SOUTH Yorkshire Police has come under fire from a local campaigner for using Barnsley officers to manage the controversial tree felling programme in Sheffield.
The felling is part of Sheffield City Council’s £2bn project to improve roads and footpaths in the city.
Police have been brought in to prevent trouble flaring up between campaigners and staff for Amey, which is carrying out the work, after clashes between the two groups.
Peter Giles, who lives in Barnsley, has been to Sheffield to support the campaigners and has fired criticism at the South Yorkshire force after learning officers from Barnsley have been drafted in to help keep the peace.
Peter, of Lancaster Street, Barnsley, said people in Barnsley are directly funding the force which is ‘supporting a big company in Sheffield’.
He said: “I have been across a couple of times and I was there last week and there was a large police presence.
“I have met officers from Barnsley and Doncaster on the streets of Sheffield - they should be in their own towns. It’s disgraceful.
“On Friday one small cherry tree down was taken down and there were 30 officers, police vans, ten tree cutters, barrier crew. It cost about £15,000 on that job in terms of time and personnel.
“It’s absolutely disgusting.
“I’ve not seen a policeman down my street for months and yet Barnsley officers are attending this ridiculous affair in Sheffield.
“I live in Barnsley but have a rural background and work for the Woodland Trust and just feel it is a needless felling of trees and I couldn’t stand by and let it go and wanted to support it peacefully.”
A police spokeswoman said the force doesn’t disclose operational numbers but confirmed that it is a force-wide operation which is why officers from Barnsley have been drafted in to assist. She said numbers of officers assigned each day changes daily.
Peter believes the number of officers and security is disproportionate saying there is no risk of violence erupting.
He said: “The worst anyone has been arrested for is the breach of highways act for getting in the way of someone in lawful business.”
The council, which is planting new trees after removing existing ones, insists those earmarked for felling are either ‘dangerous, dead, diseased, dying, damaging or discriminatory’.
Campaigners argue many of the trees the council has classed as ‘damaging’ or ‘discriminatory’ are healthy specimens which should not be cut down, saying amendments to surrounding pavements and roads should be made instead.
A police spokeswoman said many of the concerns raised by Mr Giles had been addressed by Chief Constable Stephen Watson in a public letter he sent to Lord Scriven following his criticism over policing of the tree-felling protesters.
He states: “The police service have an obligation to ensure that we respond to issues of protest in a fair and even-handed way. The policing of protest comes down to an exercise of balancing competing rights and upholding the law.
“In this case, we are satisfied that Sheffield City Council has a clear legal basis for the performance of their maintenance duties.
“It is also the case that all people have the right to peaceful and lawful protest, residents have the right to the peaceful enjoyment of their property and the wider public have the right to go about their business unmolested.
“SYP remain impartial with regards to the ongoing debate in relation to the trees maintenance program and in respect of the protests against the program. These are matters for public and political discourse and it is not the role of the police to take a view on these issues.”
