Forums › Rave › Free Parties & Teknivals › SaveTheRaveSide
Original Parliamentary Discussion
All Commons debates on 19 Jul 2007 « Previous debate
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn. —[Ms Diana R. Johnson.]
Add your comment
6:00 pm
Christopher Fraser (South West Norfolk, Conservative) Link to this | Hansard source
I am most grateful for the opportunity to raise concern about unlicensed music events known as raves, which are causing huge distress, damage and expense in my constituency. Throughout the summer months they have become a regular feature, and in the past few weeks, residents in Marham, Narborough and Cockley Cley have suffered. Unlicensed music events are hugely profitable to the organisers, and they have nothing to do with the altruistic values of young people. They are a product of a get-rich quick formula that tramples on the rural economy. Costs are minimised, no tax is paid, and there is no regard for anyone or anything but the profit made.
There are plenty of first-class licensed music venues in Norfolk, where events can be held legitimately and safely. I spent a memorable evening last summer with my family at a concert in Thetford forest. The event was extremely well managed by the Forestry Commission; excellent arrangements for public safety, public facilities, car parking, sound and lighting showed just how such events can be staged legitimately. Why should local people put up with unlicensed events on their land if all they amount to is a money-raising exercise for the organisers? Lawbreakers are getting rich at the expense of others, which in itself is criminal, in my opinion.
Constituents tell me that they were terrified by the experience of having up to 1,000 people on their property or near their home, and said how disgusted they were by the litter, human waste and excrement and drug paraphernalia, including needles, left behind after a rave. The Government have a duty to protect the law-abiding majority from the antisocial behaviour of others, and while I am conscious of the rules relating to Adjournment debates, I would like to devote a large proportion of this evening’s debate to the shortcomings of the current legislation, and ask the Minister to consider the situation. I do not seek draconian powers that would affect private parties. I know that recent changes have made it easier to disrupt illegal raves, but the reality is that current regulations are not effective deterrents and do not achieve what I believe the objectives of the police should be.
Legislation is geared towards the termination of a rave. Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 allows the police to instruct rave-goers to leave an event. However, unless substantial numbers of police officers are quickly mustered, without notice, in rural areas at night, it is extremely difficult and potentially dangerous to try to end a party already in full swing. One journalist in the national press described the effects of an attempt by police to break up an illegal rave last year:
“Two hundred riot police from five counties dispersed the 1,000 party goers. During the clashes a police car was set on fire and nine officers were wounded, with injuries to police including a suspected broken collarbone and a severed finger. At least two revellers were also injured. Thirty people were arrested and released on bail.”
Given this risk, police have to judge whether intervention is realistic. In many cases, they can do little more than monitor the event, and the organisers of the raves rely on that fact. They know that they will get away with it; that is why it is such good business for them. It appears that the organisers of the Marham event arranged for motorcyclists to help move their mobile equipment en route to the event. They also had heavies present, wearing hoods and balaclavas. The police attended but soon withdrew when it became clear that they could only monitor what was going on.
It often seems to the public that the police are not doing all they can to prevent a rave, but the site of the party is often revealed only a few hours or minutes beforehand, specifically so that the police have no time to act. That means that the law relating to the prohibition of “trespass assemblies”, which requires an application to the district council for a prohibition order, cannot be applied. The police have the power to direct people away from a rave in a five-mile radius of the site, but in the maze of country lanes that criss-cross Norfolk, that would demand huge numbers of police and is not workable.
In practice, the principal offence is:
“Failing to leave the site of a rave as soon as reasonable, once directed to do so.”
Again, Norfolk constabulary simply does not have the resources to round up and arrest hundreds of young people who have no intention of leaving. Does the Minister agree that it would be helpful to make attendance at a rave an offence? What about an offence of organising, or being involved in organising, an event?
I am also concerned that the law focuses on single events. It does not pave the way to prosecuting persistent organisers or serial rave-goers. Power to confiscate equipment relates only to the failure to leave today’s event, and is not retrospective. Norfolk constabulary told me:
“Because the legislation is aimed at stopping an event, interrogating and possibly arresting people leaving a site at the end of a rave is not within the spirit of the law.”
Does the Minister agree that the ability to gather vital intelligence about regular rave-goers, the identity of the organisers or plans for future raves would be hugely helpful to the policing process? Would not it give the police a fighting chance of making progress?
