Public Forum and mini-Occupy

Saturday 15th June, 10:30am to 2pm at Sheffield Quaker Meeting House.

11am – performance of “The Bedroom Farce”, a street theatre take on the iniquitous bedroom tax;

11:20am – Occupy General Assembly with feedback from the Debt Forum, People’s Assemblies, and action against the Bedroom Tax;

12:30pm – Bring your own picnic and get free tea, coffee, cakes and biscuits!

1:30pm – Fargate street theatre and mini-Occupy demonstration.

Everyone welcome.

There are currently working groups on starting a street paper, joining with others to get an empty shop for ‘alternative Sheffield’ and to plan the 15th of June. If you are interested email us .

Everyone is welcome to everything.

The minutes of all our meetings can be accessed by clicking the Occupy Wiki button at the top of this page. When the Wiki displays scroll down the page until you come to the list of minutes.

A FULL REPORT OF THE PEOPLES FORUM ON DEBT is now on the Wiki

We remain committed to support Fir Vale Food Bank and to work with Positive Money and the Sheffield Equality Group for fundamental system change.

GA, 7pm Monday the 4th March 2013 at the Quaker Meeting House on St James’ Street – next to the Cathedral. Everyone is welcome – just turn up. This follows the Peoples Forum on Debt on the 2nd March.

Minutes of meetings can be found towards the bottom of the Wiki page. Click on Occupy Wiki at the top of this page

Next Event

Peoples Forum on Debt.      Saturday the Second of March.   9.30 – 3.00.    

Quaker Meeting House – St. James Street (just along from the Cathedral)

Speakers on Wealth and Poverty in Sheffield (Sheffield Equality Group), Banking System and debt (Positive Money) and Personal debt (Fir Vale Food bank).

Free – just turn up.     Bring a picnic lunch.       Speakers/small groups and Peoples Forum.

People suffer and struggle and don’t realise that it is not because of their own fecklessness and inadequacy but because of the way that our society is organised and financed. Only if we work together can we change things.

Everyone is welcome to everything.  A  commitment to pursue fairness and equality is fundamental to the Occupy movement. The founding principle of Occupy is that the current system is unsustainable. It is undemocratic and unjust. We need alternatives.

Friday 9th March 2012 : General Assembly 6:30pm : Town Hall steps : Bring tent.

OCCUPY THE STREETS: a 24 hour pop-up protest against “The Banks” (which we’re still furious about, by the way). Meet on Sheffield Town Hall steps today with tents, sleeping bags, flasks, chairs and rebellious smiles. A General Assembly at 6:30pm will be discussing money, policy and actions: alternative banking / ways forward / “Move Your Money” and the rest. Bring your stats, stories and ideas. The overnight camp location(s) will be decided at the GA. Saturday morning (10th March, 10am-12 noon) will give us time for family photos outside your Favorite Worst Bank(s), and maybe we should call time on Bankers’ bonuses too. This is going to be FUN. If you missed the winter, now’s your chance to OCCUPY SHEFFIELD.

The Dean was understandably upset by a disruption on Sunday to the Eucharist by someone who had been associated with Occupy Sheffield. This was a regrettable incident, and we are calling on all parties to dig deep and show compassion towards an individual who is clearly unwell. This person is no longer part of Occupy Sheffield, having repeatedly breached our guidelines.

We additionally set the record straight regarding another interruption, which occurred on a previous Sunday – although as it turned out this was done in accordance with the Cathedral’s own procedures (‘a response to the sermon’), by an individual who is both a supporter of Occupy Sheffield, and a long time member of the Anglican Church. This person made a short point, which is worth reiterating: the goal of Occupy Sheffield is not to criticise the Cathedral.

The goal of Occupy Sheffield, in common with other Occupations worldwide, is to raise awareness of the corrupting effects of money in politics, to highlight the daylight robbery which is corporate tax evasion, to bring to public awareness the facts about our current economic situation – that the privileged few who have caused the current crisis are still active and actively enriching themselves at the direct expense of British taxpayers (a situation which is repeated across the Western world) and that the pain being felt to recover the dire economic situation is being felt in Sheffield by the poor, by the sick, by the
young and old.

Occupy Sheffield is there to stand in solidarity with those who are suffering, and to actively promote the conversation whose goal is to define the fact that there is an alternative, and what that alternative could be.

