'll come on to because there were a couple of famous incidents.
01:13:08 there were a couple of famous incidents. Actually, the big demonstration on February the 15th, 2003, um actually the home secretary at the time pressurized the police to say that we couldn't go to Hyde Park. Um and that
01:13:22 we couldn't go to Hyde Park. Um and that caused a very big um kind of argument to the point where again there was there was actually a breakdown um in in the meetings, a failure to agree in the meetings um and we simply
01:13:35 agree in the meetings um and we simply had to say um we weren't going to accept we said we weren't going to accept a ban um on going to Hide Park, which to their credit the police uh relented on about a
01:13:47 credit the police uh relented on about a week before the demonstration and kind through some process that we weren't quite clear about managed to overrule the home secretary. So we did end up in Hyde Park. Um but and there was you know
01:14:00 Hyde Park. Um but and there was you know there were a few other times when sort of sort of slightly less dramatic versions of that happened. Um but I think we we got into a good relationship where the police realized I think this
01:14:13 where the police realized I think this was crucial. The police realized that the level of opposition to the war uh in Iraq, particularly in Britain, was such that any attempt to tell us that we
01:14:24 that any attempt to tell us that we couldn't march to parliament or we couldn't march to Downing Street would cause such a kind of kind of ferore in society would cause so much push back that it wasn't worth their while. They
01:14:36 that it wasn't worth their while. They also realized that we were because of that able to mobilize um hundreds of thousands of people in the streets and that therefore really in the
01:14:50 streets and that therefore really in the face of that combination their role had to be one of simply saying of being relatively kind of cooperative and sensible and simply saying okay you know pointing out if
01:15:01 saying okay you know pointing out if there were real health and safety risks but in the end of the day having to basically agree to the proposals that we put to them. Was the risk um or potential for public
01:15:13 Was the risk um or potential for public disorder or violence ever discussed at these meetings? I don't think so. Um, I mean, maybe it was early on, as I say,
01:15:24 I mean, maybe it was early on, as I say, there might they may have been worried before the first couple of demonstrations, but I think they quickly realized that these were peaceful, wellorganized, well stewarded demonstrations whose
01:15:36 well stewarded demonstrations whose point was precisely to bring together large numbers of people um, in a in a kind of, you know, as I say, in a kind of disciplined demonstration. Was
01:15:47 of disciplined demonstration. Was criminality or breaking the law ever discussed? I'm sure it was. I'm sure it was. I'm sure there were times when they felt there were
01:15:58 they felt there were possible um risks of that happening. But um the actual experience of the demonstrations kind of presumably after
01:16:09 demonstrations kind of presumably after time ellayed their fears of that. Um, what were the MPS generally saying to you about their position about how they hoped or planned to police these
01:16:21 they hoped or planned to police these types of demonstrations? Did they give you details? Yeah, they they normally did. They told And normally, and I have to say this is less true now than it was then, but normally they said
01:16:35 than it was then, but normally they said there's going to be a relatively light touch with the policing. Obviously they would have said we will have people in reserve but we are going to not have that many officers on the demonstration because and they said this our
01:16:47 because and they said this our stewarding operations were you know adequate and and and um and working and so that kind of satisfied them. That's
01:16:59 so that kind of satisfied them. That's in general. I'm not saying there weren't instances particular cases where uh it would have been different but that was the general that was the general approach.
01:17:09 approach. Um was any mention made by either side of potential arrests? Um
01:17:18 there were on some of the demonstrations occasionally one or two arrests. Um and there were one or two cases where there might have been a few more but in general
01:17:29 general and it wasn't discussed in these type of meetings specifically. Well, there wasn't really anything to discuss that I can think of. I mean there was cases for example I remember there was one example where they um
01:17:41 there was one example where they um there was worry about some statues being defaced
01:17:46 defaced and they were worried about um they were worried about um some of the the senotar or other statues in white
01:17:57 the senotar or other statues in white hall or vicinity having graffiti on them or things like that which might have happened. And I remember there was one demonstration where they got the some of the statues in High Park covered up. Maybe that was February the 15th
01:18:08 Maybe that was February the 15th actually boxed up. So they might have said and pro they probably did say please try and encourage people not to um put stickers on statues. But I think
01:18:20 um put stickers on statues. But I think in general that was the level of the discussion about um you know I don't think there was any fear of disorder really. Certainly not one that was massively expressed by the police. Was there any was there ever any mention um
01:18:33 there any was there ever any mention um by the police or by anyone of a potential for the police tactic of containment of protesters or what some people call kettling?
01:18:44 people call kettling? Uh kettling never happened on our big demonstrations and the reason is they were too big. I mean I mean there may be other reasons but one of the reasons was I think I think I'm right in saying that
01:18:56 I think I think I'm right in saying that um Kettling had gone into kind of disrepute to some extent after the Mayday events in whether 2002. So there was probably less kettling going on in general but kettling is normally a a
01:19:08 general but kettling is normally a a tactic adopted by the police when there's a few hundred people that they don't particularly like. uh when you've got hundreds of thousands of people uh I'd venture to guess that it's not a
01:19:19 I'd venture to guess that it's not a strategy they can deploy because uh it's that would involve you know tens of thousand well hundreds of thousands of police. So it wasn't really on the card when it came to our
01:19:30 really on the card when it came to our bigger demonstrations. There was a there were one or two stop the war events at different times but this was later um which was smaller where they did deploy kettling but uh but very but it was very
01:19:42 kettling but uh but very but it was very rare. Thank you. Uh you mentioned the demonstration on the 15th of February 2003 and you've described the liaison prior to that demonstration uh with with
01:19:54 prior to that demonstration uh with with the Metropolitan Police. I think you were were you chief steward on the day for that demonstration? Um what did that um involve on the day in terms of stewarding the demonstration?
01:20:07 stewarding the demonstration? It was quite it was a it was a headache um because I think we knew probably a few weeks before that it was going to be possibly a million people in the streets which I don't think had ever happened in
01:20:19 which I don't think had ever happened in Britain before. So it was it was um it was fairly stressful um just in terms of logistics and we decided because of the potential size to have two starting
01:20:30 potential size to have two starting points.
01:20:32 points. Um and then the the fact that the government was trying to stop us going to Hide Park meant that we couldn't right up until a week before even possibly even less than a week. It meant
01:20:43 possibly even less than a week. It meant that we couldn't settle on a plan. So that didn't help. Um but on the day it meant uh having teams of hundreds of stewards at both starting points
01:20:55 stewards at both starting points um making sure that the that the the demonstration at both at both starting points started at the same time. We actually managed incredibly to come together
01:21:06 together to kind of merge and meet at OS in Piccadilli um the two different two different feeder marches exactly the right moment. So it kind of went well. Uh and then we
01:21:19 So it kind of went well. Uh and then we filled Hyde Park and um well we filled the sort of eastern section of Hyde Park which again was something that hadn't happened in our lifetime. So it was um
01:21:31 happened in our lifetime. So it was um it was a big logistic operation, very big involving hundreds and hundreds of stewards and uh all sorts of moving parts and two stages uh sorry uh uh one
01:21:42 parts and two stages uh sorry uh uh one stage but a whole number of screens and and PA systems throughout Hide Park. So it was a big operation. Uh you say at paragraph 2.11 page four of your statement that the demonstration passed off extremely peacefully and in fact the
01:21:55 off extremely peacefully and in fact the police reported fewer arrests in central London that day than on a typical Saturday. Is that right? Yeah.
01:22:02 Yeah. Where did you get your information about the arrest figures from the police? Um do you know how many protesters were arrested on on that day? Were protesters
01:22:15 arrested on on that day? Were protesters arrested on that day or not? I've got a feeling, and I might be wrong, but I've got a feeling the figure was 12. Um, did you witness any um criminality,
01:22:27 Um, did you witness any um criminality, disorder, or violence during that demonstration? No.
01:22:32 No. No. Thank you. Um,
01:22:43 can we look uh please at MPS 0018136?
01:22:50 It's at tab 60 B63 of the bundle please. Uh, it's a report dated the 24th of March 2003.
01:23:05 Um, and I think it must be over the page.
01:23:14 Uh, and I don't know how long this and again please.
01:23:20 Uh, there we go. Page three. Um, so this is a report on um global globalized resistance and stop the war activity and it says the current ception amongst
01:23:31 it says the current ception amongst activists preparing to resist the war as at midnight Tuesday the 18th of March 2003 is that uniform police serals have been instructed to treat protesters in a very softly softly fashion and many
01:23:43 very softly softly fashion and many seasoned activists with groups such as the socialist workers party and globalized resistance believe that the opportunity exists to get away with significantly more militant behavior than normally would be the case. And
01:23:55 than normally would be the case. And further down, it says Ninam had clearly been surprised when police failed to move in on the sitdown protesters, even when they began unlinking and knocking over the crowd barriers that had been deployed. He thinks that the police have
01:24:07 deployed. He thinks that the police have been reigned in and that globalized activists should seek to exploit any and every flash point on the streets. Um, I'd just like your comment on the
01:24:18 I'd just like your comment on the accuracy of that that report and in particular whether you did consider uh it to be that type of opportunity and whether GR activists were seeking to
01:24:29 whether GR activists were seeking to exploit every flash point on the streets.
01:24:33 streets. I mean I think this is part and parcel of almost everything that Simon Wellings says. He seems to be absolutely obsessed with the idea that um the aim of various groups involved was
01:24:46 the aim of various groups involved was to um
01:24:49 to um I don't know disrupt create disorder and so on and so forth which really wasn't part of the strategy of stop the war at all. I mean, you know, he's talking
01:25:01 all. I mean, you know, he's talking about his his his sense of what is really spiky is sitting down in the road, you know, which I'm sure has happened at different particularly at
01:25:12 happened at different particularly at the static protest. I think there are a number of examples where people sat down in the road, but I mean um it's not uh exactly the most um subversive activity.
