Jump to content

23rd March - ?Put It To The People March? - central London


Recommended Posts

If nothing else - it should highlight the fact that this government has let the completely failed in meeting its obligations to the people.


We have reduced investment in education, police, NHS; a benefits system run by a company (who have a mission to make profit), fmailies who cannot survive without food banks, huge house prices due to the ease at which foreign investors can buy up stock - people who cannot afford to buy/ rent/ live, job cuts....


It goes on.


TM is one part of this failure. The rest of the government should hang their heads in total shame.


This is one final opportunity for them to turn this around.


The People's March should be looking at more fundamental changes than to get a A50 cancellation. That's really, really nto going to happen. The focus should be on rebuilding the pillars of this country - and starting with an overhaul of what this government are doing with it.

And your view Mr/Ms/BTQ Teddy? Pray tell, I'd be most interested. How do you think this will all pan out? Are you throbbing hard, flaccid soft, or simply impotent (that the original definition - unable to take effective action; helpless or powerless.

zerkalo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So good to be part of this demo today. Check this

> footage out. Estimated 1m people took part.

> Incredible!

>

>


> 05714945/video/1



Actually it has been estimated that between 312,000 and 400,000 were there - not 1 million

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> robbin Wrote:

>

> >

> >

> > Actually it has been estimated that between

> > 312,000 and 400,000 were there - not 1 million

>

>

> Estimated by who?


Independent fact checking charity (FullFact) using experts in crowd estimation.


https://fullfact.org/europe/peoples-vote-march-count/?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=main_story


Don't know about their eyesight.

Not sure what page you are looking at - this is a small part cut and pasted from the link...



Claim


An estimated 1 million people marched for a People?s Vote on Saturday 23rd March.



Conclusion


It?s impossible to say with precision how many people attended the march. However experts in crowd estimation put the number at between 312,000 and 400,000.

And this...


Manchester Metropolitan University?s Professor Keith Still, said ?based on the visuals from the helicopter image, it?s between 312,000 and 400,000 people.?


This type of crowd estimation, called the Jacobs method, is done by dividing a crowd site area into sections, measuring the size of each section and then multiplying each area by the estimated density of people within that subsection.


How did the People?s Vote estimate 1 million?


The People?s Vote said they estimated the size of the crowd using information from staff and volunteers as well as examining aerial pictures from helicopters.


They said that ?peak crowd densities were estimated at 4.5 people per square metre?. (For context: Professor Still says the average crowd has between two and four people standing per square metre, and anything more than four people per square metre becomes too uncomfortable to move).


But even if this density of 4.5 people per square metre (visualised below) had been observed across the whole march site of roughly 160,000 square metres, that would only account for 700,000 people.

prof still's calculations are based on static crowds.

for those who have been on these marches, it's really interesting to see the rate of flow


these are dynamic crowds,

in the old days, marchers converged on a central point and then stood around to hear speeches

but no longer - the new style marchers turn out to be counted and then leave, making way for more people to flow into the space they have left - otherwise the numbers could never be accommodated in central london


the other interesting thing is how peaceful they are, these marches - no pushing, shoving or gilets jaunes, minimal police presence and not a broken window in sight

civilservant Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> prof still's calculations are based on static

> crowds.

> for those who have been on these marches, it's

> really interesting to see the rate of flow

>

> these are dynamic crowds,

> in the old days, marchers converged on a central

> point and then stood around to hear speeches

> but no longer - the new style marchers turn out to

> be counted and then leave, making way for more

> people to flow into the space they have left -

> otherwise the numbers could never be accommodated

> in central london

>

> the other interesting thing is how peaceful they

> are, these marches - no pushing, shoving or gilets

> jaunes, minimal police presence and not a broken

> window in sight



Yep.


We were with a group of people (including Helen Hayes) who joined the march at Green Park (he park, not the tube station) having started at Victoria.


There was a bottleneck of people trying to get out of Green Park into Piccadilly.


We got down to the screen in the Mall but couldn't get much further due to the crowds, so never got as far as Parliament Square.


And yes, there was no trouble at all, it was a really good natured and lovely day, we met some lovely people, including people who had come a really long way (felt a bit bad we just had quite a short journey there!)

robbin Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I fear it won't be so peaceful though if the will

> of the majority is ignored and the promises to

> carry out the referendum result are broken.

> Careful what you wish for!


I think panic about this is over-played. Just because Teresa May has spent the past two and a half years attempting to brainwash the country into believing that a 'full suicide' Brexit is the only way to honour a narrow majority in an advisory referendum offering no concrete vision of 'Leave', doesn't mean that anyone believes her. MPs are now, thank the Lord, taking some kind of initiative to examine the many options available. My question is : since it was obvious the day after the referendum that such a collaborative, cross-party approach was needed to work out a sensible way forward, why couldn't the government see that? I think we all know that's because their main concern was keeping hold of power, not what was best for the county.

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> civilservant Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > prof still's calculations are based on static

> > crowds.

> > for those who have been on these marches, it's

> > really interesting to see the rate of flow

> >

> > these are dynamic crowds,

> > in the old days, marchers converged on a

> central

> > point and then stood around to hear speeches

> > but no longer - the new style marchers turn out

> to

> > be counted and then leave, making way for more

> > people to flow into the space they have left -

> > otherwise the numbers could never be

> accommodated

> > in central london

> >

> > the other interesting thing is how peaceful

> they

> > are, these marches - no pushing, shoving or

> gilets

> > jaunes, minimal police presence and not a

> broken

> > window in sight

>

>

> Yep.

>

> We were with a group of people (including Helen

> Hayes) who joined the march at Green Park (he

> park, not the tube station) having started at

> Victoria.

>

> There was a bottleneck of people trying to get out

> of Green Park into Piccadilly.

>

> We got down to the screen in the Mall but couldn't

> get much further due to the crowds, so never got

> as far as Parliament Square.

>

> And yes, there was no trouble at all, it was a

> really good natured and lovely day, we met some

> lovely people, including people who had come a

> really long way (felt a bit bad we just had quite

> a short journey there!)


I felt bad about that too. But I'm jolly glad I went!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...