What about the impact of such events on local people? Current legislation suggests that the only disruption caused by a rave comes from music which,
“by reason of its loudness and duration and the time at which it is played, is likely to cause serious distress to the inhabitants of the locality.”
Although I do not underestimate the disturbance that continuous loud music causes, the illegal gatherings have other, equally distressing effects on local communities.
The presence of hundreds of people and vehicles in rural areas can cause terrible damage to farmers’ fields, livestock and crops. We must not forget that when those are damaged, that has an impact on the livelihood of farmers going about their legitimate businesses. A farmer in my constituency recently wrote to me, saying:
“to protect my pigs from party-goers, I had to be present on my field from 3.30 in the morning until 8 o’clock the following night. On one occasion when I left for 5 minutes, I returned to find 4 men chasing them around their pens.”
Is it any wonder that he was devastated to discover that the law appears to be on the side of the party-goers rather than on his side?
I have been advised that section 63 powers cannot be enforced in remote rural locations where there are only a few local residents. The law requires
“serious distress to be caused to the inhabitants of the locality.”
That seems unfair—one law for urban areas and another for the countryside. It also suggests that a rave in the countryside is acceptable because only a few people suffer. Like my constituents, I take exception to that principle.
As the excellent Norfolk Farmwatch organisation told me, a small number of residents in a remote location can feel even more vulnerable than those in a village or town. I know of one elderly couple in my constituency who barricaded themselves into their isolated home for more than 12 hours while 1,000 revellers passed within feet of their front door. Two weeks later that couple were still trying to clear up the debris left in their barn. In a civilised society, how can the law ignore such people?
The existing criteria also fail to take account of the significant distress or damage caused to wildlife and plant life. Under section 28P(6) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, it is an offence to “intentionally or recklessly” destroy or damage any of the features of a site of special scientific interest, but only if the person knows that they are within an SSSI. Most rave-goers will be entirely ignorant of the existence of an SSSI and will therefore not be liable for any damage that they cause, no matter how serious. Why should ignorance be a factor? Natural England and the Countryside Council for Wales both have powers to make byelaws under section 28R of the 1981 Act for
“the protection of a site of special scientific interest.”
As far as I can determine, the power is rarely if ever used to control the harm caused by ravers. I should be interested to hear the Minister’s comments on that.
It is true that a number of rave organisers have been successfully prosecuted, but there is concern about the leniency of their sentences, which give those making huge profits little incentive to give up their business. There is an urgent need to review maximum sentences and even to elevate such offences from the magistrates court to the Crown court. Those found guilty face three months’ imprisonment or a fine of up to £2,500. A Crown court could impose sentences twice as severe. Such a move would reflect the seriousness with which the Government view such crimes. Should the fines imposed take into account the cost of clearing up the site? Yes, they should. Many local landowners have spent thousands of pounds clearing their land with no help from anyone—yet another illustration of the imbalance that the rural economy has to fight.
The final issue that I want to raise is licensing. Norfolk constabulary and our local councils have told me that the Licensing Act 2003 could unintentionally facilitate raves, because it is possible to submit a temporary event notice application. The police then have just 48 hours to object, but objections can be lodged on only crime and disorder grounds. There is a view that the prospect of excessive noise might not be sufficient for the council to refuse the application. The 48-hour limit could be a particular problem if the application is delivered to a rural, largely unmanned police station on a Friday afternoon. If a licence application is granted, the benefit to the police is that it would bear the name of the organiser, against whom charges could be brought for noise and other disturbance. That in itself is reason enough for rave organisers to continue to hold unlicensed illegal events.
In conclusion, the problem of raves continues, despite recent changes in legislation. Far from the perception that the police are not using existing powers, it seems that they are in part prevented from acting because of legislative constraints. We will dissuade people from holding and supporting illegal gatherings only if the Government show that they are serious in their intent and provide an effective deterrent. I have known the Minister as a fellow parliamentarian for some time, and he has been honourable and fair in all my dealings with him. I hope that he will give an assurance to local landowners and others in constituencies such as mine throughout the country that they have a right to protection against these illegal events.