01:25:23 exactly the most um subversive activity. It's always been part of peace movement protest and he's trying to paint it as ever as being something sinister. It's not something sinister. It's an attempt to um effectively in
01:25:37 to um effectively in underline and and um uh increase the impact of protest. Um what was the stop the war coalition's and your um view on nonviolent direct
01:25:51 and your um view on nonviolent direct action and direct action? Are the two different or are they the same? Are they interchangeable phrases? I I think the most important thing to say is that the central spine of the strategy of the stop the war coalition
01:26:02 strategy of the stop the war coalition was the big demonstrations and the mobilizing on the widest possible scale in order to create a movement that was so powerful that it simply couldn't be
01:26:15 so powerful that it simply couldn't be um it couldn't be uh resisted by the government if you know what I mean. it couldn't be uh ignored that it put maximum political pressure and our view was always and remains that we want
01:26:27 was always and remains that we want people from every community, we want people from every workplace, we want people from every university, town and city to come together as an expression of collective will on this matter. And
01:26:38 of collective will on this matter. And our view on direct action is shaped by that overall strategic purpose. And there are times when you know people feel so strongly that
01:26:49 you know people feel so strongly that they want to to go beyond um or or do something slightly different from the mass protest. But by the way, one argument that we always put is that these mass demonstrations were in
01:27:00 these mass demonstrations were in themselves a form of nonviolent direct action in the sense that they stopped the center of London for hours and hours and hours um in a way that was you know
01:27:11 and hours um in a way that was you know max involved very participatory but also very impactful. nonviolent direct action was something that you know happened in terms of sitting uh sitdowns in the street in
01:27:23 sitting uh sitdowns in the street in terms of um various kind of symbolic actions outside various meetings and um and gatherings sometimes outside parliament these are things they're part and parcel of every um every kind of
01:27:35 and parcel of every um every kind of protest movement inevitably we supported them sometimes the stop the war coalition would have been um involved in helping to organize them not as a central strand of what we did but as an
01:27:47 central strand of what we did but as an element of it but never nothing that I mean certainly stop the war wasn't involved in anything that involved any kind of um any kind of violence to property or person
01:27:58 property or person can I just ask you about one report before we come to the George Bush November demonstration which I do want to ask you about but can we look first please at NPS 0029
01:28:09 please at NPS 0029 217 it's at tab B79 of the bundle this is a report dated the 3rd of October mber uh 2003 and it's the report at the bottom um entitled globalized resistance
01:28:23 bottom um entitled globalized resistance oil day.
01:28:25 oil day. Um it says there the stop the war coalition and other groups including globalized resistance have called a day of action oil day on Tuesday the 21st of October 2003. This will be to protest against the
01:28:37 This will be to protest against the perceived beneficiaries of the Iraq conflict the big oil companies. And then over on to page two. Chris Ninham, a leading light within both the stop the war coalition and globalized resistance has suggested that demonstrators and
01:28:49 has suggested that demonstrators and activists should be encouraged to vent their frustrations against the most visible elements of the oil companies in the UK uh petrol station uh forcourt.
01:29:00 the UK uh petrol station uh forcourt. Uh do you recall this? No. Um did you I mean I'm not saying that the the oil day didn't happen but I definitely don't the station fraud courts thing.
01:29:11 the station fraud courts thing. So you didn't encourage activists to vent their frustrations against not only I didn't but I wouldn't because that would have led to potentially to sort of clashes with people working in
01:29:22 sort of clashes with people working in garages which wouldn't have seemed particularly sensible. No. and and potential for public disorder. Absolutely. Accept. Um so this wouldn't have been the type of thing that you would have done.
01:29:33 of thing that you would have done. That's made up. So it's this is you would say um just fabricated um by Simon Wellings. Um
01:29:41 Um so I'm conscious of the time. Um I'm coming to a sort of a big topic on the November 2003 demonstration. I'm happy to start it or I'm happy to break now
01:29:52 to start it or I'm happy to break now for the afternoon break a little early. I'm in your hands. Um,
01:29:58 Um, would you prefer to stop now? Of of course. Yes. We'll break down for 10 minutes. Yes. Thank you, sir. 10 minutes.
01:42:27 So, Mr. Nam, I want to ask you about the George Bush demonstration in November 2003.
01:42:34 2003. Um, can we look at please MPS 0029481 at tab B84 and this is a report dated the 24th of October 2003.
01:42:48 the 24th of October 2003. And in this report um it suggested that Lindseay German, John Ree um you along with Professor Alex Kolinos were hoping
01:42:59 with Professor Alex Kolinos were hoping that serious disorder would break out at this protest. And the report continued this week's issue of the socialist worker will carry a lead article by Kolinos arguing that one of the two most
01:43:12 Kolinos arguing that one of the two most effective forms of direct action is riot.
01:43:17 riot. Um, and I'd like to just get your reaction, please, to those elements of the report. Um, are they accurate? Not at all. Um, and and in one sort of
01:43:31 Not at all. Um, and and in one sort of indication of how inaccurate they are is that the actual article that uh, Weddings refers to argues pretty much the opposite of what he says it argues. Uh, in other words, that rioting is not
01:43:44 Uh, in other words, that rioting is not part of the strategy. You um um uh of kind of choice of strategy of of of socialists. Um, and I just want to to to
01:43:56 socialists. Um, and I just want to to to sort of give a little bit of context here because if there had been any rioting or serious disorder on that day, you have to think,
01:44:08 disorder on that day, you have to think, would that have been I mean, if we want to get into it, which I don't particularly, but seeing as you raised it, um, would that have been good for the movement? Would it or would it have been problematic? Actually, it would
01:44:20 been problematic? Actually, it would have been very problematic for the movement because what it would have meant was um no doubt lots of arrests. It would have meant uh images in the um
01:44:31 It would have meant uh images in the um in the papers and in the media of disorder on the streets. Uh and it would have actually reduced our capacity to mobilize. For us, as I said, I've
01:44:42 mobilize. For us, as I said, I've already mentioned, the most important thing was to represent and mobilize the absolutely massive anti-war sentiment that had developed in Britain at this time. And
01:44:55 developed in Britain at this time. And in a way
01:44:58 in a way part of our inspiration in maybe not totally consciously but was the the experience of the antivietnam war movement in the United States in the 60s
01:45:09 movement in the United States in the 60s and 70s where it any sort of serious look at that history tells you that it was precisely the fact that the movement managed to mobilize on such an epic
01:45:20 managed to mobilize on such an epic scale that anti-war sentiment and organization permeated into every aspect of American society to the point where it was no
01:45:31 society to the point where it was no longer possible for the authorities to continue to conduct that war. That was the impact of those huge demonstrations back at that time. And that was the impact that we were hoping for here to
01:45:43 impact that we were hoping for here to have demonstrations. And this demonstration turned out to be 300,000 strong, the biggest demonstration on a weekday on any subject in British history.
01:45:52 history. Yes. Thank you. I'm just I'm tight for time, so I'd just like to address some of the nature of what's in the report. Um, were you hoping that serious disorder would break out? Absolutely not.
01:46:03 Absolutely not. Um, was direct action planned um in terms of a sitdown protest or any other form of of direct action um that that was um within uh the the sort of
01:46:15 was um within uh the the sort of philosophy and intentions of the uh the organization of this demonstration. No, not at all. it would have been impossible. Um, if we look then at the next report
01:46:26 Um, if we look then at the next report which is MPS 00
01:46:30 00 29562
01:46:32 29562 please at tab B85. Uh, this is dated the 30th of October 2003. So it's about a week later and uh this report
01:46:47 and uh this report uh says John Reese, Chris Ninham and Lindseay German, all coalition steering committee members and of course central uh committee members of the SWP are all still talking in terms of creating the
01:46:59 still talking in terms of creating the kind of demonstration on the 20th that will end in a way that encourages mass civil disobedience and direct action. Uh their vision is that tens of thousands of fired up activists will end up in
01:47:10 of fired up activists will end up in Trafalga Square, witness the ritual pulling down of a bush statue that will be attacked and beaten with shoes and then uh bomb burst, but I think burst out of the square to different locations
01:47:23 out of the square to different locations to stage mass sitdowns at important road junctions and carry out other direct actions such as attacks on visibly American offices, buildings, and monuments. And then it says, "It is
01:47:34 monuments. And then it says, "It is important to realize that much of their planning has the aim of creating the correct kind of atmosphere for this to be possible rather than have a team of leaders on the streets attempting to
01:47:45 leaders on the streets attempting to marshall organized teams of activists." And then just towards the end um it says he believes uh that's that's you referring to you that the tension will
01:47:56 referring to you that the tension will be racked up by the inevitably high police presence on the street and the physical restraints that are likely to be put in place at key locations such as Buckingham Palace. He opined that one
01:48:07 Buckingham Palace. He opined that one tiny flash point will kick the whole thing off and then will be in business. Um what's your reaction to um the accuracy of that report and in
01:48:18 accuracy of that report and in particular the type of language used in it to describe what um was planned for this demonstration? Well, it's a sort of intensification of the already existing theme of Simon
01:48:30 the already existing theme of Simon Wellings constantly trying to say that we were um looking to do this kind of thing which we weren't. And so the intention you you would say was an entirely peaceful protest. Is that
01:48:42 an entirely peaceful protest. Is that right?
