The effect of overbearing police will last far longer than coronavirus

Everyone knows that in a time of crisis, extraordinary measures, and extraordinary sacrifices, must be made for the good of all.

We in the UK have a knee-jerk response of invoking the “blitz spirit” when faced with the prospect of hardship. The government’s gradual introduction of measures to curb the spread of coronavirus in this country is a good example. In the age of Brexit – of greater personal autonomy and responsibility, away from big government – Downing Street has introduced more draconian measures than any other administration in peace time. The response? The Tories are polling at 54 per cent – their highest level of approval in living memory.

People understand that curbs on their liberty are necessary to protect the vulnerable in society. This is positive, especially as so many have spent the past decade decrying just how cruel the UK is to that cohort. It flies in the face of the narrative when such a freedom-loving bunch are prepared to happily shelve their immediate futures for the good of all.

But, make no mistake, the UK is a country that has forged its modern identity on a slow, millennia-long gravitation towards liberty. Its greatest thinkers and works of literature, politics and philosophy, from Mill to Locke, Paine to Orwell, all come from a position of championing freedom and warning against tyranny. Its people understand that the Coronavirus Bill, and the measures put in place, are temporary. They will not stand for them lasting a second longer than they have to, but more so, they will not stand for the state putting a toe beyond the limit of what they deem tolerable.

Boris Johnson prevaricated and delayed introducing measures that would curb the public’s freedom for precisely this reason – he feared jumping the gun would lead to disgruntlement, and see people ignore them. Barely days into lockdown, examples are emerging of people in authority tentatively over-exerting their newfound powers, and to widespread public annoyance.

The first example came from Derbyshire Police, who shared via their Twitter account footage from an aerial drone of people out walking in the open, empty countryside – identifying vehicles, and shaming them as people engaged in “non-essential” activity.

The response was as immediate as it was furious. Never mind that the people in question were breaking no laws or guidelines – everybody is permitted to exercise outdoors, and doing so in uninhabited areas is preferable to populated ones – but the fact that a police force had used surveillance equipment to identify, harass and shame them was too much. It bore an eery resemblance to the behaviour of Chinese authorities, who have proudly shown the world their own use of surveillance drones to chase people breaking curfews.

Perhaps to Derbyshire Police, exercise is not essential. But in what world is stationing a drone to monitor empty moorland essential?

They weren’t the only force to confuse their role between that of protector of the peace and bullish PE teacher. Denton and Droylsden Police took it upon themselves to arbitrarily decide how much time one could spend outside too. “Around an hour a day” is the limit for the poor inhabitants of this part of the world – with the rest of their time to be spent confined to their quarters. One wonders if the force has spent too much time watching US prison dramas rather than examining the guidelines.

Northamptonshire Police, meanwhile, are clearly fans of Eastern Bloc period dramas instead – they announced that they were receiving “dozens and dozens” of calls from members of the public denouncing neighbours for leaving their houses more than once a day, which, again, is perfectly legal even under current conditions. The announcement made to encourage the dobbing in of neighbours is perhaps the most sinister of all, putting power into the hands of the nosy is never a fantastic recipe and, as examples from the Stasi to the NKVD show, it is never confined to honest intentions.

Even in the modern era, Brits bristle when they see armed policemen. We are not a people welcoming of snooping or thuggery. In times of emergency such as this, we recognise when police behaviour is essential, and when it isn’t.

If the police want the public to keep to safety guidelines, they need to adhere to them as responsibly as the public. If they don’t, all that will happen is, as Johnson predicted, people will push back against them, and hard. People going for walks are not criminals, and those venturing outside to the shops are not enemies of the state. The police have absolutely no business wasting resources on people not breaking the law, bending guidelines to satisfy their own thirst for power, overstepping boundaries and, quite literally, taking liberties.