Analysis News

Suspended Field’s letter about ‘taking a firm grip’ on climate protesters goes viral

Field’s letter now looks literal
Mark Field grabs climate-change protester before pinning her against a pillar

Tory MP Mark Field – now suspended as a minister after shockingly grabbing and a female climate-change protester and wrestling her out of a bankers banquet – wrote a letter two months ago to the head of the Metropolitan Police urging her to ‘take a much firmer grip’ on climate protesters:

Field’s outrage that climate-change protesters were causing disruption appears to have spilled over last night into a literal grip and more – and could cost the MP his position and potentially even a criminal conviction if the woman he manhandled presses assault charges.

Field has claimed that he feared the woman “might have been armed”. The letter is going viral on social media.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. He seems to favour only relatively ineffective protests.

    Also, a lot of Londoners will be seriously inconvenienced if their city disappears under the rising sea.

  2. It seems protest is alright as long as it doesn’t affect businesses. Wants it to be friendly and no inconvenience to anyone. He obviously doesn’t get the point.

  3. The planet is dying. But the important thing is, a few people weren’t able to shop.

  4. I’m glad he’s in favour of the law being “applied to its full extent.”
    I’d throw away the keys just for the stunted Tory scrote’s piss-poor yet pretentious garbling of the English language.

  5. Meanwhile The Independent – whose adoration of the neoliberal EU borders on the messianic – has remarkably confessed that EU law really does prevent renationalisation of the railway service.

    It would be too much to expect The Independent to follow this up with pieces on how EU law likewise blocks nationalisation of mail, telecommunications, gas and electricity in the same manner, but who knows.

    1. Danny,
      We actually have legal opinion on this matter, and its not as black and white as its made out to be – better to say that under present EU Competition Rules, specifically those that apply to the Railways, it is impossible to revert back to a British Rail structure, which is what many actually yearn for.

      1. Slippery, agenda-driven, quibbling, christopher. In what concrete way are you actually disagreeing with Danny’s perfectly correct statement, christopher rogers ? It is precisely the return to an all-UK old British Rail-model, joined-up, single (public) owner railway system, of both the trackway and the rail services running on it, that is most efficient and cost-effective. The EU rules make such a single (state) owned system impossible to re-assemble and maintain – given this structure’s “anti competitive ” shutting out of the likes of Virgin, Stagecoach, etc, from bunging in periodic (entirely bogusly financially structured) bids for operating parts of the network (with HUGE public subsidies) . The likes of Virgin would be empowered to sue the UK government for this contravention of competition policy . It is indeed black and white . Under current EU rules the most efficient rail structure – ie, the old integrated British Rail structure with 100% public ownership CANNOT be reintroduced . So why the mealy mouthed sniping at Danny’s actually correct statement ?

        The (bogus history of British Rail) canard constantly spread by the private rail operator lobbyists (are you one, christopher ? we haven’t seen you on here before) is that the old British Rail was inefficient and the service terrible. This is a straight lie . British Rail was deliberately starved of adequate funds for decades at the behest of Tory AND Labour governments captured by the road transport lobby (Tory Transport Minister Ernest Marple being the most blatant example) . The infamous con artist academic, Dr Beeching, also shattered much of the local rail network with a disastrous line cutting programme in the 1960’s based on NO detail impact research at all ! Given the inadequate funds BR had its service was amazingly cost effective – and the public subsidy nothing like the amounts squandered on Virgin , and the other private providers today in real terms – and through-ticketing was a doddle , and rail fares were a fraction of today’s rip-off in real terms. But the paid propagandists for the private operators today snipe about “stale BR sandwiches” and “crowded trains” , and “late arrivals” , with a brass necked cheek that can only depend upon most younger people being unaware that the old integrated BR, for all its inadequate funding, worked very well indeed – and with adequate funding , could be brilliant – and a very GREEN transport option.

      2. “Slippery, agenda-driven, quibbling, christopher.”

        Not at all like your constantly regurgitated bot-puke, then?

        I reckon it’s a better bet achieving public ownership within the EU than taking the advice of a Toytown ‘socialist’.