01:48:43 right? It is. And that's what happened which is kind of proves the point really. And you were centrally involved in organizing this protest and were chief steward on the day I think. What did
01:48:56 steward on the day I think. What did very briefly? What did Chief Stewart on the day of this demonstration involve? making sure that the demonstration started
01:49:05 started uh was safe and went from point A through the center of London down Whiteall uh to Trfalga Square and effectively and safely. And I just would
01:49:17 effectively and safely. And I just would want to I do want to point out one thing which is that the real the real sort of flash point in so far as there was was one happened actually before the in the
01:49:28 one happened actually before the in the weeks before the demonstration when once again the police tried to stop us as they said under pressure from the CIA tried to stop us from marching down
01:49:39 tried to stop us from marching down Whiteall because apparently the CIA had said that George Bush was going to be in Downing Street and didn't want to be confronted by huge numbers people um uh demonstrating down Whiteall. That was
01:49:51 demonstrating down Whiteall. That was the political issue around this demonstration. That was the political battle which was had out in public in the in the days and weeks before. And once again, the police um because they
01:50:04 once again, the police um because they understood and and one thing we said to them actually was look, if you do this, then there really is the possibility of some level of disorder. If you ban a peaceful organized demonstration through the streets of central London on this
01:50:17 the streets of central London on this issue because you've been told to by the CI CIA then you are taking things into another realm. They relented once again. The demonstration was allowed down white hall. It it went to Fala Square and it
01:50:29 hall. It it went to Fala Square and it passed off peacefully. Thank you. Um just in terms of um the policing of the demonstration, was there any discussion um previously as this um report tends to suggest amongst the um
01:50:41 report tends to suggest amongst the um activists of uh deliberately confronting the police um during the protest? Absolutely none. Was that ever part of Stop the War
01:50:52 Was that ever part of Stop the War Coalition's strategy or tactics, the deliberate confrontation with police? No.
01:50:58 No. Um you you describe uh you've just described what happened during the demonstration and you you say that it passed off um peacefully and in your witness statement paragraph 2.14 you say
01:51:10 witness statement paragraph 2.14 you say impactfully. Is that right? Yeah. As I say the victory for us was that despite police attempts to stop the demonstration taking place, central London was completely brought to a
01:51:21 London was completely brought to a standstill by 300,000 people on a weekday. That was the uh the political victory which which was something we had to fight for but we fought for it politically in the pages of the
01:51:33 politically in the pages of the newspapers, TV and so on and so forth in the run-up uh to the demonstration. So it was it was we regarded it as a very big success. Uh and did you witness any disorder or
01:51:45 Uh and did you witness any disorder or violence?
01:51:46 violence? No.
01:51:48 No. Um the part of the report talks about a a ritual pulling down of a bush statue that will be attacked and beaten. Um and also uh talks about direct action such
01:52:00 also uh talks about direct action such as attacks on visibly American officers buildings and monuments. Was that ever part of the intention for this demonstration? That was a apparently a fantasy on the part of Simon Wellings. was a statue
01:52:11 part of Simon Wellings. was a statue which was a papermâé statue that we erected um with agreement with the GLA on the stat on the um steps uh on the
01:52:23 on the stat on the um steps uh on the stage and we pulled it down in a symbolic gesture that actually made the front page of most of the papers. So that was a a success obviously mimicking the um what the Americans had done to a
01:52:35 the um what the Americans had done to a statue of um Saddam Hussein but um again it was this was a symbolic act. There was no smashing up of the statue afterwards. It was a a ritual kind of pulling down of the statue to make a
01:52:46 pulling down of the statue to make a political point. And it it was a political point um well made and there weren't any such attacks on visibly American offices, buildings or monuments. So far as you were aware,
01:52:58 monuments. So far as you were aware, one thing I would say is that there was a noticeably tenser atmosphere with the police, not just in the runup, as I say, around the the CIA pressure. Um but also
01:53:10 around the the CIA pressure. Um but also on the day itself, I very much remember the feeling that the police were very jumpy that they were kind of there was more police in riot gear uh than normal.
01:53:22 more police in riot gear uh than normal. There was I was getting phone calls like every 30 seconds pretty much from the gold commander on the day saying, "Is everything all right?" You know, they were definitely monitoring me much more closely. I wonder whether that was
01:53:34 closely. I wonder whether that was partly Simon Welling's fault because of the nature of this. You say essentially exaggerated and sensationalist type of reporting prior to the demonstration. Yeah, I wouldn't even say exaggerated.
01:53:45 Yeah, I wouldn't even say exaggerated. I'd just say it's fantastic. Thank you. Um I want to look at one last report um on this demonstration. It's um dated the 15th of July 2004 and it's
01:53:56 dated the 15th of July 2004 and it's page three of MPS 0035842 at tab B 108 of the bundle please. Um
01:54:07 at tab B 108 of the bundle please. Um this report concerns the planning of the London European Social Forum which you were involved uh in organizing. But before we come to that event, it does contain um uh a a passage about um how
01:54:24 contain um uh a a passage about um how the the George Bush demonstration uh went and was planned and it's um the last paragraph starting this situation and it says this situation has existed
01:54:36 and it says this situation has existed before when US President George Bush visited London in that in that case Ninham who had put Taylor on standby to kick things off with the police in Trafalga Square eventually reigned
01:54:47 Trafalga Square eventually reigned Taylor in rather than let him off the leash. This was as a direct result of pressure coming from key activists in the Muslim Association of Britain MAB who wanted no part of a riot. Ninham
01:55:00 who wanted no part of a riot. Ninham knew that it was vital at that time to keep them within the stop the war coalition and so settled for a protest that although huge inevitably made less of an impact than say the pole tax um
01:55:12 of an impact than say the pole tax um demonstration
01:55:16 and um that paragraph the situation that had existed before was the desire supposedly professed by you and Mr. to mount real and direct uh real and
01:55:29 to mount real and direct uh real and effective direct action. Um in relation to that section then um what do you say about the accuracy generally of that of
01:55:40 about the accuracy generally of that of that um paragraph of the report? I'd say it's a fabrication. Um did you have the ability to reign Mr. Taylor in or indeed let him off the
01:55:51 Taylor in or indeed let him off the leash
01:55:51 leash or more more relevantly did Taylor have the uh ability to unleash uh to kick things off with the police in Frera Square? I doubt it. Um with all respect
01:56:02 Square? I doubt it. Um with all respect to him, but um but anyway, it wasn't part of what we were aiming to do. And as I said to you before, it's not that we as an organization were against direct action and nonviolent direct
01:56:15 direct action and nonviolent direct action. And in fact, on the days before the Iraq war actually started in March 2003, there were walkouts from schools and actually some workplaces
01:56:26 and actually some workplaces um which were kind of participatory democratic um uh uh actions that were taken involving thousands of people that had a huge impact. that kind of um direct
01:56:38 huge impact. that kind of um direct action which which moved from having demonstrations to actually people walking out of work and and stopping what they were doing in order to protest against a war that was illegal. That was
01:56:49 against a war that was illegal. That was something that we were uh happy to support and was part of the general approach. But small groups of people attacking American offices or whatever is just nothing to do with anything that
01:57:02 is just nothing to do with anything that we ever stood for. So essentially your your view is that um this is Simon Wellings having predicted a riot in previous reporting or at least a a a
01:57:14 previous reporting or at least a a a degree of public disorder and violence having to explain untruthfully in a report after the fact why it didn't happen.
01:57:22 happen. Yeah. No, that's exactly right. Yeah, that is what I think. Can we just look at the section before this paragraph of this report? Um it's uh it's paragraph four onwards. Uh
01:57:35 it's uh it's paragraph four onwards. Uh starting to that end
01:57:40 he and that's referring to you is pushing for the event and this is the European social forum um to culminate in a large demonstration that will end in Trfalga Square with a concert and party.
01:57:53 Trfalga Square with a concert and party. Ninam also realizes the significant of the event to next year's G8 protests. He knows that the SF could potentially draw in and radicalize a whole swave of individuals who currently sit in the NGO
01:58:05 individuals who currently sit in the NGO trade unionist camp and energize them into building their own protest at the event. Perhaps most significantly, Ninham has already warned his close friend and fellow activist Guy Taylor that he must be ready to mount real and
01:58:17 that he must be ready to mount real and effective direct action in both the leadup to the ESF and of course at the G8 that will follow some six months later. This course of action will always be determined by political expediency.
01:58:29 be determined by political expediency. Non would only order it done if it was necessary, for instance, if very radical young activists were being attracted elsewhere to get their kicks or if the resultant publicity was desperately
01:58:40 resultant publicity was desperately needed. Um, were you advocating or planning for real and effective direct action in both the leadup to the ESS and ESF and the G8?
01:58:51 ESF and the G8? Um I mean the again the language political expediency get their kicks and so on and so forth it tells you a story about um an attempt to sort of demonize
01:59:02 about um an attempt to sort of demonize the movement to answer your question directly I mean there was there was direct action associated with the European social forum not massive but there were various different sitdown protests that took
01:59:14 different sitdown protests that took place as I remember there was there was a plan that only half um took place for there to be a protest outside some um companies in Canary Warf that were
01:59:25 companies in Canary Warf that were refusing trade union rights for some of the cleaners in that area, for example. Um but these were forms of non-violent direct action that were well within the law and had nothing to do with any kind of violent disorder,
01:59:36 of violent disorder, whereas you you would say that here what he's trying to do is imply violence. I assume so or imply in some way that what we were promoting was was illegal, but he doesn't actually say it. um I
01:59:49 but he doesn't actually say it. um I guess because he couldn't really um harvest any real evidence. Thank you. Um you've made very clear in your evidence that each of the groups you you've been involved in and been
02:00:00 you you've been involved in and been involved in leading the SWP, Globalized Resistance and Stop the War Coalition um did not advocate or uh intend there to be uh public disorder, criminality or
02:00:13 be uh public disorder, criminality or violence at at as part of their strategy. um or uh policy, but I I just want to um ask you um whether there was any formal or
02:00:25 um whether there was any formal or agreed internal policy on public disorder or violence within any of those three organizations. I mean, no, because
02:00:36 I mean, no, because it wasn't something that that was discussed or entertained as being part of a um of a of a of a strategy. As I say, there were there were times when we
02:00:47 say, there were there were times when we engaged in nonviolent civil disobedience, nonviolent protest, direct action, but never with a view to there being a disorder or violence of any
02:00:58 being a disorder or violence of any kind.
