G20 death: more pressure on police

Indeed, if there was any blame attached to the death of Ian Tomlinson from a heart attack, it was associated with protesters who had, allegedly, thrown missiles at police as they attempted to resuscitate him. The death takes on a very different aspect now that we know more about the circumstances that preceded it.

New video footage, which was made available by a New York fund manager who was watching the
demonstrations, makes clear that Mr Tomlinson was pushed forcibly to the ground from behind by a policeman, who may also have hit him with a baton.

This evidence is now being considered by the Independent Police Complaints Commission but it does not take a lengthy report to conclude that, on the face of it, this was a disgraceful way to treat a member of the public. As we report elsewhere, there are a number of difficult questions the police need to address.

One is whether there were two clashes between Mr Tomlinson and the police. If so, they need to explain whether he offered them any provocation that might put the second into context. Another is whether they were acting in accordance with their own rules for policing the demonstration. A third is why did they issue a statement saying he had not been involved in a confrontation with police before he died?

Mr Tomlinson was not an anarchist nor a protester. Rather, he was helping to sell the Evening Standard and was going about his ordinary business as he made his way home. Unprovoked assaults on legitimate protesters are not justified either but this apparent wilful mistreatment of a law-abiding member of the public is particularly shocking.

Granted, Mr Tomlinson did not die as a direct result of police violence but it is at least possible that his heart attack was occasioned by his treatment. This death should give rise to immediate reassessment of police tactics, in particular isolating groups of protesters and hemming them into a confined space.

The public are used to the idea that they may need protecting from violent demonstrators; we ought not to need protecting from the police.

Absent MPs

The standing of MPs is already low, thanks to the revelations about their expenses. Now, with the publication of statistics about their poor attendance at parliamentary committees, some of them look work-shy as well as opportunistic. MPs are not paid extra for attending committees and, according to figures released by Parliament, at least 60 of the 220 members of the most influential committees routinely skip meetings.

Attendance at the most important committees has dropped by 10 per cent in the past five years. This is troubling: the low importance attached to debates by the Government means these committees provide some of the few opportunities to hold the executive to account.

Admittedly, some committees are plainly poorly chaired and work less well than they should — the Public Accounts Committee and the Transport Committee set standards that the rest would do well to follow — but this is not an excuse for members to opt out of their duties. MPs should remember that there is very great competition for their seats: if they cannot be bothered to do their job, there are others who would be only too glad to do it.

Bargain Proms

THIS YEAR'S proms programme announced by the director, Roger Wright, is as diverse as we have come to expect. There is Fidelio, conducted by Daniel Barenboim, competing with the Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain, and a Bollywood prom. This is one of the great music festivals of Europe, and with tickets from a fiver, a credit-crunch bargain with it.