Finally we reiterated our desire to continue the substantive conversation which was begun last Monday, between OS and Ecumenical leaders in the city. We believe that there is a huge amount of common ground between us, and that as the world, the country and the city of Sheffield stands at a crossroads, a unity of purpose expressed by both the Occupation and the Ecumenical community of Sheffield can be a powerful beacon of hope at a time of need. We look forward to working with the Cathedral and their winter calendar of events, to ensure they can continue business as usual across Christmas and beyond.

Email dated 5th December 2011, from the Cathedral:

Dear Occupy Sheffield protestors,

I write following Sunday morning’s interruption of the Cathedral Eucharist. I now formally request that Occupy Sheffield end immediately its occupation of the Cathedral Forecourt, land which you have neither the right nor the permission to occupy.

Over the past four weeks, the Cathedral Chapter has shown a good deal of understanding of the reasons behind your protest and occupation. We have done this despite our significant concerns about matters of health and safety in the running of the camp, and also about your misrepresentation of the Cathedral’s position in the media.

During yesterday’s interruption of the Cathedral service a representative of Occupy Sheffield shouted profane and threatening obscenities at the congregation and clergy during my sermon. This was completely unacceptable, and deeply distressing for all present. After the previous interruption of the Cathedral Eucharist on 6 November, the Cathedral had made it clear to members of Occupy Sheffield that the Cathedral would hold all members of the protest accountable for the actions of individuals associated with it. Yesterday’s incident shows that you are neither competent nor capable of fulfilling your stated commitment to allow the Cathedral to continue its work uninterrupted, nor of ensuring that the protest is respectful of people’s right to worship without being interrupted or intimidated.

From the beginning of your illegal occupation I have consistently affirmed, in all my statements to the media, that there is a need for many of the issues raised by Occupy Sheffield to be heard more widely. The meeting at the United Reformed Church on Monday 28 November was an attempt to begin this process in Sheffield.

However, I have also consistently stated that the Cathedral Forecourt is not the right place for you to be. The Cathedral’s financial and human resources are being stretched to the limit by the need to manage what has become a very complex situation, and my colleagues are under considerable stress.

In my sermon I said that the time for protest is over and the time for action has come. I now reaffirm my willingness to continue a process of discussion and reflection about areas in which we might act together. However, this process cannot move forward with any degree of goodwill unless you end immediately your occupation of the Cathedral Forecourt.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully,

Peter Bradley

Email reply to Peter Bradley from Occupy Sheffield, dated 6th December 2011:

To The Very Reverend Bradley,

We write in response to your letter of the 5th December.

Firstly, we would like to express our regrets that the cathedral Eucharist was interrupted on Sunday morning last and acknowledge your continued opposition to the location of the Occupy Protest on the cathedral forecourt. We must however point out that the person involved was not a ‘representative’ of Occupy Sheffield, she was there in an individual capacity. We do not send representatives to the Eucharist or any other cathedral event to which we are not specifically invited.

You comment also on a previous interruption at the cathedral on November 6th. This was actually a polite response from a a confirmed member of the Church of England. This young woman also happens to be a part of the protest. She asked to reply to the sermon, and was given two minutes in line with Cathedral policy. She didn’t start responding to the sermon until after she had been invited to the microphone (and therefore onto the hearing aid loop). She estimates that she spoke for 45 seconds of the two minutes that she was allowed under the cathedral policy. She didn’t swear, and informed the cathedral at that point that Occupy Sheffield were not protesting against the Cathedral. Whilst you seem to wish to hold us all responsible for the actions of individuals, we have to say that we are a collection of individuals not a membership organisation, we include a broad range of views and we encourage anyone to come along and get involved in the conversation. Those members of your congregation that have spoken with us have expressed a significant level of support for the aims of the Occupy Protest and have in many instances been generous in deed as well as thought.

We have over the last four weeks made every effort to ensure that the operation of the camp impacted as little as possible on the business of the cathedral but it is impractical to expect no impact at all. We have addressed health and safety issues as they arose and have taken advice both from professionals in the field and from the fire service with respect to the operation of the camp. We continue to meet with the cathedral management team on a regular basis to discuss your concerns and look at how we can mitigate the impact on the operation of the cathedral. We do this at the request of the cathedral and if this is causing overwork or stress for your staff we would happily meet less often.