02:00:59 kind. And it certainly it wasn't used as a strategy or tactic. No.
02:01:03 No. uh
02:01:05 uh in terms of um peaceful protest, you say at paragraph 4.1, page 14 of your witness statement that the protests you've been involved in, have organized and have been chief steward of were
02:01:17 and have been chief steward of were designed with the express intention of being peaceful. Um what did that mean in practice in terms of what you did to ensure that that was the case? Well, I mean, anything that we promoted
02:01:30 Well, I mean, anything that we promoted or planned um would have always been of a peaceful nature. I mean, it's not a question that even really came up. I mean, the only time in my experience of
02:01:41 mean, the only time in my experience of there of of demonstrations and protests in the anti-war movement and beyond when there has been any form of disorder, it's normally been actually after the
02:01:52 it's normally been actually after the protests that we've organized have finished and normally been as a response to what I would have called heavy-handed policing. Uh, but it's and that's a kind of responsive
02:02:04 of responsive um uh uh you know thing. It's never been sub part of the actual planning or promotion of the kind of events that uh we've been involved in. And I'll come to police response in a
02:02:15 And I'll come to police response in a moment. But just sticking with this um how was the message that um these movements, these demonstrations, these protests were to be peaceful conveyed internally within the three groups that
02:02:27 internally within the three groups that you were involved in. Well, with the particularly in the stewarding which is the front end, the sort of interface with the wider movement. What we what we always say to the stewards is look there
02:02:41 always say to the stewards is look there may be people who want to provoke trouble u opponents or even potentially people from the police force who want there to be some uh incidents taking
02:02:52 there to be some uh incidents taking place. Our view is that these if that happens it will be used against the movement and it will actually stop our ability if that were to happen it would
02:03:04 ability if that were to happen it would restrict and reduce our ability to mobilize the kind of numbers and the social forces and the social weight that we're looking to do. So that is something that we explicitly say at the stewards meetings. diffuse anything,
02:03:18 stewards meetings. diffuse anything, dissuade people on our side from anything that could lead to incidents um and and
02:03:26 and and you know could lead to a situation where on the front page of the paper the next day what we see is fighting in white that will not help us because we're trying to build a mass participatory
02:03:37 trying to build a mass participatory movement.
02:03:38 movement. That's amongst the stewarding group that of course you were chief steward of. Um what about amongst them or general membership or indeed um the public messaging?
02:03:50 messaging? It doesn't come up in terms of public messaging because it's not something as I say it's not something we particularly you know it's not seen as being actual clashes with the police or violence of
02:04:02 clashes with the police or violence of any kind is not something that's associated with our movement. um internally if if it ever came up we'd give the same answer as we give to the stewards who are after all the people who actually have to deal with the reality of that
02:04:14 have to deal with the reality of that potential situation. Do you think it was discussed internally more widely than the stewards within any of those groups?
02:04:23 Sorry, what was do do I think what was discussed
02:04:26 discussed the the message um that these protests and demonstrations were to be expressly uh peaceful? Yeah, I think it that would definitely have been a discussion and
02:04:38 definitely have been a discussion and because people would have raised the possibility of different kinds of strategies and options. So definitely that would be something that pretty much everyone was uh aware of. And was that message conveyed expressly
02:04:50 And was that message conveyed expressly to the MPS during for example your liazison with them in advance of demonstrations? If asked it would have been but I think they would have also understood it from
02:05:01 they would have also understood it from the experience of the demonstrations. Thank you. Um were there specific measures uh put in place to ensure that demonstrations were peaceful either in advance or on the day other than the
02:05:13 advance or on the day other than the stewarding that you've described? Um I mean in a way not particularly because it it just everyone knew what was happening here. They knew it was a mass
02:05:25 here. They knew it was a mass demonstration. They knew it was a family event. They knew they could bring, you know, people from who weren't necessarily involved in the left. They knew what kind of demonstrations these were. So, um, I
02:05:39 demonstrations these were. So, um, I mean, the stewarding in a way is is fairly critical here. Obviously, if there was anyone in the movement who had a different view, then we'd talk to them and discuss it out. But, you know, the message on the day was always avoid
02:05:51 message on the day was always avoid being provoked. And so the steward the stewarding structure and the number of stewards would you would say were some of the specific measures that were put
02:06:02 of the specific measures that were put in place to minimize the risk of public disorder or violence because the the stewards it's not just how they intervene. It's also when you have hundreds of stewards it kind of has a the stewarding group has the uh effect
02:06:16 a the stewarding group has the uh effect of kind of permeating through the movement to a certain extent per of of kind of passing on a message through the movement. Um, was there any contingency planning to address uh possible uh
02:06:28 planning to address uh possible uh breakaway or confrontational actions? So, for example, by smaller groups of people with different intentions to to to yours and um stop the war coalitions
02:06:39 to yours and um stop the war coalitions or globalized resistance. In other words, those a minority intent on causing public disorder or violence. um dissuasion really um which you know
02:06:51 um dissuasion really um which you know you in the end of the day other political groups you know have the right to do what they want to do and there's not a great deal that you can do when they're part of our demonstrations we
02:07:02 they're part of our demonstrations we try and um through discussion with them in advance sometimes on the day through the stewarding process through the general spirit of the demonstration we try and say to them you know on this day
02:07:15 try and say to them you know on this day please stick to the the the general approach that we have which is to have the maximum turnout the max the maximum impact and normally they get carried on
02:07:26 impact and normally they get carried on and by and large during the I would say during most of the Iraq demonstrations certainly the big demonstrations there weren't really any um any any
02:07:37 there weren't really any um any any breakouts sometimes people did some other things afterwards but in general people stuck to the to to to the to the point to the purpose to the strategy and was that sort of um discussion and
02:07:52 and was that sort of um discussion and contingency planning a risk of breakaway groups um ever discussed with the MPS before these demonstrations or not? No, probably not.
02:08:06 mainly because it didn't arise.
02:08:20 Um, at paragraph 4.2, page 14 of your, uh, statement, you say that a very small number of demonstrations I've been on have witnessed low levels of disorder.
02:08:33 have witnessed low levels of disorder. Um, I've been chief steward on over 50 national demonstrations and the only instances of anything approaching disorder on these occasions have happened after the end of the protests and in all cases I can remember as a
02:08:44 and in all cases I can remember as a result of provocative and sometimes aggressive policing. What do you mean there by low levels of disorder? On one or two demonstrations,
02:08:55 On one or two demonstrations, there have been um some clashes with the police. Um, as I say, in the evening after the the the hour demonstration is
02:09:06 after the the the hour demonstration is over, as people stay behind, as some small numbers of people stay behind, and sometimes the police move in very very quickly to try and clear them off the streets, they are obviously staying
02:09:17 streets, they are obviously staying behind because they still feel frustrated and angry at the issue, at the war, at the uh uh at the, you know, attacks on the Palestinians, whatever.
02:09:28 attacks on the Palestinians, whatever. And sometimes there are um he there is heavy-handed policing uh which is something that we we feed back to the police when that happens and we do complain about and I would say that I
02:09:41 complain about and I would say that I mean I'm talking about two or three instances maybe three or four instances in 25 years of organizing demonstrations um where this has happened um and yeah
02:09:52 um where this has happened um and yeah it's something that we very strongly um would put down to a level of sort of, you know, police overreaction. Um at paragraph 106 page 39 of Simon
02:10:06 Um at paragraph 106 page 39 of Simon Welling's uh statement MPS0748847
02:10:11 he states in relation to globalized resistance given the disorder in Seattle and gen Genua caused by anti- capitalist protesters and in London on the 18th of June 1999 and at Mayday protests at the
02:10:24 June 1999 and at Mayday protests at the turn of the century the potential for public disorder was clear. Um, do you agree or disagree with that? The levels of public disorder on the the
02:10:35 The levels of public disorder on the the demonstrations in London, the Mayday demonstrations even, which were demonstrations that um I wasn't involved in were very very low
02:10:46 I wasn't involved in were very very low level and were very very easily contained in Genua. Um, which is a a reference to the anti-GAA protest which took place there in 2001. there was um
02:10:57 took place there in 2001. there was um there was some disorder but once again it was you know famously caused by the police assassination of one of the protesters u and that's a case in point that actually you know to talk about the
02:11:10 that actually you know to talk about the disorder as if it was caused by the the globalization movement is palpably unhistorical and untrue and actually the demonstration that took place after the
02:11:21 demonstration that took place after the assassination the police assassination of Carlo Giuliani at that demonstration the de at that series of events. The demonstration that took place the following day was completely peaceful.
02:11:33 following day was completely peaceful. Thank you. Um could we look at MPS 0027912
02:11:38 0027912 is it tab B75 of the bundle. Um this is a report in relation to the visit of Ariel Chiron on the 14th of July 2003.