Add your comment
6:14 pm
Photo of Vernon Coaker Vernon Coaker (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Home Office) Link to this | Hansard source
I congratulate the hon. Member for South-West Norfolk (Mr. Fraser) on securing this Adjournment debate on illegal raves. It is an extremely important matter, and he made his points in his usual dignified, concise and intelligent way. His constituents will know that he has raised this issue with me on a number of occasions, and he is standing up for them by raising what is an important issue not only for the people of Norfolk but for those in other parts of the country. The debate relates specifically to his constituency, but it will have a broader impact as well. I congratulate him on his work on trying to secure a benefit for his constituents that could affect other citizens of this country. I hope that I shall answer all his questions in the course of my speech, but if I appear to be reaching the end without having done so, he may wish to intervene.
I am aware of rave events occurring in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency this year, and I share his anxiety that they should not become an opportunity or an excuse for disorder, antisocial activity, criminality or behaviour that intimidates and alienates members of local communities. Nor should those events facilitate illicit drug cultures, with which they have also been associated. I also realise that the effects of raves are not limited to the duration of the event itself. These gatherings can cause traffic congestion to small and wholly unsuited roads, and also lead to the depositing of huge quantities of rubbish, ruining local residents’ surroundings.
I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the Home Office is committed to tackling criminality and antisocial behaviour, whatever form it takes. I welcome this opportunity to discuss raves, to outline the relevant legislation, and to update Members on the concerted efforts being made by the police to tackle the problem. We regard it as an extremely important matter that deserves our full attention.
I shall begin with the relevant legislation. The police are equipped with a number of powers specifically to deal with raves in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Following close liaison with the police on the changing nature of raves, that legislation was further updated in the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003. The police have powers to direct 20 or more rave-goers to leave an event. They also have pre-emptive powers to direct two or more persons preparing for a rave to leave land. It is a criminal offence to ignore those directions. The police also have powers to seize vehicles or sound equipment, and to direct people away from a gathering that has already been prohibited.
The hon. Gentleman and his constituents should also be aware that those successfully convicted may receive three months imprisonment or a fine. We always keep those matters under review, and I take his point about the need for sentencing to send out a message of deterrence to people who choose to ignore the law. Regarding enforcement, in the years from 2001 to 2005, 15 persons were prosecuted for failing to leave land when directed. Five of them were convicted. Also, three persons were prosecuted for failing to comply with a direction not to proceed in the direction of a rave, and one person was convicted. I repeat that we want the police to deal robustly with those events and, indeed, that we want the courts to support the police in their work.
It is not just legislation specific to raves that can be used by the police. I mentioned at the outset that unlawful raves have been associated with low-level public disorder, unacceptable nuisance and the possession of unlawful drugs. Members will know that a whole raft of legislation is in place and available to the police to deal with those offences—for example, sections 1 to 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and even antisocial behaviour orders. Clearly, a range of other legislation in respect of public order offences, drugs misuse and so forth is available to the police for dealing with illegal raves.
Authorities in Norfolk served a temporary antisocial behaviour order on a 62-year-old man accused of masterminding a series of illegal raves in the county. The ASBO prevents him from organising or participating in any further events in the area. As the hon. Gentleman will know, should he breach that ASBO, it would amount to a criminal offence in itself. In the Thames Valley, the police have also put resources into tackling illegal raves through ASBOs, resulting in orders being placed on a couple of rave organisers, with more cases pending. There is anecdotal evidence to suggest that those actions have been successful in preventing raves in the Thames Valley area.
The hon. Member for South-West Norfolk also raised the issue of mess or rubbish left behind at rave sites. As he will know, a series of Acts of Parliament can be used to tackle the problem. For example, leaving litter is an offence under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and provisions in the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 give authorities the power to deal with fly-tipping and littering of the sort that the hon. Gentleman mentioned. More recently, the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 provides considerably increased powers and levels of punishment in respect of those offences.
Add your comment
Christopher Fraser (South West Norfolk, Conservative) Link to this | Hansard source
May I make one observation? I accept and understand the laws that the Minister refers to, but they may well be more effective in an urban environment where it is easier to maintain surveillance on people. In very rural areas, where the fields are usually without light, it is much more difficult to catch people in the act of committing such offences.
Add your comment
Photo of Vernon Coaker Vernon Coaker (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Home Office) Link to this | Hansard source
The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point, which I accept, and some of my later remarks may help to address it.