With respect to our misrepresentation of the cathedral’s position to the media, we can only respond to the media according to our understanding of your position, perhaps you could have made greater effort to talk to us direct rather than taking your comments to the media first, such as your interview with Edward Stourton on 27th November, where you showed little understanding of our position, or of the makeup of our supporters, and you yourself misrepresented your own “conversation” with the protest when there had been none. It is also unfortunate that you felt it necessary to discuss this situation with the media before talking to us direct.

We are engaged in positive discussions with the leaders of all the political parties in the city council and have received a positive response from the people of Sheffield as well as positive media coverage for our views. We have also had very positive support from other faith bodies within the city.

You state in your letter that the cathedral chapter understands the reasons behind our protest and yet despite our continued efforts to involve yourself in the conversations between the cathedral and our camp it was not until the ecumenical meeting at the URC that we have actually come face to face. We would dearly love to progress our discussions with all interested parties, yourselves included, and we would encourage you to examine the positive aspects of the camp in drawing positive attention to the cathedrals mission within the city and the way your support for our protest would enhance the efforts of both.

In the end however we must decline your request to end the Occupy Protest.

Yours sincerely,

Occupy Sheffield.

Following on from the previous published correspondence with the Cathedral, which has been picked up by The Sheffield Telegraph, there has been subsequent correspondence, which in the interests of transparency and openness is published below.

The following email was sent the the Cathedral and Occupy Sheffield by David Goss Vicar of St Aidan’s, Wheatley Hills, Doncaster, @DaviGoss on Twitter.

From: David Goss
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:11:53 -0000
Subject: Appeal to Sheffield Cathedral & Occupy Sheffield

An appeal to those responsible for Sheffield Cathedral and to those at Occupy Sheffield.

This morning I listened to the Radio Sheffield interviews with Deacon Dave & Peter Bradley regarding “Occupy Sheffield”. Later I came to hear Billy Bragg and also spoke with some of those occupying outside the cathedral. I then attended Holy Communion in the cathedral.

I have long been proud of Sheffield Cathedral because of its excellent social outreach. But I also wish to support the Occupy movement, which I believe is taking up an important prophetic role in these dangerous times in which we live. – I am therefore disappointed to find that the cathedral and the occupiers are somewhat at odds with each other.

I realise, of course, that there are some legal and safety concerns that can’t simply be overlooked, but these must not be allowed to get in the way of matters that are much more fundamental and important. I therefore appeal to both the cathedral and the occupiers to lay aside all pettiness and all intransigence and to engage seriously together to explore how each can accommodate the other and to work together on those areas of common concern.

The Sheffield Diocesan Vision Statement invites us to seek to “transform our society and God’s world.” The prophets urge us to do justice as well as to show mercy; and to “let justice flow like a river, and righteousness like a never failing stream.” – These are matters of ultimate importance.

This comes with a promise of prayer for all concerned.

David Goss
Vicar of St Aidan’s, Wheatley Hills, Doncaster.

The following email was sent to Occupy Sheffield by Carl Hutton, General Manager of the Cathedral on Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:30:40:

Dear Occupy Sheffield protestors

With reference to the email you sent to me on Monday, you stated that you would be in contact with the Cathedral regarding health and safety matters relating to the Billy Bragg performance on the Cathedral Forecourt/Churchyard before it took place, land which you are currently occupying without permission. Fortunately due to the low turnout at the event the health and safety matters that were a concern to the Cathedral in this instance were not realised, this however does not make your decision to not communicate with the Cathedral about your intended health and safety measures for the event, when you stated in an email that you would.

On a separate and related health and safety matter, in the Cathedral and Occupy Sheffield dialogue meeting held yesterday, concerns were expressed with regards the open structure that has been erected close to the accessible entrance to the Burrows Transept. The concerns relating to the lack of ballast, the structure being a tripping hazard and its location in relation to the main entrance with a funeral taking place on Monday the structure dominates the Forecourt / Churchyard and we would be keen for it to be relocated away from the two entrances if you insist on its continued use.

In the meeting the Cathedral was informed that the structure was ballasted with the sand bags and tethered to the bollards and street furniture. In having undertaken a site check this afternoon it is clear that the structure is ballasted through the use of no more than 6 sand bags which should the wind pick up would not be sufficient to stop a serious incident occurring. Please can you resolve the matter of where this structure is located how it is ballasted immediately as it is a potential danger to both campers and members of the public should the weather change and the wind pick up.

