THE policing at the Clapham Common vigil to Sarah Everard was a “direct consequence of the Government imposing unreasonable, disproportionate restrictions”, according to Christchurch MP Sir Christopher Chope.

Questions have been asked of the Metropolitan Police over their handling of the event in London on Saturday evening.

And wider concerns have also been raised about proposed measures in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, which is receiving its second reading in the House of Commons this week.

The bill includes plans to give police more powers to tackle non-violent protests which cause significant disruption to the public or on access to Parliament.

Sir Christopher told the Daily Echo he was “very nervous” about this element of the bill.

Asked about the scenes at Saturday’s vigil, he said: “My view on what happened on Clapham Common is that it is direct consequence of the Government imposing unreasonable, disproportionate restrictions upon people’s right to protest and assemble in the open air.

“In the first lockdown such rights were not restricted and we had demonstrations and so on.

“What happened at Clapham was that the discretion of police to negotiate the terms and conditions of a public rally with the organisers was removed from them by the regulations. Those regulations were passed without any debate in the House of Commons.”

The Conservative backbench MP said the regulations were relaxed last Monday in relation to political campaigning but still in force to prevent people who wanted to “expresses support and solidarity for the family and friends” of Sarah Everard.

He added: “This has blown up in the Government’s face because the basic regulations were unreasonable.”

On the proposed changes in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, Sir Christopher said he is “instinctively a person who supports liberty”.

“I am very nervous about all of this,” he added. “People in London were absolutely exasperated by some of the Extinction Rebellion protests, which completely disrupted the economy of London.

“That is obviously one of the background factors for this legislation but I am not sure we want to go out of the frying pan and into the fire on this.

“I think we remove the right of people to assemble and express their views in public at our peril in a sense that once those democratic rights have been removed or reduced, who knows how or when we are going to get them back again.

“We have seen that during the pandemic. You can go out and campaign for political elections or even for referendum but you can’t go and have a vigil on Clapham Common.”

Sir Christopher said he intended to support the bill at the second reading in Parliament this week but added that there would be opportunities for scrutiny and changes at committee, report and third reading stages.