The use of legislation in an operational context is entirely a matter for the strategic direction that a chief officer provides for his or her force. Whether it be in an urban or rural area, this is an extremely important issue, which this debate helps to reinforce. Tactics on how individual raves should be policed are at the discretion of the officers deployed at the scene of an event and involve difficult judgments on minimising disturbance to local communities and residents, preventing any escalation in public disorder and ensuring the safety of police officers and rave- goers.
Although the detail of operational decisions is not necessarily a matter for ministerial interference, Ministers are keen—and I am certainly keen—to see best practice in policing raves disseminated across the police service, including in Norfolk. In that regard, a workshop on policing raves was hosted by the recently established National Policing Improvement Agency in June, which was attended by 100-plus police officers from around the country, including officers from Norfolk. I understand that police tactics, the sharing of intelligence, partnership working, national guidance and current legislation—issues also raised by the hon. Gentleman this evening—were all discussed, and that the feedback from the workshop will be collated and used both to promote short-term steps that forces can take further to improve their response to raves, and to inform longer-term strategic work, including whether any changes to legislation are required.
That should be of help to the hon. Gentleman, because, clearly, such a workshop will consider issues such as the policing of raves in remote rural areas, and the sharing of good practice between police forces, especially when one force has found a particular way of operating to be effective. I take his point that there is a big difference between policing a rave in a remote part of Norfolk and policing a rave in a field on the edge of London, for example.
The sub-group on raves, which was set up by the Association of Chief Police Officers working group on public order, provides an appropriate forum to take work forward, and further underlines police commitment to work nationally to improve policing of illegal raves. ACPO has recognised that the problem is growing, and the sub-group is building on work done in an earlier forum. I shall ask my officials to read the record of the debate, and to send the relevant points made by the hon. Gentleman to that working group for consideration. That might benefit him and perhaps other Members across the country who have had such problems. He asked, if I remember rightly, whether it would be possible for attendance at a rave, or organising a rave, to be made a criminal office. The group will be able to consider whether that is appropriate, whether other legislation covers that, or whether something could be done.
On the importance of partnership working, the hon. Gentleman might also like to know that the Local Government Association announced last month a five-point plan for councils to combat illegal raves. That included work with police and other agencies, intelligence gathering, which is crucial, and asking landowners to be vigilant. He might want to ask his local authority whether it is aware of that, and what steps if any it is taking in that respect.
Clearly, the hon. Gentleman called the debate because of concerns in his constituency of South-West Norfolk. I therefore want to conclude by providing him with some reassurance that Norfolk police are taking the matter seriously. They have an analyst working part-time monitoring rave websites, and the force holds a database of music rigs that are being used to organise raves in the Norfolk area. As the hon. Gentleman rightly said, help to gather intelligence is critical if we are to move forward in this area. We are therefore required to look at rave websites, magazines and other types of media in which information about where an illegal rave might take place is shared. I congratulate Norfolk police on their use of an analyst, as that can help us to deal with the problem. Officers from Norfolk, Essex and Suffolk, together with other agencies, gathered information during this year’s Easter and May bank holidays to prevent illegal raves from taking place.
I hope that those remarks give the hon. Gentleman some reassurance, particularly my suggestion that the points that he has made should be referred to the ACPO sub-group, and that it should be asked to look at the legislation again, consider whether improvements can be made, share good practice and do something to prevent the appalling things that his constituents have had to suffer at the hands of people whose only goal is to make a good deal of money. Such a situation is not acceptable, and we need to work together to try to do even more about it.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at half-past Six o’clock.
>>>
I write to you regarding a recent news report on the BBC Look East programme, which was broadcast on the 19th of July 2007 concerning illegal raves. I notice that you have made a commitment to asking a police study group to look at new ways of clamping down on raves and on those who attend them.
I speak to you here as a constituent and also as a person who has both hosted and attended “illegal raves” or gatherings (as I will refer to them hereafter)for over 15 years. I would like to see some sort of inclusion of views on the matter of gatherings from ravers themselves. I feel that to leave them out is to admonish objectivity and discourage a less encompassant view of the whole issue. I’m sure you will agree with me when I say that you can not provide an effective solution until you fully understand the problem.