Finally it was stated by the Cathedral in the dialogue meeting that the Cathedral had with Occupy Sheffield protestors yesterday that the Cathedral had been informed that the Police were receiving a number of calls from Occupy Sheffield protestors from the Cathedral Forecourt / Churchyard with regards various incidents taking place on the camp, only for complaints then not to be formally lodged once the Police had attended the incident. This morning two members of the Cathedral staff reported that they witnessed a member of Occupy Sheffield in distress, alleging they had been assaulted by another member of your camp, only for the matter again not to be formally taken forward with the Police, despite the Police having attended on site. This approach of not wishing to have incidents recorded with the Police is putting every member of the Occupy Sheffield protest which is illegally occupying Cathedral land at significant risk as there are clearly chronic problems within your group with regards criminal activity.

We are obligated as the owners of the land, even though you are trespassing on it to draw these matters to your attention. It is the Cathedrals understanding that the male involved in the incident this morning was also involved in the altercation witnessed on Saturday evening that I previously brought to your attention. Our conclusion to this is that Occupy Sheffield despite stating that it is in control of the campsite and occupation are in fact not and you are putting protestors and members of the public at significant risk.

As with my previous correspondence please do not hesitate to circulate this message as you see appropriate.

Carl Hutton
General Manager

The Cathedral Church of St Peter and St Paul
Church Street
Sheffield
S1 1HA

W: www.sheffieldcathedral.org

Occupy Shefield sent the following reply in response:

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:44:13 +0000
From: info@occupysheffield.org.uk
Subject: Re: Sheffield Cathedral – Issues of concern

Dear Carl,

We know that the OS representatives at the meeting on Tuesday were able to respond to your points about the Comms, Health & Safety and Police issues, namely that 1) it’s a tough job, and we apologize 2) they were being dealt with and 3) that matters between OS and the police are precisely that. To clarify, both police and city centre management were consulted re Billy Bragg and were happy it wasn’t a cause for concern. With regards your suggestion to move the dome, this will be discussed at our next camp meeting.

Occupy Sheffield has a code of conduct in which we are asking people to leave the immediate area of the camp (and are discouraging them from entering), if they are under the influence. The camp is dry. However, we have no means of enforcing the removal of people if they are violent, except in extreme cases where we can only call the police. We have taken what we believe to be the correct stance where itinerant Street-Drinkers who stay on the Cathedral forecourt are concerned (they have been doing so for many years), namely that they are welcome in the camp if they abide by the code of conduct. Sadly, they frequently have not.

We do have to manage challenging anti-social behaviour and occasional flare-ups. But it is a core belief that the movement should be inclusive, and moreover, in many cases these are the victims of the system we challenge – so it is painful for us to have to lay out for you so barely that in most cases it is these people who are causing trouble. The group is undertaking workshops to attempt to deal with the issues of safe exclusion.

It is a common phenomenon that has been observed in Occupy Movements around the world, that the pre-existing troubles of an area are brought into the spotlight – and frequently blamed on the Occupation itself. This situation seems to be no different, but we have set our sights on higher goals, and we will do our best not to be diverted.

Once again, we appeal for a change of heart on the part of the Cathedral; for you to acknowledge that fundamentally the prospectus for a just and fair society is one that we all share. We are working to establish a way of setting up a constructive dialogue process that will be acceptable to all involved and invite you to a constructive dialogue as to how the Cathedral and the Occupation can leave the narrative of conflict behind.

Occupy Sheffield

He sang:

1. The World Turned Upside Down, composed by Leon Rosselson in 1975
2. Which Side Are You On?, composed by Florence Reece in 1931
3. There is Power in a Union, composed by Joe Hill in 1913
4. John T Was a Banker, Billy Bragg 2011
5. The Internationale

You can download a MP3 of the lunchtime talk or listen using the player below, following are some photos that were taken during the talk.

Smash EDO are planning a summer of resistance against EDO in 2012, and want groups from all over the country to play a part.

This talk was organised in partnership with the Sheffield Palestine Solidarity campaign.

