Six Extinction Rebellion activists held a protest outside a Cardiff Barclays minutes after being fined over a lock-in at the same bank. The climate change protesters had been taken to court following an event last November when they chained themselves to the interior of the St David's Way branch in a demonstration against the bank's funding of fossil fuels.
After being found guilty and sentenced at Cardiff Crown Court, the activists walked to the bank and wore mock-prison uniforms displaying the message: "Barclays are the real criminals". Barclays has defended its environmental record as "one of the first" banks to "set an ambition" to become net zero by 2050.
Pamela Williams, 74, from Llanidloes in Powys; Sarah Wilding, 55, from Knighton in Powys; Christine Welch, 69, from Broseley in Shropshire; Jamie Russell, 48, from Shrewsbury; Dougall Purce, 59, from Shrewsbury; and Michael Bastow, 54, from Oswestry in Shropshire denied aggravated trespass in the November 14 occupation of Barclays. From around 12pm until 3.30pm they had chained themselves to each other and to a fixed stand near the windowfront, where they silently held placards against the glass.
Read next: Young man 'forced to grow cannabis for gang and didn't leave house for months'
They told the non-jury trial they took up "minimal space" because they did not intend to disrupt the bank's activity. But prosecutor Sian Cutter said one of the chairs in the waiting area was not available to customers because of the protest.
Ms Cutter added: "Pamela Williams says the aim of the placards was to change the minds of anyone thinking of banking with Barclays. The court may decide this is clear evidence the intention was, at least in part, to disrupt the bank's business."
The prosecutor also said the bank was forced to close three hours early due to the lock-in. But Welch, a retired special educational needs coordinator who represented herself, said: "The choice of venue, the sort of action, was all aimed to be non-disruptive. I've done a range of training, including non-violent direct action, which I think is vital."
Welch described the group as "non-violent, polite and respectful" to everyone they interacted with. And Eleanor De, who represented the other defendants, said the protest was "plainly non-disruptive by design", adding: "Mr Russell specifically researched the law to make sure they were not putting themselves at risk of arrest."
Ms De pointed out the bank manager had admitted that staff were able to continue with business as usual before the decision to close the bank for the day. The manager had said the decision was made because it was "not a nice atmosphere outside" and they wanted to make sure staff were safe when they left the branch. But the manager accepted the defendants were not involved in the shouting outside. Ms De argued this showed it was not the defendants' actions that led to the closure.
Finding the defendants guilty, District Judge David Webster said the manager was "disrupted in carrying out her activities" because the protest meant she was unavailable for her usual duties. He added that he was satisfied the protesters intended to be disruptive, though he said: "The protest outside was potentially more threatening. Inside it was relatively — and I emphasise the word 'relatively' — innocuous."
The judge continued: "It was a wholly peaceful demonstration and it was structured in a way to mitigate the impact. But I take the view the reason for that was as much a desire to have a prospect of acquittal as any other reason."
Bastow, Welch, Wilding and Purce had no previous convictions, while Williams had one for obstructing a highway and Russell had one for failing to comply with a police condition to leave a protest by a certain time. The court heard Bastow had a weekly income of £600, Purce £450, Russell £340, Wilding £300, Welch £300 and Williams £200.
Judge Webster handed Bastow a £534 fine and £214 victim services surcharge, Purce a £405 fine and £162 surcharge, Russell a £306 fine and £122 surcharge, Wilding a £270 fine and £108 surcharge, Welch a £270 fine and £108 surcharge, and Williams a £180 fine and £72 surcharge. Each must also pay prosecution costs of £310.
Shortly after their sentencing the protesters posed for a picture outside the bank and held a "better without Barclays" banner while chanting: "Extinction Rebellion." Wilding, a shepherd, said: “I took action because Barclays are the biggest fossil fuel funders in Europe. Even if you don't bank with Barclays, HMRC does, which means the money you pay in tax goes towards funding the climate and ecological emergency.”
And Williams, a retired deputy headteacher, told WalesOnline the criminalisation of protesters was an example of how society was "wasting time" on the climate crisis. "It's another way of shutting us up," she said.
The Guardian reports that Barclays put more than £15bn into the fossil fuel industry in 2021. A Barclays spokesman said following last November's protest: "We are determined to play our part in addressing the urgent and complex challenge of climate change. In March, 2020, we were one of the first banks to set an ambition to become net zero by 2050, across all of our direct and indirect emissions, and we committed to align all of our financing activities with the goals and timelines of the Paris Agreement. We have a three-part strategy to turn that ambition into action: achieving net zero operations, reducing our financed emissions, and financing the transition."
To get the latest Cardiff news straight to your inbox, subscribe to our daily newsletter here.
READ NEXT:
