In the comments underneath that article Lawrence Ernest Balderstone says
"So much about what preceded Saturday's vigil/protest is not known and can only be guessed at. Yes, we know that RTS say that the Met failed to engage, and this may well have been the case. Equally though, it may not. I haven't yet read anything from the Met in terms of an explanation for its position in negotiations, nor how/why it got to an apparent point of its position being solidified into one of the vigil/protest not being able to take place lawfully.
"Yet here and elsewhere, having heard from only one party, the position appears to be prejudged ("If Met intransigence persists...").
"These are all issues that are far too important to be discussed on the basis of assumption, especially where the assumptions appear to have no basis beyond that espoused by a group who have a dog in the race."
|