It is somewhat regrettable that the correspondence received from Cathedral Management should be made public however the group feel it important that the congregation of the Cathedral – many of whom are vocal supporters of the Occupation – and the wider public, should be made aware of the confrontational approach of the Cathedral, who continue to question the validity of the Occupation and to undermine its presence through exaggerated concerns about Health and Safety and other minutiae.

Please be in no doubt that the Health and Safety of all at the camp, and the cathedral staff and visitors, is a real concern which Occupy Sheffield takes seriously.

However, Occupy Sheffield would like to invite the Cathedral to join with us in confronting the serious issues that the Occupation is dealing with.  There is evidently a great deal of synergy between the goals of the Occupy Movement and those of the Christian church. Occupy Sheffield is confident more could be achieved by working together – specifically in relation to Sheffield’s homeless problem with which Occupy Sheffield is not only ‘up close and personal’, but for which the camp is actively providing welfare support on a 24/7 basis – something that not even the Archer Project (which Occupy Sheffield wholeheartedly supports) can offer.

It is a matter of some disappointment that the Cathedral seem intent to continue along an obstreperous and obstructive path, rather than embrace this opportunity to reaffirm the commitment of the Church to its core doctrine of seeking an equable and just society through courage, dialogue and action.

Occupy Sheffield urge members of the Cathedral’s clergy and congregation to join the movement and confront the inequalities of our society firm in the understanding that only by standing together can common goals be achieved.  The Cathedral is invited to acknowledge that their initial fears about the Occupation have been unrealised, and that now is the time to enter into a new phase of co-operation and dialogue.

OCCUPY SHEFFIELD

Initial statement from the Cathedral

Below is the statement on behalf of the Cathedral’s governing body, the Cathedral Chapter on the first day (5th Nov) of Occupy Sheffield.

The protestors do not have the Cathedral’s permission to use the churchyard. The Cathedral does however respect the protestors’ right to make their voice heard. Some of what they are saying is very important.

For over twenty years the Cathedral has worked with partners throughout the city and region to give a voice to the homeless, the most vulnerable people in our community. It is our hope that the care the Cathedral Archer Project offers to many very needy people will not be impeded or reduced by the presence of protestors here.

The Cathedral remains open to visitors and for worship and prayer. The Cathedral Archer Project will also maintain its regular opening hours.

The Very Reverend Peter Bradley 5th November

Correspondence from the Cathedral

To follow are all emails received by Occupy Sheffield from the Cathedral to date:

From: Carl Hutton
Sent: 10 November 2011 23:42
To: info@occupysheffield.org.uk
Subject: Security / Guards on Duty on the Cathedral Forecourt / Church yard

Dear Occupy Sheffield Protestors

I am reliably informed that you currently have SIA licensed security guards patrolling the Cathedral Forecourt this evening which Occupy Sheffield do not have permission from Sheffield Cathedral to be on, in order to resolve various anti social behavior problems that you have encountered over the last few evenings.

Please can I draw your attention as a matter of urgency to the fact that the security guards are not insured to work on Cathedral land as we have not consented to their use as Occupy Sheffield are trespassing on Cathedral property.  Should there be an incident tonight requiring the physical intervention of one of the security guards, our understanding from the Police and our legal advisors is that they could be charged with assault.  The Cathedral made several attempts to contact the security company you are using this afternoon to make them aware of the significant risk they were placing members of staff in by working on Cathedral property, unfortunately despite our efforts our calls were not taken or returned.

In fairness to the security guards who you have contracted to undertake this work, can I please suggest you inform them immediately of this situation and the position that Occupy Sheffield have placed them in as not to do so places all participants of the Occupy Sheffield protest individually in a very vulnerable legal position should any incidents happen later in the evening.

I will raise this matter again tomorrow afternoon at a meeting arranged with representatives of Occupy Sheffield.

Carl Hutton

General  Manager

Subject: Sheffield Cathedral – Areas of concern
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 16:29:59 +0000
From: Carl Hutton
To: info@occupysheffield.org.uk

Dear Occupy Sheffield Protestors

Following on from the dialogue meeting yesterday between representatives of the Cathedral and the Occupy Sheffield Movement, the Cathedral raised concerns over Occupy Sheffield requesting donations on Cathedral land and leafleting without an appropriate license, this morning Cathedral staff had to move 2 individuals who had set up a stall in front of the cathedral, clearly displaying Occupy Sheffield posters and propaganda on their stall whilst also distributing the Socialist Worker.

