1. What evidence do we have that the accommodation of a march will draw this issue to a close ?
2. It is clear from Facebook that protestors see the campaign as a phased programme of events. In fact they have identified a number of demands.Is there not a significant risk that they will be emboldened by this action to make future requests that, to be "fair", have to be considered on face value ?
3. Specifically, will the heralded "D-Day" event for 6th June now be cancelled if the 24th May event goes ahead ?
4. Could it not be argued that in organising (albeit illegally) on bank holiday Monday 13th April, the demonstrators have had a more-than-fair chance to make their demands and articulate their feelings on the issue of March 10th ?
5. Will the 24th event culminate in a rally with speeches ? Do we have notice of who the speakers are ? Will the content of their speeches be restricted ? The twin themes of "March for England" are "immigration" and terrorism."
6. Is there not a problem where the criteria for permission relate purely to issues of health and safety with no consideration of equalities and impact on community cohesion ?
7. Does this concession to march not run contradictory to the strong message sent out on the cover of the recent "Lutonline" saying "Enough is enough. Luton is our town and the people who live here work hard to co-exist, ensuring community cohesion. We don’t need people using our town as an excuse to stir up ill feeling or suggest that we are not patriotic."
8. Who are the organisers of the march ? Are any of them Lutonians ? If it is March for England, is LBC aware of the serious allegations levelled at the organisation on respected blogs such as http://barthsnotes.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/english-patriots-capitalise-on-islamism/. The 2 photos gathered from Dave Smeeton's Facebook page (above) are of particular concern. Under the "Skinhead" photo, Smeeton has written in a comment "those were the days..." in a moment of unbridled nostalgia.
9. Were community groups and leaders consulted prior to the decision to consider sanctioning the 24th March ?
10. Is not the marching date particularly ill-timed given the 1) proximity of the mosque fire, 2) high-profile far-right election campaign, 3) heightened community tension and 4) imminent preparations for the inclusive, multi-cultural carnival celebration ?