      3. Poor quality trolling and priceless drivel , RH – you say “I reckon it’s a better bet achieving public ownership within the EU than taking the advice of a Toytown ‘socialist’.” Wake up at the back there stupid boy. The entire point of Danny’s, and many other’s , detailed and careful (over umpteen posts), explanations of the impact on a Left economic programme of the EU’s Competition and State Aids Single Market rules , is that it is quite IMPOSSIBLE to achieve a nationwide, comprehensive re-nationalisation of the rail system, or water, or power distribution and generation, or any other utility or industry under them. Just keep churning out that meaningless Mandelson-written PV script – because straying into complex issues like EU Competition Policy is waaaaaaay over your empty troll head laddie.

      4. John, I know the PV/Remainers keep arguing that there is nothing in EU membership to stop a Left government from re-nationalising, or nationalising industries or services, or generally implementing a Left Keynsian radically transformative economic programme. But , whilst the nationalisation claim is true for small component bits of nationwide services, like rail (eg, the collapse of various private regional rail franchises often results in a state takeover- prior to re-tendering), the Single Market rules make it impossible to take entire nationwide industries, utilities or services into permanent public ownership – with a block on periodic private sector re-tendering. Thwarted potential private tenderers like Virgin would have the right to sue the UK government through the ECJ – and would WIN ! Similarly even supporting a strategically important industry like Steel would fall foul of the State Aids Rules. Lastly the Balanced Budget rules of the EU – a core instrument of EU-wide Austerity would preclude a Left government running a long term budget deficit to carry out a vital New Deal-style /Green Economic Agenda infrastructure and public services re-building programme.

        The PVers , including the supposed “Lefties” of “Another Europe is Possible” are simply lying with their oft repeated claims that EU membership is no barrier to implementing a radical Left economic programme. Unfortunately the various wings of the Mandelson/Blair/Campbell conspiracy to destroy Jeremy Corbyn and the Left-led Labour Party and stop a Left Labour Government, have limitless financial resources and mass media megaphones. And can afford to pay for all-day Trolls on social media to push their script. All the socialist Left can do is spread the real facts across as many media as we can.

      5. Point taken John P. Yes, all that AEIP and so called Open Labour and so on seem, at heart, vehicles for undermining Corbyn. Not enough is being made of the point that a post-Bexit Labour government taking back our industries into public ownership will provide a model for other European countries to follow. That’s how another Europe is possible.

      6. JPENNY,
        Love you being a total twat, but it does help to clarify matters, namely, under present EU regulation their can be no return to the days of British Rail, namely both the trains, tracks and signalling owned by a single entity. However, State owned operators of Rail & Track is allowed, if, and here’s the biggie, its gone through a competitive tender. As stated, not black and white.

        As for my views, I welcome a full return to a fully nationalised rail services ASAP, and that applies to any service deemed absolutely necessary to survive in our day and age.

        Alas, this makes me both a Europhile now and fucking supporter of neoliberalism – God I sometimes give up with you lot

      7. ” that meaningless Mandelson-written PV script ”

        Anyone defining contrary opinions thus, and continually conjuring up ‘paid trolls’ from the ether, by definition hasn’t the intellectual capacity or basic knowledge to get his head round the issues related to EU membership.

        In summary – the minority group of Lexiteers are damned from their own mouths.

      8. With regards to the EU and re nationalisation I think Christopher Rogers is right to say “it’s not as black and white as it’s made out to be”.

        At intervals, I have invited Danny to take a critical look at Tom Kibasi’s pamphlet ‘State Aid Rules and Brexit’, which may challenge or perhaps qualify his and other’s oft repeated viewpoint. To date, I don’t think anyone has taken up the offer, though I seem to remember that David McNiven. took a look.

        I am interested, not because I have some kind of a remain agenda on the go and neither do I necessarily agree with the drift of what Kibasi says, especially since he regularly writes for the Guardian …

        Instead, I wonder about the scope and viability of this particular manifesto commitment given Labour’s “customs union” position on Brexit.

        Anyway, here’s a link to the section of Kibasi’s pamphlet that comments on the railways.