Prior to moving the individuals on, the Occupy Sheffield camp was approached so that a request for this activity to be stopped could be taken forward by Occupy Sheffield.  The response to this request was that the individuals concerned had nothing to do with Occupy Sheffield but were  related to the Socialist party.   The attitude of members in the camp to Cathedral representatives was described to me as hostile – again not ideal when such concerns had been raised in a meeting the day before to representatives of Occupy Sheffield.

After this dialogue the Cathedral staff moved on the individuals only to witness throughout the afternoon at least one of the individuals from the Socialist Party being in and around the camp for most of the afternoon.  As stated yesterday the Cathedral has no option but to take the view that individuals who are associating with Occupy Sheffield are part of Occupy Sheffield.  So we request again that no donations are asked for or taken on Cathedral land.

Separately we have also identified to members of the camp the unacceptable conditions of the site around the HMS Sheffield Memorial (including  tree) currently comprising of several pallets (also a fire hazard) a chained up bike and tarpaulin.  This memorial is a focus for activity around Remembrance Sunday and has left a member of the public who visits the memorial every year in distress this afternoon.   Please sort this immediately so further upset is not caused to other members of the local community who the Cathedral serves on a daily basis.  This concern was raised with representatives of Occupy Sheffield yesterday, but since this meeting the condition of the camp as a whole and specifically the area around the memorial has quickly deteriorated to unacceptable levels.

We are repeatedly drawing your attention to the fact that you do not have permission and you have no invitation to use our land for your protest.  Despite this we are trying to show a degree of tolerance to your activities.  Incidents such as today’s issue undermines our stance and your stated objective not to hinder the Cathedral in its work.

Please raise these matters at your next General Assembly.

Carl Hutton

General  Manager

Subject: Sheffield Cathedral – Issues of concern
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 13:58:17 +0000
From: Carl Hutton
To: info@occupysheffield.org.uk

Dear Occupy Sheffield Protestors

At the meeting  on Friday between representatives of Sheffield Cathedral and Occupy Sheffield, the Cathedral outlined a number of events taking place at the Cathedral over the coming weeks so that Occupy Sheffield were able to ensure that these events take place without interference.  In light of this dialogue it is unfortunate that the Cathedral only became aware of the intended performance of Billy Bragg on Cathedral land on this coming Tuesday via the internet rather than through the dialogue meeting.

With regards to the Billy Bragg performance on Tuesday we need clarification as to the health and safety measures Occupy Sheffield intend to have in place should a number of people arrive on the Cathedral Forecourt so that the safety of members of the public, members of the Occupy Sheffield, member of staff at Sheffield Cathedral and Billy Bragg are not put at risk on Cathedral land, land which you do not have permission to be on. For your information it is the Cathedrals understanding that legally each member of Occupy Sheffield would be individually liable should any incident be encountered in relation to the visit and performance  of Billy Bragg on Cathedral land when we have stated you do not have permission to occupy our land.

On a related matter,  the Cathedral outlined that one of the key criteria for the Cathedral to maintain its position of tolerance towards Occupy Sheffield was on the basis that certain health and safety matters were acknowledged and addressed, these included the need for Occupy Sheffield not to have any lit fires on site.  Last night at 11.40pm several members of the Cathedral team including myself saw a lit fire being used by Occupy Sheffield on the encampment, please stop this practice immediately as otherwise the Cathedral will be required to review its current tolerant approach to dealing with Occupy Sheffield.

Finally the Cathedral has stated that other key criteria for the Cathedrals continued tolerance towards Occupy Sheffield to be maintained include the stipulation that no users of the Cathedral be they staff, clergy, the congregation or visitors are verbally or physically abused.  So far there is no suggestion this has happened.  However we are repeatedly receiving information with regards incidents within the camp which do not reflect well on Occupy Sheffield with regards the respect you are showing each other within the campsite which as you are illegally on our land we have to draw to your attention. For example last night I witnessed a significant altercation within your camp in full view of a number of members of the public which seemed to include different factions your the camp having to restrain two individuals from attacking each other.  The result of this unsavory incident will be me consulting with colleagues at the Cathedral on Monday as to whether a further stipulation is that members of Occupy Sheffield do not verbally abuse or physically abuse one another in order for the Cathedral to maintain its position of tolerance.  I will also be raising this matter with the Police.