The problems generated by gatherings in the United Kingdom are well documented and I can fully understand why you think a more robust approach is needed. In all honesty, further clampdowns on gatherings may well backfire for a number of reasons. Before any analysis is proferred as to why this may occur, I would like first, to bring to your attention some of the reasons why gatherings are growing in number and offer you an insight into what these cultural gatherings represent to those who attend them.
Attached to this document you will find various views regarding gatherings from those who attend them and also some of the reasons why they do. I would encourage you to read them to gain a greater awareness of the why and how as well as to observe the levels of creativity and human spirit behind the whole concept of gatherings.
As a member of parliament now holding a ministerial position, a great responsibility has been placed upon your shoulders and I believe you to be a Democratic man. It’s important that you realise that What we are discussing here is, of great cultural importance to a not insignificant number of British people. Before any legislation is drawn up that may criminalise people in the hundreds of thousands, let us at least look at the impact of gatherings from all sides.
Why are “Raves” growing ?
The popularity of gatherings has increased for a number of reasons. In a slightly Ironic way it’s growth can be attributed in part to the original Criminal Justice Act, but there are certainly many more contributory factors besides this. One of the largest contributors by far however is “City Centre Culture”. Ask any raver why they are stood in a muddy field or damp barn on a Saturday night and it’s likely they will tell you that they are escaping “city centre culture”. I’m aware that you have expressed your own views publically regarding this particular culture and in truth your point of view on the matter is not far removed from the viewpoint of ravers themselves.
One of the most overlooked factors when the establishment aims to “tackle raves” is that, not only do the underestimate the scale of the problem but they refuse to ask the most fundamental question of all.
Why do “Raves” occur ?
Why do people rave ?
The answer is very much a cultural one, as well as being a result of the anti “City Centre Culture” philosophy. This is something which is very much interwoven into the fabric of mankinds existence. People have always gathered in almost every nation on earth since man became social, to dance to repetitive Tribal beats. To many ravers, gatherings are a continuation of our indigenous culture and we are simply following the traditions of our ancestors in gathering and celebrating our existence through music and dance.
When viewed in this context, it can be seen to be a fundamental right as a free human being to carry on the traditions of our ancestors and celebrate our existence in a similar fashion, provided that such celebration does not impact on the enjoyment of life of others. If proposed legislation seeks to criminalise those who maintain and evolve our indigenous culture then it must be the duty of those who believe in cultural freedom to challenge such legislation and bring it to the attention of a higher authority than that of the British Legal Establishment.
Whilst this course of action would be lengthy and costly, I believe that sufficient numbers of people still care enough about upholding our cultural traditions throughout Western Europe to fund such a challenge should it be necessary. I sincerely hope that this will not be the case and that a new way can be found to solve the problem, but I feel that this can only occur if all parties concerned are at the table.
The new Prime Minister talks of a more interactive and responsive government which seeks to reconnect with the people, I believe this is an opportunity to test the credibility of this new approach from Government. After many tiring years of Blair spin and all major decision making processes being the remit of the inner cabinet, people are as ready as Government say they are, to reconnect. Reconnecting with people and including them in the political process will often necessitate entering into dialogue with those you seek to legislate over. I would ask that any advisory body or study group set up to look at clamping down on gatherings include representatives from all sides,including the ravers themselves and I would request that you as my MP put this idea forward on my behalf.
Cultural suppression is one of the greatest crimes of the 20th century. In a society in which, education kills our childrens creativity,where success or intellectual capacity is measured on rote learning and repetition, where the “degree” is a measurement of intellect or professionalism is a sad reflection of the human condition. In a society which has a greater level of sophistication than all evolutionary equivalents in the known universe, to have the audacity and the stupidity to place culture and the arts at the bottom of the curricular and social agenda, is nothing short of the repression of humanity itself. We are undermining the human experience through education, legislation, criminalisation and a general airbrushing over of indigenous culture worldwide.
Gatherings, in my personal experience have reconnected people with a culture of creativity that is otherwise denied them as they grow from children into young adults and it’s influence on culture, both popular and otherwise should not be underestimated and can not be overstated.
Gatherings and the incorporation of music, production, visual arts and so on are entities that the modern urban youth can connect with after all.
An assortment of individuals representing an entire spectrum of a modern healthy society are represented around the fire of such gatherings. It offers far greater levels of diversity, opinion, morals and culture and in much greater quantity than any city centre space could ever provide under the current format.