02:11:50 the 14th of July 2003. And I just want to ask you about um one element of it which is that um this was the demonstration where um Mr. Taylor was arrested uh attempting to lead a
02:12:01 was arrested uh attempting to lead a dash into Whiteall to carry out a sitdown process protest and there were three other arrests I think um made on the day and it says um this towards the
02:12:13 the day and it says um this towards the bottom of page one. It is important to note that prior to the disorder, globalized resistance activists had been busily passing through the crowd in both an attempt to in to stir up the crowd
02:12:26 an attempt to in to stir up the crowd and up the ante and gauge people's willingness to mount some form of direct action. Instrumental in this endeavor were Taylor himself, Chris Ninham, and then a number of of uh other names
02:12:38 then a number of of uh other names including some of privacy reductions. These individuals were also centrally centrally involved once the disorder broke out. In particular, whipping up the crowd in the attempt to de-arrest
02:12:49 the crowd in the attempt to de-arrest and trap the police officers carrying out the initial arrest. Um I think you accept you were present at this um demonstration. Um was there the
02:13:01 this um demonstration. Um was there the public disorder um described here? Um did that happen? uh so far as you recall I mean my memory of this day I have to say is very um is very a bit indistinct
02:13:12 say is very um is very a bit indistinct but what he's saying is in reality if you strip away the rhetoric and the kind of flowery language is that some people from globalized resistance were trying to organize direct action. Now direct
02:13:25 to organize direct action. Now direct action is not illegal in this country. You're talking about a sitdown in a road um as a response to an invitation to a um a highly controversial political figure. That's not illegal and it
02:13:37 figure. That's not illegal and it certainly doesn't involve disorder. It involves sitting down in a road. So again, massive hyperbole. Um, were you involved in the way that it that um this sets out
02:13:50 that um this sets out that I can't I I honestly don't remember. I honestly don't remember, but I wouldn't completely rule it out that I may have advocated that people should sit in a road uh in order to protest
02:14:02 sit in a road uh in order to protest against someone rightly regarded as a uh as a as a kind of butcher of the Palestinian people. So, yes, that's possible.
02:14:11 possible. Was um uh Simon Wellings present as is set out here? I'm imagining, but I couldn't be. No, I can't say for certain. Can you recall um
02:14:24 can't say for certain. Can you recall um in any detail how uh he behaved or if he was involved in this action? What I can recall from um the period in the runup to this protest
02:14:37 to this protest was that Sim and actually after and in the runup to the to the vis to the protest against the vis the visit of um Kissinger to London was that Simon
02:14:49 Kissinger to London was that Simon Wellings was at the forefront of those people within uh in fact he was probably an outlier in the sense that he was someone who was constantly trying to advocate
02:15:00 advocate uh more edgy um uh tactics when it came to protest. As I say, these when I say edgy, we're talking about sitdowns in the road. So we're not talking about
02:15:11 the road. So we're not talking about criminality. We're not talking about violence. We're not really talking about disorder. But nevertheless, Simon Wellings was definitely someone who was in fact there was a kind of joke within glyars resistance that Simon was the one
02:15:23 glyars resistance that Simon was the one who was always pushing for maximum um you know confrontation maybe too strong a word but definitely for more you know um uh nonviolent uh
02:15:36 you know um uh nonviolent uh disobedience and sitting down and possibly once or twice he might have even pushed for for for us to push up against police lines and so on. I think he was definitely known for that.
02:15:49 he was definitely known for that. Was was he engaged in the sort of behavior that he reported here that the sort of attempting to stir up the crowd up the ante and gauge people's willingness to mount some form of direct
02:16:00 willingness to mount some form of direct action?
02:16:00 action? As I say, I cannot tell you for sure. Do you recall if he was there when Guy Taylor was arrested? I can't say for certain. I'm assuming
02:16:11 I can't say for certain. I'm assuming from the document that he is, but I don't know. Thank you. Um we've discussed public disorder and violence at at some length. Um in terms of the uh
02:16:22 at at some length. Um in terms of the uh philosophy on criminality or lawb breaking, um what was the position um or the policy or philosophy of of the three organizations you were involved in on
02:16:35 organizations you were involved in on breaking the law or criminality? Was there any difference um between that in terms of or as between public disorder and violence and criminality or was was
02:16:47 and violence and criminality or was was it the same sort of philosophy? Broadly speaking I'd say it was the same. Um I would say that yeah that you know the or none of the organizations I
02:16:58 know the or none of the organizations I mean certainly not stop the war coalition
02:17:02 coalition um and even globalized resistance SWP were pro promoted anything that was um involved disorder or involved um you
02:17:13 involved disorder or involved um you know
02:17:15 know criminality of any kind really. Was there any in any of those groups um formal or agreed internal policy on breaking the law or I don't think one
02:17:29 or I don't think one I don't think any of those groups kind of had that sort of you know worked out sort of programmatic statements or or they're more the strategic approach was something
02:17:41 the strategic approach was something that was more evolved in practice. I would say that um that doesn't mean that I or the um
02:17:54 that doesn't mean that I or the um others in the organizations believe that there were no circumstances in which breaking the the law was um justified. And I think if you look back over the history of direct action and
02:18:05 over the history of direct action and civil disobedience, there are times quite important moments, the suffragettes, the anti-aparttheid movement, the civil rights movement in the US where when uh wrongs are so
02:18:17 the US where when uh wrongs are so egregious that uh and they're so kind of backed up by the institutions of the law. Um there are there are times when I think historically looking back you can say that breaking the law in certain
02:18:28 say that breaking the law in certain specific circumstances was justified. So it's not to say that there's a in all these cases there's an absolutely blanket view that you can't break the law but certainly there's no sense in
02:18:40 law but certainly there's no sense in which that was central to the strategy or the tactics that were adopted by any of these organizations. Um do you accept that in some forms of direct action there would be a risk of
02:18:52 direct action there would be a risk of criminality or lawb breaking? Yeah.
02:18:56 Yeah. Um and do you accept that um that sort of potential or risk um may legitimately have an effect on the way in which the police would plan to or carry out policing of demonstrations or other
02:19:09 policing of demonstrations or other public events? Yeah, I can see it would be taken into taken into consideration. Having said that, the kind of well the two things really a civil disobedience and direct action of the sort that we're talking
02:19:21 action of the sort that we're talking about was not something that was central to any of the organizations that was a central part of the of the strategy of any of the organizations as as I've explained. B the ex the kind of civil
02:19:33 explained. B the ex the kind of civil disobedience that at times was used even if not centrally was not the kind that leads directly to criminality or to um or to or to violence or damage to
02:19:45 or to or to violence or damage to property. None of these organizations saw that as being something that we would um that we would want to pursue. And as I say with the mass organizations in particular, anything that does lead in
02:19:58 particular, anything that does lead in that direction actually tends to militate against the kind of movement that we're trying to um that we're trying to build. Uh I want to to look please at uh MPS
02:20:11 Uh I want to to look please at uh MPS 00008906
02:20:14 00008906 at tab B36. uh please
02:20:19 uh please you deal with um this report at paragraph 5.7 page 22 of your witness statement and it's it's about a Palestine
02:20:29 Palestine uh workshop and I just want to ask you about um a passage uh in the middle of uh the page which says the overall message of the workshop was that violence was the only
02:20:41 workshop was that violence was the only solution to the current crisis faced by the Palestinian people and that to consider any other approach was a futile and gigantic waste of time and effort. Um, you say that there are several
02:20:53 Um, you say that there are several serious problems with this document in your statement, uh, paragraphs 5.7 to 5.15.
02:21:00 5.15. Um, and that it conflates strategies for those Palestinians living in Gaza in the West Bank to those protesting uh, the the war in the UK. And you don't accept
02:21:12 the war in the UK. And you don't accept that the overall message of the workshop was violence. Is that right? Absolutely. I mean, it's unthinkable that could have been the case because that was just simply not part of the uh
02:21:23 that was just simply not part of the uh of the sort of politics and approach that globalized resistance was known for.
02:21:29 for. So again, what do you think that Simon Wellings was trying to achieve with this report?
02:21:35 report? Well, I mean, I can't fortunately get myself into Simon Wedding's mind or psychology, but I'm guessing that a
02:21:46 psychology, but I'm guessing that a again he was trying to justify um his role and his the continuation of his role by playing up and exaggerating or or mis um mis constring entirely the the
02:22:00 or mis um mis constring entirely the the views and approach of globalized resistance. But I also do think that that this is perhaps one of the features or one of the functions of of of what Simon Wellings did is to is to
02:22:12 of what Simon Wellings did is to is to help to generate this sort of demonization and this wrongful characterization of uh of the movements to try and say to
02:22:24 of uh of the movements to try and say to try and exaggerate the level to which they're involved in confrontation. To try and say they're violent when they're not violent. to try and say they want to adopt tactics and strategies that actually they don't as a way of of of
02:22:37 actually they don't as a way of of of criminalizing and and demonizing and trying to marginalize the movements. Can I just ask you briefly about um the Mayday protests um and I think that um globalized resistance did have some
02:22:49 globalized resistance did have some involvement in the Mayday protests in the years 2002 to 2004. Is that right? Yeah. Um the there's a document MPS
02:23:00 Yeah. Um the there's a document MPS 00008385
02:23:02 00008385 at tab B14 of the bundle that's dated the 25th of March 2002 which concerns an open planning meeting for the globalized
02:23:13 open planning meeting for the globalized resistance Mayday committee. Um and it sets out that uh privacy a steering committee member and you chaired the meeting. And then I just
02:23:24 chaired the meeting. And then I just want to look at uh the paragraph uh just above the source comment which says uh Ninham
02:23:36 the source comment which says uh Ninham opened his address with the somewhat controversial gambit that rioting works.