Carl Hutton

General  Manager

Reply to the Cathedral

Subject: Re: Sheffield Cathedral – Issues of concern
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 09:40:16 +0000
From: Occupy Sheffield info@occupysheffield.org.uk
To: Carl Hutton

Please be in no doubt that the Health and Safety issues you noticed have already been dealt with and we will be sharing our H&S plan for Billy Bragg on Tuesday with yourselves after it has been agreed with the relevant authorities. We will be in contact with you Monday afternoon to ascertain any specific H&S requirements, over and above the normal.

We feel it is important to address the final point in your letter, where you suggest that ‘members of Occupy Sheffield do not verbally abuse or physically abuse one another in order for the Cathedral to maintain its position of tolerance’. Firstly, the condition of respect and nonviolence is fundamental to this movement, but is also already in our code of conduct.

Secondly, Occupy Sheffield is an open camp, and we feel it our moral duty to welcome all comers (with some limitations – fascist groups are not welcome), this means welcoming people who will potentially behave badly. We have become a magnet, not only for well-meaning, well-behaved protestors, but also for troubled people who frequently have drug and behavioural issues. We feel that for the Cathedral to enact the implied threat to “withdraw its position of tolerance” for Occupy Sheffield on the basis of the behaviour of a minority, is no different to the Cathedral “withdrawing its position of tolerance” for those people directly. We are doing our utmost to uphold our obligation to the most needy in society, whilst at the same time continuing to push forward our main goal of raising awareness of the crisis of exaggerated riches for the few, and economic frustration for the many. Our approach is open and consensual, and we welcome your ideas as to how we should best deal with this element, during the night-time, overnight and weekends when the Archer Project is closed.

Occupy Sheffield stands firmly in the belief that it was correct to start the camp, and the camp will remain for as long as possible. It is clear from the Occupations world-wide that there is a genuine groundswell of opinion that we must orient our society away from the individualistic, grab-it-while-you-can mentality, and Occupy Sheffield is providing the forum for those discussions.

But we are also a magnet for the sick, the abused and the fallen, and we cannot, and we will not turn our backs on these people.

We ask only that you stand with us for a better world.

Occupy Sheffield

All over the world people from most walks of life are congregating in churches and financial institutions and are, in their own words, “Peacefully occupying them”. They all seem to have one common agenda and that is for fairness in society and in economics. Every individual person within the movement will have a unique and specific outline of why they are there, however all the explanations given point to one thing, 1% of the world’s population owns nearly half of the worlds wealth.

Let’s take a look at some of the main factors mentioned most of the time. The most moving argument I have encountered so far is that the amount of money spent on war and military build up and maintenance far exceeds the cost of feeding everyone on the planet. One typical missile can cost in excess of several hundreds of thousands of pounds, Just ONE. During a conflict dozens if not hundreds of these things are fired daily. The high tech weaponry, planes, helicopters, etc all cost phenomenal amounts of money. You could argue that military power is essential in society and it is money well spent, and that is up to you. The next point however is that human beings own the companies that manufacture and sell these products. Huge profit is made on war and military.

Billions a day are raked in by the arms manufacturers, especially when nations like the UK and America are invading non complainant nations. These humans who take home these vast sums are mega rich. Trillionaires are not fantasy. Remember a lot of wealth can be hidden in networks of foreign accounts, assets, priceless collections, estates etc. The other huge argument most occupiers will mention is the vast profits made by banking and insurance firms daily. It is on the same scale, if not more than the war industry. By moving money around from strong and weak currencies and then back again huge gains are made. By buying shares in companies that are known to be about to receive large government contracts also make huge returns. Usually the most profitable companies are those that make weapons and medicine. For those in ‘the know’ the future contracts and profits in these companies are highly predictable. High-street banks are dealers in pocket change compared to their investment banking counterparts. Billions of pounds are moved around the financial industry daily, profit margins are massive. The amount of profit made in banking daily could also feed the entire planet several times over.

Remember that 1% of the world’s population own nearly half of the world’s wealth. When the occupiers refer to themselves as the 99% they mean that they, along with pretty much everybody else in the 7 billion strong population of the world, are the majority. By the 1% they are not referring to the millionaire entrepreneurs, or the lottery winners, this is a drop in the ocean compared to the super-rich.