      9. John, thanks for the link to ‘Let’s be clear on nationalisation law.’ …’ which follows the same direction of travel as the argument being made in the Tom Kibasi link below … all caveats about provenance and possible intentions being taken as read …

  6. Poor Mr Fields, he has given the game away, what you saw last night was class hatred and class war!
    Mark will be in the bad books, look we know we are legal capitalist thieves but you lost class discipline – you need to join in keeping up the GREAT PRETENCE that we all in it together, fool!
    The line is “In the national interest’ but what they mean is in the Neo-Liberal capitalist interests!
    I tecently saw the great film Peterloo and EP Thompson was brilliant in The Making of The English Working Class on this event – the most vicious against the working class demonstrators were not the professional troopers but the local gentry on horseback, “What they feared was THE WORKING CLASS ORGANISING – Peterloo was class hatred!”
    These annual Mansion House posh do’s for the rump fed capitalist legal thieves disgust me; it is attended by the generally right wing barbarians who have stuffed their mouths with gold or have had them stuffed by their friends the Tories.
    We should abolish self-govt by the City of London elite and put it under Local Authority Democratic Control!
    It is the working people in every country whose abour really creates the wealth and makes societies work so if and when we can get Jeremy in I would like such speeches to be transferred to an East End Community Centre with an audience of diverse working people (and to such centres around the country).
    But I had an odd dream the other night, we won, we ended poverty, built the homes needed, ended austerity and ended homelessness and other countries followed suit but there appeared a new group of homeless and Big Issue sellers in my dream and it was Boris Johnson and Tory MPs and the rich and I thought wow there is justice in life.
    Then diverse working people in every country created left wing democratic socialist global civilisation.

  7. Without studying the franchise contracts and EU law down to the dots and dashes it can’t be stated with any certainty whether re-nationalisation in any specific form is or is not possible in EU law – but it can be said that contracts are never watertight and neither are laws – even EU laws are subject to interpretation, challenge and in the last resort, “Go whistle.”
    Companies hardly ever stick to the letter of contracts – if the service isn’t as promised penalties will be available to a government that cares to pick those nits.
    Privatisation being a Tory flagship they’ve always needed it to appear to work and they throw good money after bad to keep up appearances.
    The last thing they ever do is to admit, punish or advertise failure.
    That needn’t stop us doing so.
    Companies depend on share price for investment and investment can disappear at the hint of a loss of franchise.
    No point paying top dollar for failing companies.
    Fuck’em. Tories aren’t the only ones who can play dirty.

    1. Nope, David McNiven, sorry, but it isn’t subject to genuine debate. It IS quite clear that comprehensive, nationwide, nationalisation of an industry, service, or utility , WITHOUT ALLOWING PERIODIC RE-TENDERING TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR, is not legal under EU rules. I’m all for telling the private sector vulture tenderers and EU to “go whistle” – but the ECJ would punitively fine the UK government on behalf of Virgin and all the other willing tendering companies. What would the Left UK government then do ? Give up most of the promised Left programme – and await that far, far, far off day that the EU by some unknown process becomes a “workers’ Europe” ? Press on with the Left programme it was elected to implement and get into a stand-off with the EU and ever-mounting sanctions and fines ? (Remember what the EU has done to Greece ?) Things would be tough enough for a Left government facing the internal and external sabotage and financial speculation of Big Business and the Money Markets, without still being trapped in the straightjacket of the Single Market too I suggest.

      1. The limp ‘surely we’ll be able to find a way’ idea is of course in the name (another europe is possible) and is designed to be corrosive for the left. That’s where the Mandy money is being spent – ways to be corrosive.

      2. Your protestations of certainty on a subject upon which acknowledged experts cannot agree is what marks you out as a bullshitter and a bluffer.
        And it’s still ‘straitjacket’.

      3. … and the point isn’t just about just about ‘nationalisation’ – that hugely question-begging word when the detail begins to impinge – it’s the simple fact that choosing to leave the EU brings with it massive other downsides that firmly outweigh claimed advantages, despite current competition rules.

  8. As to that thug’s comment that the protester might have been armed I think it far more likely that he might be armed himself, considering his violent temper and total disregard to the safety of the public! He should be jailed!

  9. Sorry my Brexit comment should have been in the ‘BR’ thread.
    But on the main issue, in deeply saddened that the victim had decided not to prosecute, leaving it a racing certainty that the tame lawyers’ advice will prevail.