This cultural message is not lost upon the youth themselves, indeed it is embraced by them. If you seriously want the youth of today to listen to you as a government, then it is time that you as the peoples representatives listened impartially, to us. Gatherings have the ability to engage the modern urban youth and challenge them creatively. I’ve yet to see a government policy that can produce similar results on such a scale and it begs the question, as to why any government, would seek to outlaw attendance at such gatherings. One could infer that Government intended or sought to discourage critical or creative thinking within society itself.
As an MP and Minister you have a duty to represent all your constituents and to raise issues of significant political importance in the house. Those issues should not only incorporate the issues that affect landowners and the privileged, but should represent the views of your entire constituency. You may consider my view to be unique but you’d be wrong in your assumption. Indeed, you have a far greater volume of “Ravers” in your constituency than you might care to think.
It is all too easy to underestimate support at local level on an issue as important as the criminalisation of attendance at cultural gatherings, but I assure you that a sufficient numbers of your constituents will make their feelings known at any future local elections, should they not be consulted or simply ignored on issues of political and cultural significance.
It would be naive of ravers to underestimate the negative impact of gatherings on a local community but it would be equally naive of anyone who has never attended a rave to assume, that it has no bearing on reducing crime or has no positive impact on the lives of those who attend. Several of these key issues are often overlooked when discussing or proposing new legislation to counteract “Raves” and the balance must be redressed if any progress toward a solution is to be found.
Whilst I have only lightly touched upon the reasons for the growth of “rave” and the cultural influences surrounding them, there are many more issues that I feel need to be examined before any legislation is proposed and would like to request an appointment with yourself in order that the matter be discussed further.
Draft 2
If anyone would like to put forward a point of view with as to why and how raving has had a positive impact on your life, please feel free to write a statement to attach to the article.
All constructive input welcome and much appreciated, Nice 1.
in his speech he mentions these parties are hugely profitable !?(maybe for OB getting overtime) and they are driven by a “get rich quick formula”
this is not true ! twenty years ago we were paying 20 pounds to go to unlicensed events .
but not any more its not about money its about people!
your letter is excellent !
TBH I think Ryan (stamina’s) statement on SJ summed up what I would say about raves…. having lived in the same city as him for many years and been to many parties with his circle of friends there I know exactly where he is coming from…
Col – I’ve managed to reduce the word count to about 1391 (from 1571), slightly edited/moved around a few paragraphs (whilst preserving context) and adding a subtle reference to the aspect of “Britishness” in rave culture (which I think is important as this culture is definitely part of the creative spirit of our nations). I could email/PM this version or post it up here..
Col – I’ve managed to reduce the word count to about 1391 (from 1571), slightly edited/moved around a few paragraphs (whilst preserving context) and adding a subtle reference to the aspect of “Britishness” in rave culture (which I think is important as this culture is definitely part of the creative spirit of our nations). I could email/PM this version or post it up here..
Thanks for that GL
Pm or post it here mate, I’m useless at condensing articles, that’s why my books will never get published.
Unless some kind soul comes along one day and sorts it all out for me.
They’d need the patience of a saint to wade through my notes though.
Here’s my reaction to the debate. I did put it up on SJ, but it seems to have vanished before I could see the reaction. This is the letter I would write:
Dear Mr Croaker,
After reading a transcript of the debate on ‘Illegal Raves’- raised on the 19th July- that was posted on the internet, I feel that I need to respond to some of the points raised. Within this issue it is important to include the views of all members of the community- including those who choose to attend these gatherings, as we are also members of society; indeed, are often voting members and future voting members of the constituency in question.
There are some very fundamental misconceptions within the speech on the 19th July. The first being that the ‘Raves’, or Free parties as I prefer to call them are growing in number. It is general knowledge that there has been a free party in East Anglia most weekends for at least the last 7 years. In fact, I would go so far as to say that they have actually diminished in number since the hey-day of 2003, when there was a guarantee of at least two large gatherings each weekend in the summer.