02:23:44 Um did you say something along those lines at this meeting in 2002? I have absolutely no idea. I doubt it. Um, I suspect that if I did
02:23:59 Um, I suspect that if I did what I it was probably a bit of a joke because I think what I was referring what I might have been referring to was the fact that um what happened in uh in
02:24:10 the fact that um what happened in uh in the following Mayday the sub the Mayday demonstration immediately after this meeting that we were planning was um or what had just happened was that the the
02:24:21 what had just happened was that the the the authorities had actually agreed for the first time uh since the kind of more controversial kettled protest that we could have a um Mayday demonstration
02:24:35 could have a um Mayday demonstration uh during the week on Mayday itself that was um that was allowed. So in that sense I may have meant okay what happened at the previous ones has made
02:24:46 happened at the previous ones has made the police think again and actually allow something that is now legitimate. So if I said that, which I I'm really not sure if I did, that is what I would have meant. And it's important you weren't proposing a riot at these
02:24:58 you weren't proposing a riot at these the exact opposite. What I was saying is, isn't it good that the police have been forced to back off and allow there to be what turned out to be a massive peaceful uh Mayday anti- capitalist
02:25:09 peaceful uh Mayday anti- capitalist protest that year?
02:25:16 Uh can we look at one more report about Mayday, please? this time from 2004. MPS 0034504
02:25:25 0034504 at tab B99.
02:25:30 And uh this report on May Mayday uh the one at the bottom uh says Chris Ninham is keen to spice things up a bit in the immediate runup to the annual Mayday
02:25:42 immediate runup to the annual Mayday March uh this year. Uh it goes into the reasons uh he's keen to live up to the reputation that globalized resistance brings to the annual workers march that of being a radical activist organization
02:25:56 of being a radical activist organization rather than one that simply marches from A to B and it will satisfy those grassroots activists that are keen to engage in a little direct action. He has suggested a picket and occupation of either the flagship Nike Town store or
02:26:09 either the flagship Nike Town store or one of the big Gap clothes shops on Oxford Street in the hours before the march assembles. Um, how accurate is this report? Were you keen to spice things up a bit? And what do you
02:26:20 things up a bit? And what do you understand that to mean here? I I I to be honest with you, I can't remember whether this is true or not. And given that Wellings has a certain um um ability to twist the truth, I I
02:26:32 um ability to twist the truth, I I wouldn't like to say. However, even if it is true, I' it's not exactly um a um a suggestion of
02:26:43 it's not exactly um a um a suggestion of criminality on our part. What he claims I was suggesting was a picket and possible occupation of a of a store on Oxford Street before the March
02:26:54 on Oxford Street before the March assembles. Again, this is nonviolent direct action that may or may not have been being proposed. This is civil disobedience. This is well within the law and is certainly not proposing any
02:27:05 law and is certainly not proposing any kind of violence or or really disorder or damage to property for that matter. Thank you. Um I want to ask you very briefly about um subversion. Um do you
02:27:19 briefly about um subversion. Um do you consider that the aims and objectives any of the three groups that you were involved in or led involved um subversive action? No.
02:27:29 No. Or intention? No.
02:27:31 No. Um in this context, what do you understand subversion to mean? Well, I suppose it can mean quite a lot of things, but but in ter in general terms, I guess it means the kind of um
02:27:42 terms, I guess it means the kind of um it means the kind of some sort of secretive
02:27:47 secretive plan to infiltrate institutions or topple the state by small numbers of people or some such kind of political strategy.
02:27:58 strategy. And none of the groups that you were involved in would have had the um that as a name or objective. You gave some evidence earlier about particularly the SWP being a democratic organization.
02:28:09 SWP being a democratic organization. Were the other two also um pro-democracy and democratic organizations? democratic organizations that recognize and particularly in the case of the SWP recognize the limitations actually of
02:28:21 recognize the limitations actually of democracy as it exists currently and recognize and believe that democracy should be massively expanded and that one of the problems of the society we live in is that ordinary people have too
02:28:32 live in is that ordinary people have too little control over the world uh and over their own lives and that really what what a socialist and a Marxist approach here is to say we need much more democracy not less. And actually,
02:28:45 more democracy not less. And actually, sorry to go on, but just to say that the real uh threat to democracy at the moment, it seems to me, comes from again corporate power, but also various forms of authoritarianism, and that the
02:28:56 of authoritarianism, and that the tradition of the of the left is to say we defend democracy against those threats, but also seek to extend it. Thank you. Um, in relation to the
02:29:08 Thank you. Um, in relation to the steering committee of globalized resistance, um, you say at paragraph 7.3, page 31 of your statement that, um, Simon Wellings was elected to your
02:29:20 Simon Wellings was elected to your steering committee. Um, and you say that this is significant as it demonstrates how deeply embedded he became within the organization. And it also aligns with a broader and more troubling pattern where
02:29:32 broader and more troubling pattern where the SDS managers appear to encourage or even facilitate UCOs's assuming leadership or influential roles within activists groups. Um, we know, we don't
02:29:43 activists groups. Um, we know, we don't need to bring it up, but from NPS0018972
02:29:47 tab B67 that he was elected to the steering committee at the 2003 annual conference. Um what he says about this at paragraph 112 at page 41 of his
02:30:01 this at paragraph 112 at page 41 of his witness statement MPS0748847
02:30:05 is that um my election to the steering committee of GR that is referred to in my rule report apparently dated the 12th of May 2003 was wholly unremarkable in many
02:30:16 was wholly unremarkable in many respects. Many of the activists were surprised that I was not already a member when this fact became apparent at the steering committee meeting that preceded the annual conference. As is clear from the final page of the report,
02:30:27 clear from the final page of the report, the election was a rubber stamp exercise and even individuals who were not present were uh unanimously elected by the conference.
02:30:38 the conference. Um,
02:30:41 Um, do you have uh he he also goes on to say in paragraph 113 at pages 41 to 42 um that given the size of the GR steering committee and the fact that Guy
02:30:53 steering committee and the fact that Guy Taylor and Chris Ninham were taking their orders from the SWP central committee in any event, I had no influence on proceedings. Um, do you have any comment about those two
02:31:04 have any comment about those two statements by uh Simon Wellings? I mean, not really. It just he calls it a rubber stamping. I call it an election. I mean, um, and it obviously
02:31:16 election. I mean, um, and it obviously did mean that he was seeking to be influential within the very fact that he put himself forward shows he was seeking to play an active role in the leadership. Um, I think I've dealt with the taking orders from the SWP steering
02:31:29 the taking orders from the SWP steering um, central committee. I mean, I was on the central committee, so I couldn't really take orders from it. We had debates about as I said before what to do within the organization and um and
02:31:41 do within the organization and um and and we did our best to carry them out. Would would he as part of the steering committee had an opportunity to influence um policy and strategy? Yes. Um I think you say at paragraph
02:31:54 Yes. Um I think you say at paragraph 10.3
02:31:55 10.3 um that the steering committee of your statement that the steering committee was crucial in directing global resistance's work and also that um it decided our campaigning priorities
02:32:07 decided our campaigning priorities discussed what we should prioritize and reflected on the broader political situation. So was he influential in those uh ways on the steering committee?
02:32:18 those uh ways on the steering committee? I think he was trying to be and as I say he was someone who pursued quite single-mindedly appeared to be pursuing a particular or prom or or arguing for a particular type of approach which was
02:32:30 particular type of approach which was more direct actiony and and so on. So I think he was trying to be whether he had that much influence in reality is is another question because I think um I
02:32:41 another question because I think um I don't think he was a particularly eloquent sort of you know um operator. I don't think he had I mean I always thought he had I always found him a bit of an odd character I have to say
02:32:52 of an odd character I have to say because I didn't think he had very much politics and obviously now now I know why. Um so I'm not sure that he was really that influential but he was obviously trying to be that's why he stood for the um for the steering
02:33:05 stood for the um for the steering committee and also he was someone who hung around the office loads. I mean, he tried to make himself indispensable by coming into the office and volunteering. I'd say probably more than
02:33:17 I'd say probably more than possibly more than almost anyone else. He was in the office. He was working. He was wanting to be there. Thank you. Um I just want to deal with one particular point that you raise in your witness statement that you're
02:33:30 your witness statement that you're concerned about. Um there is a report um MPS 0032025 at tab B97
02:33:41 at tab B97 um and this um attaches it's a report um by Simon Wellings to uh his office and it attaches the globalized resistance membership list and you um it includes a
02:33:54 membership list and you um it includes a password um and you say in your uh statement that that uh paragraph of 7.5 to 7.6 at page 32 that you're very concerned about the contents of this
02:34:06 concerned about the contents of this report and the fact that the membership list was passed by Mr. Wellings to um the police. Um you go on to say um at paragraph 7.6 page 33 that even more
02:34:18 paragraph 7.6 page 33 that even more disturbing than attaching the membership list is the implication suggested by this report that Simon Wellings unlawfully took items belonging to globalized resistance. Um, you say this
02:34:31 globalized resistance. Um, you say this UCO not only violated internal confidentiality but committed theft in the service of political policing and that that's an abuse of power. Um, what are you referring to when you talk about
02:34:43 are you referring to when you talk about um him committing theft there? Well, I mean I think to be honest with you, I think the the whole question of taking the membership list is absolutely shocking. Um, we've discussed the kind
02:34:56 shocking. Um, we've discussed the kind of organization that Global Blood Resistance was, but uh for for an undercover police officer to be um taking away membership lists of organizations is has uh really serious
02:35:09 organizations is has uh really serious implications which you know could include the blacklisting or the potential. So, it's about data. It's about data more than anything. Yeah.