  10. Breaking news!
    Guardian report on Police visit to Johnson’s flat tonight (21/6) after concerns from neighbour re a possible domestic incident.
    Neighbour was really concerned for the female occupant next door who was according to the Guardian report apparently screaming at him.
    Apparently the neighbour has made a recording of the incident.
    Interesting times.

    1. Was already half-asleep but heard one comment to the effect that the neighbours were known lefties and another dismissing the incident as a non-event – “Couple has row. Voices raised.” [Big deal]
      There’s some joy in it though, suggesting as it does that beneath the “devil-may-care rogue breezing to victory without really trying” act the stress is taking its toll on the bluff Bunter.
      That the court jester – an actual fool – a pound shop Trump – will likely win the highest office in the land solely on the strength of his entertainment value – makes me question the value of democracy itself.

    2. Bazza ,more bad news this morning!.The press have turned on Johnson.I am not joking sadly,and I cannot
      think of worse news for getting corbyn into downing street.For Labour Boris Johnson had all of the attributes we so desperately needed !Typical Tory public school boy ,mean, racist,buffoon,of particular nasty comic book hero!!for the average Tory party supporter.If that other Hunt regime gets in we will be in trouble!.Looking like the Guardian once again puts the boot into corbyn.They have got a recording of Johnson’s version of family life with his latest squeeze and it’s not pretty.Jeremy hunt would be a far more difficult character and much more of a Tory fanatic,and twice as deadly,with blood on his hands from is tenure with the NHS.We will have to really get organized if it’s hunt.

      1. I think that you are being too pessimistic. Johnson won’t bow out quietly when he has sensed victory. No doubt his advisors (who themselves have ambitions of jobs at No 10) will tell him that he can “ride it out” and the last thing in Johnson’s mind is “the good of the party”. There’s still plenty of time for the Tories make their leadership election into an even bigger farce and let the membership have their say to the horror of half the PCP. I don’t think that we have seen the best of it yet.

      2. “The press have turned on Johnson.”

        I fear you miss what’s happening. Johnson already has a shit media image. His ‘popularity’ is *despite* that, with all his vile characteristics watered down to ‘He’s a bit of a character’.

        Never underestimate the gullibility of a large proportion of the voting public.

  11. Joseph, logically Johnson the buffoon ought to be by far the lesser danger to Labour.
    “Popularity” is a shallow and insubstantial thing and his actual capabilities are few – but politics itself in our era is as shallow as a soundbite and the fate of nations can hang on a catchy S*n headline.

    In a logical world Johnson would be “that funny guy at McDonald’s” but here he is.
    Luckily we have great people like Laura Pidcock to damn him with an offhand “Just a casual racist, then?” 🙂

    1. Hope you are right on this,I was badly shaken at the thought of
      loosing Boris.Could have been a sting ,maybe?

      1. ‘Her indoors’ complaining about spilt red wine and the bit about the laptop had me hoping he might have been caught untrousered on a nasty porn site, be thrown out of her house, drive away drunk and get busted.
        I’m not usually prone to optimistic daydreaming, honest – I lean more toward the shark-attack-while-cleaning-the-hull end of the optimism scale.

    2. Anyone listening to Tory supporters phoning into R5L could be forgiven for concluding that having the Police knock on your door because the neighbours are concerned for your partner’s safety is just an everyday occurrence in their daily lives.

  12. Hendon Magistrates Court – Anti-Palestinian activists guilty of harassment
    19 June 2019
    Jonathan Hoffman and Damon Lenszner harassing boycott activists. (InMinds)
    Two infamous anti-Palestinian activists in London pleaded guilty to charges of harassment and threatening behavior on Wednesday.
    Jonathan Hoffman, a former leader in the Zionist Federation, and Damon Lenszner changed their earlier not-guilty pleas in exchange for government prosecutors dropping related assault charges.

  13. Oh here SH goes again trying to keep the anti-semitism narrative running.
    Your game is up!
    Funny how the theme of this post was supposed to be the obnoxious behaviour of a male Tory Minister?