The next misconception, and probably the most important, is that the parties are run solely for profit. It is a sad reflection of a capitalist society that the reasons for this movement are seen to be based on monetary concerns alone. The view that “Unlicensed music events are hugely profitable to the organisers”, is very wide of the mark. More often than not, the costs involved in organising and setting up a party are far greater than any amounts raised at the event itself. I’m sure that the Norfolk police force has had contact with many organisers over the years, and would be hard pushed to find anyone that has managed to “get-rich-quick”. Most parties rely on donations, willingly given by the attendees, just to break even. When you include the huge costs of actually buying equipment such as speakers, amps, etc; and that of hunting down and buying the actual music for the events, the amount of money needed runs into the thousands, often more.
Party goers and organisers are not naïve children. Or, if they are they learn very fast. They are aware of the CJA and the consequences of the updated Anti-Social Behaviour Act. They understand that they are risking court action, fines and even jail time in extreme circumstances if convicted. On top of this, by holding an event, they are risking thousands of pounds worth of sound and lightning equipment; as confiscation, and destruction of rigs have become a very real possibility.
So why, in the light of all the possible outcomes mentioned above; in the very real risk to careers, family life and the possibility of criminal records, do people choose to hold these events, week after week. I seriously doubt it is for monetary gains. Personally, I would summarise the reasons as follows:
Escapism may seem a strange point to put down. However, it does sum up nicely some reasons that free parties are so popular. Firstly, it is escape from the ‘norms’ of society. In this I am unfortunately referring to the binge-drinking, violent, yob behaviour that is endemic in town and city centres across the country. Anyone who has ventured out into their local town centre on a sat night knows that it can be a war zone. The “first-class licensed music venues in Norfolk” that the cabinet member refers to are more often than not horrible places to attend. Who would wish to spend time in a place where the whole point seems to be to down as many pints as possible, and get in a fight with the first person to bump into you or catch your eye? I know this may be the extreme end of the spectrum, but is more often than not the experience to be had when going out in a town centre. It has been said many times by those police officers who attend the Norfolk free parties (not the ones in riot gear I should add!) that the people who attend the gatherings are much more cooperative and generally nicer to deal with than the ones in the town centres- some have even said they prefer to police ‘raves’!!!
However, escapism can be a more positive reason. In today’s society there is little time for entertainment. People have to work hard in order to provide a safe and secure life for themselves and their families, or looking after children and loved ones. When living in rural areas such as Norfolk and Suffolk, if you do not wish to join the city-centre ‘Ere-we-go’ lifestyle on a Saturday night there are precious little options left. Over the last 17 years, dance music, and the free party scene has become an important part of the cultural identity of Britain’s youth. It is not hard to see why. When faced with the choice, which would you prefer to do: go to a dark, dingy club to listen to uninspiring, generic, mass- produced, over-played pop music, where even eye contact is an invitation to be punched. Or would you prefer to be dancing in the open air of Thetford forest, with the wind in your face and the sunrise pouring through the trees, surrounded by smiley, happy people who look out for each other, listening to music that constantly pushes boundaries and connects you to the people and nature around you?
Secondly, money is an important consideration, although not for those reasons mentioned in the cabinet members speech. Both organising, and attending any ‘legal’ event nowadays costs a great deal of money. I’m sure the concert in Thetford forest that Mr Fraser refers to was amazing. Having attended many of these concerts I know how good they are. Unfortunately, most young people do not have tens of thousands of pounds in order to stage such events. Even a small, simple event will need a large amount of cash input in order to obtain the necessary licenses, health and safety certificates, hiring of venues, etc. Again, considering the free time and disposable cash available to young people, jumping through hoop after hoop does not seem worth the while. Although most people do not actually wish to hold events, even attending clubs can be an expensive evening, with high door prices and expensive drinks. Add to that often aggressive door staff, and evenings out do not become particularly appealing. In short, should those people with less money be denied the right to enjoy life? To let their hair down or create something that gives other people joy?
The final, and most important point, is passion. At the end of the day it is passion that moves people to create, and attend, such gatherings. The British youth of today are unique in human history. We do not have a World War to worry about, there is no depression to be angry at. For the lucky majority we have a roof over our head, and enough food to eat. We are healthy, safe, clean and comfortable. In fact, looked at from this way, we are the epitome of life on this planet. We are very lucky. We also know that it will not stay this way. What with war on terrorism, climate change, id cards, etc, etc we know that the future looks bleak, our civil liberties will be more and more reduced and our lives observed and monitored at all times.