02:35:20 Yeah. Thank you. Um there are a number of reports um on you and other members of Globalized Resistance that report um private
02:35:31 Resistance that report um private personal information that you think was unnecessary. Um I don't need to go to um all of them but for your reference there MPS 0036507
02:35:43 MPS 0036507 at tab B 112 and MPS 00008521 at tab B20. Uh, and then this one please. MPS
02:35:54 Uh, and then this one please. MPS 00008805
02:35:57 00008805 at tab 30 which reports your new mobile number. Um, and um, how you came to be offered an upgrade and what your handset was like. Do you have any further
02:36:08 was like. Do you have any further comment on that report? Apart from a sense of kind of anger and outrage really that that police time and resources and should be spent on
02:36:20 resources and should be spent on presumably bugging my phone or at least trying to find ways to intercept my messages is an outrageous infringement of my civil liberties as a
02:36:32 infringement of my civil liberties as a as a as an individual and a political political organizer. So only that um you detail at paragraph 7.11 at pages 35 and 36 of your statement a number of
02:36:46 35 and 36 of your statement a number of different reports that contain personal information such as addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, places of work and and other personal details of private lives of activists. And you also
02:36:59 private lives of activists. And you also um comment that there were reports on uh social events for example at MPS 00008390
02:37:08 00008390 at tab B17 and MPS 00009843 at tab B41 of the bundle and I just want to get your general views now about the
02:37:19 to get your general views now about the the level of intrusion into the private lives of you and other activists by Simon Wellings. Well, that in itself is all of these examples are in themselves
02:37:31 all of these examples are in themselves shocking and they are as you say a a breach of privacy, a gross breach of privacy. But in a way, what is even worse
02:37:40 worse is
02:37:42 is to think about why they were being why this information was being extracted. And one of the things about the the the tape um message that eventually
02:37:53 tape um message that eventually uncovered Simon Wellings is that he was in the process of talking to presumably his his handler, his manager about personal relationships, not political
02:38:04 personal relationships, not political things entirely, but personal relationships between different members of globalized resistance. Presumably, one can only assume this is information that is being considered to be used as a
02:38:16 that is being considered to be used as a way of I don't know as a way of disrupting the organization or or or kind of um causing you know deliberate disorganization,
02:38:28 disorganization, potential tensions and so on and so forth. I can't see what other possible reason there would be to pass this information on. So this is an insight into the real role that is being played by Simon Wennings here. In my opinion,
02:38:40 by Simon Wennings here. In my opinion, it's not just about information gathering. It's not about criminality. It's about finding ways to undermine a legitimate legal political organization.
02:38:51 legitimate legal political organization. Thank you. That could be taken down now, please. Um you mentioned the discovery um that uh Simon Wellings was an undercover police officer and the inquiry is very familiar with how that
02:39:03 inquiry is very familiar with how that came about and has heard evidence about it. But um just dealing briefly with your discovery of it and and reaction to it. Um you discovered that he was um an undercover police officer when the
02:39:15 undercover police officer when the member of Globalized Resistance who uh he had accidentally called and then recorded on the answer phone him reporting to the SDS information on Globalized Resistance members and
02:39:26 Globalized Resistance members and brought that that person brought the tape into the office. Is that right? Yeah.
02:39:30 Yeah. And you listened to the tape a number of times I think with other Globalized Resistance members. Is that right? Yeah. Um, did you immediately recognize it to be Simon Wellings as that person
02:39:41 it to be Simon Wellings as that person on the tape? We weren't sure for quite a long time. I must have listened to it 30 or 40 times myself and I think others even more because it was quite indistinct. And and how did you come to then accept that it
02:39:54 how did you come to then accept that it it was indeed him and that he was an undercover police officer really just because um we listened to it so many times and kind of narrowed it down um and I mean even when he was
02:40:09 down um and I mean even when he was confronted and I wasn't there when he was confronted I guess there was an element of doubt in people's minds but we felt we had enough it was kind of clear enough to at least confront
02:40:20 clear enough to at least confront confront him with the the information and see how he reacted. We felt we didn't have a choice because clearly it was someone and it was someone close to the heart of globalized resistance. So
02:40:32 the heart of globalized resistance. So it had to be dealt with and we decided on the balance of probability it was him.
02:40:37 him. Um and when you'd come to accept that um what was your reaction? How how did you feel about it? I was really shocked. I mean given the kind of organization that globalized resistance was I wouldn't say I'm naive about the role that the police play in
02:40:48 about the role that the police play in society but nevertheless I was amazed that uh resources would be spent on and and time and and energy would be spent on getting into this organization whose
02:40:59 on getting into this organization whose every move was completely public um that was an open democratic organization with big open public meetings and so on and so forth that plan no illegality no criminality. I was
02:41:12 plan no illegality no criminality. I was really shocked and I and I was shocked and I in a way the thing that that sticks with me is a sense of okay if they're prepared to do this what what are the limits what are actually
02:41:24 what are the limits what are actually the limits of what the police are supposed to do? Um, and I felt a sense of, you know, I mean, as I say, I'm not I'm not I'm not naive about the police, but I think that on the one hand, we're
02:41:35 but I think that on the one hand, we're having these negotiations with them about what we, you know, what how to organize demonstrations, which appear to be in good faith. On the other hand with you know
02:41:46 you know they are at the same time trying to manipulate not just not just spy on but actually manipulate our organization as I came to understand
02:41:57 I came to understand for it to do things that are illegal or or move towards the possibility of illegality. So, you know, it's a it's quite a moment when you when you realize that in reality. I mean, I know you see
02:42:09 that in reality. I mean, I know you see it in films and stuff and you kind of maybe think that it happens, but when it when it's in front of you, it's quite a a shocking moment. Thank you. Um, paragraph 8.8, page 44 of
02:42:21 Thank you. Um, paragraph 8.8, page 44 of your witness statement, you say that many UCOs have exaggerated the danger they were in from activists, and you point out that no one really went near Simon Wellings once it was discovered he
02:42:32 Simon Wellings once it was discovered he was a UCO. And this was even the case when you knew about it, but he'd not finished his deployment and he was still around as Simon Wellings. Um, did you see him at all again after the
02:42:44 see him at all again after the discovery? Never.
02:42:46 Never. Um, in your view, was he ever at risk any risk from anyone in any of the three organizations you were involved in? No. And if you'd known the people who met up with him and confronted him,
02:42:58 met up with him and confronted him, you'd realize why. I mean some of them even after he broke down apparently and started crying and in that meeting and so on and so forth some of them still believed that actually m still doubted
02:43:10 believed that actually m still doubted that he was an undercover police officer and I think met up with him afterwards and had lunch with him and felt sorry for him. I mean you know the idea that anyone was going to do anything throw him into the temps or something is is a
02:43:22 him into the temps or something is is a is a joke really. No. And you you point out that um the SDS's own document at MPS0526830 tab B90 of the bundle. We don't need to
02:43:34 tab B90 of the bundle. We don't need to bring it up, but that considered the risk of physical injury uh to him to be uh low.