    1. Don’t be silly Bazza – I am simply highlighting the now proven bad character of some of the anti-Corbyn protagonists that have been involved in accusing JC of anti-Semitism. Surely their criminal convictions should be taken into account when considering the veracity of their accusations against JC and the Labour Party.

      You should read the full article, the Judge’s sentencing comments paint this pair of criminals in a very bad light.

      Why should they be given a free ride?

    2. Surely, Bazza, you can’t have been so immersed in Skwawkbox that you failed to notice that the antisemitism scam still has legs of its own without any help from SteveH?

      You might even have noticed that the site has quailed at the idea of allowing comments about Berger because of the fear of retaliation? That’s because the narrative is live.

  14. Years ago I had some married friends who hardly ever fought except on cocaine, when a row was almost guaranteed. We called them the Charlie Wars.
    Just for the hell of it, what would happen under Tory rules if for some reason the front runner in what’s now a two horse race dropped out, was disqualified for doping or otherwise became un-runnable?
    Running third-placed Gove against second-placed Hunt would cause ructions with everyone else I think so they’d probably have to start again however ridiculous that made them look.
    I assume it would still be an internal Tory party matter over which Parliament had no say except through a no confidence vote?

    1. “The real debate we need urgently to engage with is not whether Mark Field is a wife-beater or misogynist. It is how we deal with the power structure he represents, the system he is a loyal servant of. For that psychopathic system is ready to beat us all, men and women alike, into the dust, to keep extracting the last ounce of wealth from a dying corpse, to obliterate our futures.”

      1. Went to great Unite meeting today in Yorkshire.
        I made the point that with Austerity the first thing the Tories and Lib Dems did was to give tax cuts to millionaires (some got an extra £110k a year) and tax cuts for Big Business TO PROTECT THE RICH FROM AUSTERITY.
        So Austerity was and is ONLY FOR WORKING PEOPLE!
        Then in pub later had a great thought (from such comes creativity) and remembered the iconic 1900’s Lord Kitchener poster ‘Your Country Needs You!’
        So perhaps we need a 21stC iconic poster:
        ‘First thing Tories & Lib Dems did was to give tax cuts to the rich and powerful TO PROTECT THEM FROM AUSTERITY!
        Austerity was and is ONLY FOR YOU!
        VOTE LABOUR!’
        On a picture of JC – come on left wing democratic socialist creatives – get on the case!
        X & Solidarity!

    2. Excellent article, as always. In the final analysis their power to form and/or effect public opinion stems from their more-or-less complete control of the MSM. In a Corporatocracy the corporate media – along with the BBC – will do whatever the corporate elite want, from non-existent WMD in Iraq to a smear campaign against JC and the left AND setting up and demonising those who expose their true nature:

  15. I wouldn’t claim for a moment that it’s valueless to say “This, not that is what we should be talking about” – but the MSM control the narrative and most people trust them.
    Climate change, neoliberalism, AI/robotics, Brexit should all take their places behind control of the media – that must come first because with wealth controlling the MSM nothing will stop the other runaway trains hurtling down their parallel tracks to destruction.

    On the other thing – imagine the hold ‘Mrs. Boris’ now has over him.
    One allegation of abuse and he’s toast 🙂 🙂 🙂

    1. Don’t bank on it, David. Did you hear the worshippers defending him? And I reckon there’s a fair number of non- Tory party members who reckon he’s just a blokey bloke like down the ‘ale house’ – to use Toffee’s quaint vocabulary.

      1. *Sighs*

        Another failed shithouse attempt to associate me with some knobhead toerag. Oh, but he’s a leave voter so that means it’s ok, doesn’t it?

        Ok, I’ll play your paltry little game if you want.

        Did you know gary glitter voted remain…

      2. Jeez, Toffee, you’ve got a thin skin if you think that this was intended to ‘associate’ you with Mr Toad.

        It was a mild dig in the ribs – if that – using an image that would capture the average Tory supporter’s quaint attitude to Johnson.

  16. If you are familiar with the details of why the two women that slept with JA went to the police, you will know that the sole reason was because one of them wanted to ascertain if JA could be compelled to have a test, as she was (supposedly) concerned about STDs and in particular HIV, and the OTHER woman went with her solely to give her support (and they both made statements to that effect). I’ve read so much stuff about it all in the past few months that it’s difficult to remember everything – and it’s all so incredibly convoluted (and I strongly suspect by design) – but I don’t recall Sofia Wilen having said at any point that she spoke to Julian about her concerns and, as such, asked him to get tested and, that he in turn refused. Does anyone who’s researched it all recall if she DID say that?