So while we can we celebrate. We channel our passion into creating and attending free parties. There is something tribal, almost primeval about dancing in the open air, to the beat that we love, that enflames the soul. It is one of mankind’s most basic instincts- to dance to a beat, to celebrate life. The free party movement in the UK is all about choice. Choosing our right to come together, to look after each other, to dance to the music we choose for as long, and as loud as we want. This is why we take the risks we do, and also why there are the inevitable confrontations with authority. Passion drives us forward.
Before descending any further into overly emotional speeches. There are further points raised in the commons debate by Mr Fraser that need addressing. Please note that I am aware of the massive generalisations that I am drawing in this letter, both of ‘ravers’ and wider society. Most ravers understand, and greatly regret the impacts that free parties have on the wider community. However, it is also important to understand that these negative impacts are often exacerbated by the actions of the police force as they attempt to stop these events happening. The dearest wish of any free party organiser is to be left alone. This is why any organiser worth their salt will make every attempt to find the most isolated, out of the way party site. However, often access to these sites will be restricted by the police, forcing free parties to be set up in less than perfect locations, nearer to houses that then cause disturbance. I know this has happened on at least one occasion this year, and an effort was made to keep the music levels down as a result.
The other point raised is one of litter. Any person, or indeed, any police officer, who has been in attendance at a party in Norfolk knows that if left to their own devices, ALL litter will be removed from the site, (and often recycled). When a party is shut down by riot police, although often attempts are made to clear litter; police will threaten those clearing with arrest if they attempt to clear it up, or eject people so forcefully there is little time to do anything. This causes the environmental impact that is so often used to put free parties down. It is obviously a political tactic by the police, but it is really annoying to be branded with this iron, as most people who attend free parties are the complete opposite!
I have written this letter in order to provide the point of view of someone who attends these gatherings. I feel it is important that the reasons for free parties be properly understood. I am also extremely worried about the proposals put forward by Mr Fraser to “make attendance at a rave an offence?”. That is a slippery slope. If attending a rave becomes a criminal offence, how much further is it to making attendance at a protest march an offence? Or for that matter, any event which the government of the time deems to be subversive in any way. If the BNP were ever to gain power, would then attendance at a mosque be a criminal offence? The world has seen this situation before.
I agree that it is not right that parties cause criminal damage. The examples of people chasing pigs, and destruction to SSSIs or crops are unacceptable. However, rather than simply criminalise the events that lead to these actions, a more positive course of action would be to provide areas that are designated isolated enough to be used for these events. How many derelict airfields are there in the East Anglian region? Also, access to a database of SSSIs would mean organisers can pick locations carefully, thus minimising disturbance. As with so many things in this world, exchange of information and cooperation would be a whole lot more beneficial than simply smothering something that you do not understand,
However, this is Britain. I know that this is wishful thinking. Heavier legalisation will not be far away, more parties will get stopped, and yet another source of passion and inspiration will be killed off in our society. And because this is Britain, and I do not wish to be branded a criminal because of the life I choose, I choose to remain anonymous.
Sincerely,
A. Raver
I did see it on SJ (and a couple of supportive comments) but then the board crashed. I think that covers the points very well, and comments from yourself (and Ryan/Stamina) actually sum up the situation for both SE and Eastern England – co-incidentally the areas mentioned the most in the Parliament debate!
One thing I would add though is some sort database of SSSIs actually does now exist for public use (link provided below)
This is fairly recent so its understandable that you or others may not have yet seen this.
Another good one is:
Where you can create an interactive map of an area with SSSIs, nature reserves, RSPB sites, etc.
http://www.squatjuice.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=106254
if anyone else wants to take over then drop me a pm or email or whatever.
probably needs to be someone in their teens/20s who actually lives in one of these areas and is a student or in regular employment
but fuck knows how people are supposed to put across a positive side, unless they wholly distance themselves from the more “militant” ideals and accept that they are gonna have to work in places where they have permission to be using the TENS system…
call to arms!
http://www.squatjuice.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=106821
Re: Save The Rave. Opening correspondence now sent:
http://www.squatjuice.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=108734
Nice one Col raaa
0
Voices
11
Replies
Tags
This topic has no tags
Forums › Rave › Free Parties & Teknivals › SaveTheRaveSide