02:43:43 uh low. Uh I just want to um finally ask you about a little bit more about um the impact of uh that this has uh had upon you um at paragraphs 12.3 to 12.4 pages
02:43:58 you um at paragraphs 12.3 to 12.4 pages 51 to 52 of your witness statement um which deals with the effect and impact on you and other globalized resistance particularly members of finding out he was a ECO. say there was disbelief
02:44:10 was a ECO. say there was disbelief initially and then um betrayal. Um do do you still feel like that that you were betrayed? Yeah, I definitely do feel a sense of
02:44:21 Yeah, I definitely do feel a sense of personal betrayal. I think it's very odd to be relatively close to someone who you kind of realized suddenly was um you know in a way a fictional character and
02:44:32 know in a way a fictional character and that's in itself a disturbing thing. I know many people have been through much worse experiences, but it definitely had an impact not just on me, but on people around us. But I think there's other
02:44:43 around us. But I think there's other things too. I think there's, as I say, a sense of um there's a sense of of of doubt that is thrown on the way in which
02:44:55 doubt that is thrown on the way in which uh official society is relating to what is a a legitimate protest movement. Um, and I think it inevitably had on many people a kind of
02:45:07 had on many people a kind of radicalizing effect because it makes you feel uh it makes you feel paranoid. It makes you feel uh it's it's disorientating, disturbing, but it also makes you feel okay. So we're living in
02:45:19 makes you feel okay. So we're living in a society in which state institutions are um
02:45:26 are um in a in a way which at least internally in the police force and so forth is known about are being weaponized in very very sinister and disturbing ways to spy
02:45:37 very sinister and disturbing ways to spy on um organizations and and it's very important I think in terms of thinking about the impact that this has had to for to to reflect on what the purpose of
02:45:50 for to to reflect on what the purpose of Simon Welling's um uh uh engagement was because I don't think it was mainly about spying because really this information as I think I hope I've
02:46:01 information as I think I hope I've established has been fairly worthless in terms of avoiding any kind of criminality or or any such uh any such behavior. what it's about. It seems to
02:46:12 behavior. what it's about. It seems to me I can only draw the conclusion is as I've say as I say starting to helping to generate a false narrative about what various movement and organizations and
02:46:23 various movement and organizations and campaigns are really about. Providing false evidence that can be used by the police and possibly wider forces to to demonize and criminalize these
02:46:34 demonize and criminalize these movements. But most disturbingly of all, it seems to me to disrupt and even potentially sabotage because I think the fact that uh that I've obviously ever
02:46:46 fact that uh that I've obviously ever since this uh the whole thing happened, I've I've become to believe that that Simon Wings was trying to make us do things that we weren't automatically going to do and trying to make us go
02:46:57 going to do and trying to make us go closer to criminality and therefore cause problems for the organization potentially of all different kinds. But also one of the things that really struck me in reading some of the material here is the particularly the
02:47:09 material here is the particularly the final note um that was that I think was circulated. Yes, I I think I know the one you mean. Shall we go to it? MPS 0000 362
02:47:21 Shall we go to it? MPS 0000 362 uh
02:47:22 uh 65 at page three please. Um sir this is um not in Mr. Numm's bundle but is in HM118's bundle at tab
02:47:33 bundle but is in HM118's bundle at tab B68
02:47:35 B68 and it's the second bullet point down I'd like to look at this is so that we orient ourselves um the file note um written by DCI Michael Dell after the
02:47:46 written by DCI Michael Dell after the discovery um after Simon Wellings had been outed as it were as a UCO by members of of globalized resistance and under a heading that's on the previous
02:47:57 under a heading that's on the previous page entitled now onwards Bullet point two um on this page three says consider with C squad whether we should um leave GR intact or through RW mount a
02:48:11 GR intact or through RW mount a destructive operation. Is that what you were referring to a moment ago? and and so what's your concern about the um the object objective of um Simon Welling's
02:48:24 object objective of um Simon Welling's depo deployment in terms of um disrupt a destructive operation. Well, that is the the note that I was referring to. Um I mean I think that
02:48:36 referring to. Um I mean I think that that
02:48:38 that uh bullet point barely needs any commentary. I mean whether or not that was what Simon Wellings was up to that point doing it's quite clear and this is
02:48:50 point doing it's quite clear and this is presumably written by someone senior in the SDS or someone with oversight of the SDS who is discussing how to respond to a change situation in terms of an undercover operation that he could even
02:49:04 undercover operation that he could even suggest
02:49:06 suggest in a very casual way different options and one of them being mount a destructive operation against globalized resistance. So this isn't about
02:49:17 resistance. So this isn't about surveillance just this isn't about spying just this isn't even about just demonization. This is clearly about putting people into organizations who at
02:49:29 putting people into organizations who at least have the potential or the capacity to in this in his words destroy them. um what that actually might have meant in practice, who knows? I know that Simon
02:49:40 practice, who knows? I know that Simon Wellings carried on having um meetings with various people even after he was outed who didn't necessarily who thought that myself and others including Guy who who who uncovered him were being too
02:49:52 who who uncovered him were being too harsh or whatever. Um maybe he was trying to create divisions or or whatever. But it seems to me that this document makes it absolutely crystal clear that at least potentially what
02:50:05 clear that at least potentially what this operation was about was could have been um an intervention in a legal organization in order to destroy it. And I find that deeply sinister, deeply
02:50:16 I find that deeply sinister, deeply troubling. Uh and as I say, I think all of these events have the effect actually apart from anything else of making people feel very very alienated from state institutions. very very concerned
02:50:28 state institutions. very very concerned about the future of democracy uh and and to have a sense that there's something going on under the surface of society that is really very toxic and very dangerous.
02:50:39 very dangerous. Thank you. Um those are all the questions I have for you Mr. Ninham. Is there anything else um you wish to add? Um
02:50:50 Um no I don't think there is. I'm very grateful sir. I don't think there are any rule tens, but would you rise briefly so that I can confirm and to see if there's any re-examination? Certainly. Um before I rise, I do have a
02:51:02 Certainly. Um before I rise, I do have a question of you and I'd be grateful for your assistance. Um can we take the 20th of November 2003 uh demonstration when 300,000 people
02:51:14 uh demonstration when 300,000 people marched from central London to Trafalga Square via White Hall. Um, you were a chief steward there. Uh, as I
02:51:25 you were a chief steward there. Uh, as I have understood your evidence, one of the things that you did was to notify the police about the forthcoming demonstration. You nod your head. I'm afraid that go on
02:51:37 You nod your head. I'm afraid that go on a trans question. It's a question. Um, not just notify the police. We had serial meetings with the police before the demonstration. We had a big negotiation about the route and as I say
02:51:48 negotiation about the route and as I say we had a in the weeks before we had a very very public dispute about whether or not the demonstration was to be allowed down whiteall. Um which included by the way a kind of a
02:52:01 Um which included by the way a kind of a press conference outside Scotland Yard with a hundred journalists um you know it became a kind of in a minor way a sort of call to should they be allowed to go past Downing Street
02:52:12 be allowed to go past Downing Street when George Bush was in London. So yeah, very detailed negotiations with the police on all aspects of the demo. And is that with uniform police
02:52:23 And is that with uniform police um yes
02:52:26 um yes with senior police officers and and police at all different levels in inerson meetings in Scotland Yard. I I don't know whether you can remember now uh at what level of rank the police
02:52:38 now uh at what level of rank the police officers were with whom you spoke. I don't know but very senior because this was as I say I mean the police themselves told us that one of the reason well that the reason why they
02:52:51 reason well that the reason why they were
02:52:53 were trying to disallow us from going down white is that they've been asked by the CIA that we shouldn't be able to go that we shouldn't march past um Downing
02:53:04 we shouldn't march past um Downing Street when George Bush was visiting. What actually happened was they relented and let us through and then George Bush's time uh agenda was switched though he wasn't actually there as it happened but yeah these were very the
02:53:16 happened but yeah these were very the high level meetings that were reported in national newspapers um and that took place at Scotland Yard with senior officers and what if any communications did you
02:53:28 and what if any communications did you have with uh the police officers controlling the march or generators was observing it. Um what if any communication did you
02:53:39 it. Um what if any communication did you have with them on the day regular? I mean when we started to form up in the morning the police would have come over to us and talked to us about
02:53:50 come over to us and talked to us about just checked everything was all right. there was a kind of there's normally a police liaison person and I specifically as I I think I said in my what I was saying earlier is that there was a certain level of tension on the day
02:54:03 certain level of tension on the day partly no doubt because the CIA were on their case and George Bush was in town but also maybe because of Simon Welling's false um intelligence that we were going to do
02:54:15 um intelligence that we were going to do something other than what we said we were going to do. Um, and it was quite tense in folks and I remember getting I think from the bronze commander I was getting call phone calls every 15
02:54:28 getting call phone calls every 15 minutes say is everything all right you know whatever I think they um they were very very jumpy for absolutely no reason.
02:54:40 reason. Thank you. We now have a process as always when there's a short break to enable any questions to be put to council to the inquiry and if she thinks it right to
02:54:51 inquiry and if she thinks it right to put to you and there may be re-examination but it won't be long. Thank you sir.
02:58:14 Thank you sir. There are no rule 10 questions. Um but there is one short point on re-examination. Of course, Mr. Nam, this is a question arising from the chair's question that he just asked. um the George Bush
02:58:25 he just asked. um the George Bush demonstration when you had these pre-demonstration meetings with senior police officers uh did you give them an indication of the likely number of
02:58:36 indication of the likely number of demonstrators who would be coming? Yeah,
02:58:43 Yeah, as always, we had a discussion about um what we thought was going to happen. And funny enough, as I remember um we had to try and persuade the police
02:58:57 um we had to try and persuade the police that it was going to be as big as it was. Um I think because it was a weekday demonstration, which is very rare to have big weekday demonstrations. In fact, it turned out to be the biggest weekday demonstration on any subject in
02:59:10 weekday demonstration on any subject in British history. Um, and we obviously because we're the organizers, we know how many coaches are coming. We're getting a sense of it. And we were sort of saying to them, they were like slightly skeptical. We were saying, "No,
02:59:21 slightly skeptical. We were saying, "No, this is going to be absolutely huge." And, you know, we we do really want you to understand that. And partly that had a that had a kind of
02:59:33 a that had a kind of a relevance to the whole debate about White Hall because what we were saying to the police was funny enough in direct contradiction to what Simon Weddings said. We were saying to the police look
02:59:45 said. We were saying to the police look if you don't let us go down White Hall you're effectively stopping the march happening because there's no other route to get up to Trafalago Square that's practical. So you're talking about a
02:59:56 practical. So you're talking about a really big crisis here, not involving a few thousand activists, but involving really large numbers of people, a bit like there had been over hide park in the February earlier in the year. So we
03:00:07 the February earlier in the year. So we were saying if you don't let us down white hall then we are moving into territory which actually we don't want to move into which is that people may feel that you know they have to do
03:00:20 feel that you know they have to do something about a restriction on uh our right to protest. So that was a that was a a robust discussion shall we say which spilled over as I say into a public campaign and we were saying no this is
03:00:31 campaign and we were saying no this is going to be massive really believe us because really this war is very very unpopular. It was just as the war was really starting to become um you know at the beginning of the war there was a
03:00:42 the beginning of the war there was a little bit of a kind of back our boys suddenly there was by this stage people realized what a disaster it was. So so yeah that was the argument that we had with the police actually about about numbers and um I have to say we turned
03:00:55 numbers and um I have to say we turned out to be right. Thank you very much. No further questions. May I thank you as I do all who have attended voluntarily as you have. Uh
03:01:07 attended voluntarily as you have. Uh you've um informed me person who's never been on a political demonstration in his life a bit about um how these things work. I'm very grateful to you for doing so and also for the evidence that you've
03:01:18 so and also for the evidence that you've given about undercover policing. Thanks very much. Thank you. We will resume on Monday with the evidence of Emily Apple. Uh I'm hope we
03:01:31 evidence of Emily Apple. Uh I'm hope we will start at 10. Uh I cannot say for certain precisely what form the evidence will take or how it will be transmitted if at all. That remains to be seen in the light of how the Zapple feels on the
03:01:45 the light of how the Zapple feels on the morning and on the day. Thank you sir. Thank you all.