    And why on Earth would you think to actually go to a police station to inquire, and not just phone the police – or a clinic – and make a general inquiry as to whether or not someone could be compelled to take a test.

    It was ALL a set-up of course, and BOTH women were part of the plan! And THAT is precisely why Julian was invited – by Anna Ardin, the OTHER woman he slept with – to go to Sweden in the first place to speak at a meeting she had arranged. I mean if you read the following article and Ardin’s account of what supposedly happened, you will see how improbable and absurd it all sounds and, as such, conclude that it’s ALL fabrication concocted and contrived to make Julian appear like some sort of sexual predator, and as if she would continue to let him stay at her apartment and arrange a party for him etc etc if he REALLY behaved the way she claims. It beggars belief of course:

    1. That last bit should read: if he REALLY *HAD* behaved the way she claims he did (on their first evening together after she came back unexpectedly early from a trip).

      1. In the Guardian article it says the following:

        On the following morning, Saturday 14 August, Assange spoke at a seminar organised by Miss A [Anna Ardin]. A second woman, Miss W [Sofia Wilen] had contacted Miss A to ask if she could attend. Both women joined Assange, [and] the co-ordinator of the Swedish WikiLeaks group, whom we will call “Harold”, and a few others for lunch.


        Well what an amazing coincidence that one of the women that JA slept with should be contacted by the other woman he then ended up sleeping with to ask if she could attend the seminar. Nowhere have I read that the two women knew each-other PRIOR to this phone-call, and yet SHE, Sofia Wilen, just happened to be invited to join JA and Anna Ardin – and a few others – for lunch (which in turn led to her sleeping with Julian and EVERYTHING that was to follow!).

        As for the revenge bit (mentioned at the end of the Guardian article) etc, THAT implies that they both had it in for Julian, but THAT of course doesn’t square with them merely (supposedly) going to the police station to inquire if Julian could be compelled to take a test which, having read right through the Guardian article just now, I see that Julian agreed to do. So why on earth would you THEN think to go to a police station to ascertain if he could be compelled to do so! Oh, right, because the whole thing was planned in advance, including leaking it all to the media!! The ‘revenge’ line, and the ‘money’ line (ie selling the story to a newspaper) were just Blinds concocted and designed to conceal the fact that it was all orchestrated and planned in advance, as were other aspects of it.

        As I’ve said before, in effect, that HAD it been just ONE woman making such allegations (and JA denying them), then it was HIS word against HERS, but if there’s TWO women making similar claims, well, I mean, it MUST be true, precisely BECAUSE there’s two of them, and who could possibly conceive of the possibility that BOTH of them were lying.

        Yep, ‘they’ had it ALL worked out, and Julian could never-EVER have seen what was coming!

        PS And I bet they all laugh themselves silly every time one of their number mentions that last phrase – eg ‘Poor Julian, he could never-ever have seen what was coming!’.

        THAT’S the fascist psychopathic elite and their fascist psychopathic minions for you.

      2. i’m hoping this is gonna end up immediately below my 7.32pm post. Anyway, I just want to clarify something I said in that post so as to make it clear what I meant, and what I said was:

        The ‘revenge’ line, and the ‘money’ line (ie selling the story to a newspaper) were just Blinds concocted and designed to conceal the fact that it was all orchestrated and planned in advance, as were other aspects of it. Blinds, that is.

    Add JC picture.
    Art is about thinking and constantly re thinking and stepping back until you are generally happy with the finished piece.
    X and solidarity to left wing democratic socialists!

  18. Boris Johnson drops investigation into MP who manhandled protester

    Boris Johnson has dropped the Whitehall investigation into Mark Field, the Tory MP who was caught on camera manhandling a Greenpeace activist out of a black-tie dinner.
    Johnson has sacked Field from his role as a Foreign Office minister since taking over as prime minister and decided that the investigation was no longer needed.

Leave a Reply