The more politically minded members of the occupy groups have also mentioned this, in our democracy we place a tick in a box and then somebody else decides what to do for four years, then you get to tick a box again. They feel this is an illusion of democracy, as no real choice is presented to them. The politicians that stand a chance of winning are backed by these large companies that can afford to pay for extensive and effective campaigns. Of course once in a position of power they could not make any suggestion that these company directors and executives should pay any more profits as tax. In fact, as a note, this new government has reduced corporation tax since getting into power, while pushing up the taxes regular people pay.

This brings us neatly to the arguments about taxation and government funding. Remember how much money is spent on the military by governments? Billions. A strong argument is that the priorities are wrong. While people are paying more and more for their essentials, in their rents and house prices, in their taxes, and the amount of available work sinks, why are the vast amounts of military spending taking place? After all, weapons kill and destroy, is this better than looking after those at home, on our soil? It is an argument many often repeat.

The banking crisis is costing the public money, jobs and public services. Because an investment apparently went wrong we are paying for it. This is common knowledge. Whether we should or not is a matter of opinion. Iceland as a nation has refused to assist Europe pay back the banks in a public vote. If you think about it, the banks will charge you for not having enough money to satisfy a bill, penalising you financially for struggling financially. Then they now have a shortfall and we, the public, are charged again. Many feel this is not fair. Many feel bank charges are not fair to begin with and this austerity measure is simply ridiculous and criminal. It is common argument. Remember how much money is floating around in the riches 1% – enough to fix the banking shortfall in moments without damaging anything.

The banks and financial institutions have one over on the governments. How is this apparent? National debt. Our taxes are paying off national debt in their billions. Our leaders are at the whim of the loan sharks. Could they not just say no? Could they say, “We are in charge, don’t tell us what to do, stop being so greedy and help build a positive society, you can afford it, it is law”? They could but they don’t.

So how do the occupiers suggest we begin to fix these problems? Although the 1% of the world who own nearly half of the worlds wealth could afford to feed the planet, build and maintain a school and a clinic in every village, fund international peace deals globally and much, much more, they don’t want to and wont. A law that says they must would be very difficult to put forward.

However, some sort of law needs to be implemented. The amounts of money they move around and make daily is, as I have mentioned, phenomenal. A Robin Hood style tax that shaves off a tiny fraction of this, which would be undetectable to their profits, would raise enough money to settle the financial deficit, pay off the debts, build economies, feed the world, build schools, hospitals, training, free education…the list is absolutely endless. Any selfless and humanitarian project you could mention would be made possible overnight. By eliminating poverty and providing well paid jobs globally, by eliminating the concept of a third world country, it would logically follow that the world would pay more taxes, and the cycle would enter a positive feedback.

The occupy movement want the government to say “No” to paying the banks money to reduce the amount of money the supposedly ‘lost’. Every day people are being given harder and harder times with rising costs in essentials like food and energy can be overcome by standing up to these corporate organisations and saying no. It is obviously apparent that the people in charge have enough money to solve the problem themselves.

Many occupiers want to see an end to military action in places that have no affect on us what so ever. Instead of fighting people who are claimed to be “Terrorists” why not fly over and ask, “What have we done to upset you and how can we fix it?” The protesters generally agree on the needlessness of war. It costs far more money that it would take to fix the global issues of poverty, disease, education costs, public services and much more.

What about the democracy? The idea of voting once every four years and then leaving it up to people you have never met is simply undemocratic in the opinion of occupy. How they go about decision making is to have a general assembly where everyone is invited to attend. A discussion takes place with one person in charge of giving everyone else a fair say. No one takes a leadership role and every decision is made by consensus, where by everything is discussed and debated until a middle ground can be agreed on by all. Once the groups have agreed on something it is documented and shared with other groups for consideration. Each ‘cell’ is responsible for itself; however consistency in opinion and decision is showing through where it is becoming obvious that all over the world people want change, and the change wanted is the same. The same principle could be taken to the running of the country.

Each local area has its council, which could be a lot more democratically involved with the citizens of that area. Once the citizens and the council have agreed on an action it is put to the national government, who also debate the principles with the public. The basic idea is that it cannot be left up to a select handful of people who we know nothing about to run everything that affects the citizens and the nation.