Tina Louise Rothery – Anti-Fracking ‘Nana’

Graham Gifford interviews Tina Louise Rothery about her ongoing legal case against Cuadrilla

It’s 9am on Day One of the new Brexit Britain, but as most of the UK is listening to the breaking news of Cameron’s resignation, a different drama is unfolding in Blackpool, Lancashire. Arriving at the County Courts, anti-fracking banners unfurl against the iconic skyline, and a sea of yellow T-shirts proclaim: ‘I am Tina Rothery.’ Around 150 people are crowded around the court steps, with others still arriving, and even a dog or two has been lovingly tucked into a ‘Tina’ T-shirt. Here and there, people are checking Facebook and twitter, calling out as messages of support pour in from places as diverse as Italy, Argentina and Thailand. So who is Tina, and why has she fallen foul of the courts?

Tina Rothery is a mother, a grandmother and an aunty. When she heard about the dangers of fracking, her instinct was to protect her family and her neighbours. For five years, she has travelled all over the UK, helping local people to understand the threat that fracking poses to their health and wellbeing. As a tireless anti-fracking campaigner, she has supported communities in setting up their own protest groups, helping to inspire a movement that has grown from a handful of anti-fracking groups to more than 400 today. She lives in Blackpool and works with a variety of groups, including the ‘Nanas’.

While the media sometimes uses militaristic terms like ‘eco-warrior’, the ‘Nanas’ chose their name to remind themselves and others that they are, first and foremost, family members, who are building a safer future for everyone’s grandchildren. In some of the movement’s anti-fracking songs, there is even a mythical paradise – ‘Nanashire’ – where activists and their communities live in frack-free safety!

Tina’s current legal problem began on 7^th August 2014, when a group of 26 Lancashire ‘Nanas’, used a Section 6 notice (similar to the squatters’ rights process) to occupy a field on Preston New Road, near Blackpool. On this occasion they were joined by many people including Left Unity’s very own Stephen Hall. Most others, though, were new to activism, having never taken part in any form of action previously. However, the appearance on the scene of the fracking giant, Cuadrilla, had caused a great deal of anxiety in the area – and the community took action.

Petitions were organised, councillors and MPs were lobbied, and an unprecedented numbers of planning objections were raised. Countless public meetings were called and every conceivable news outlet was contacted. Yet all of their strongest objections seemed to be ignored.

Tina said ‘We could see that our government’s determination to go all out for gas was looming towards us and the democratic process offered no means to oppose it’.

The only solution that seemed open to Tina and the other Nanas was to organise a protest, and so the field occupation began.

Then the dirty tricks started. Evicted! Even though they had already left?

On 7^th of August 2014 – Tina and Co.’s very first day of occupation – the police and landowner were informed that the protest would last for three weeks, and that the site would be vacated on 26^th of August. The group’s later press releases, their online blogs and their social media posts all made this leaving date public.

During the three weeks that the field was occupied, public awareness started to build, and support for the Nanas increased dramatically. The people living nearby brought groceries, and stopped to chat. As people understood what the Nanas were trying to achieve, support for them grew. ‘Frack Free Lancashire’ signs sprouted up all around the area, and community feelings were strengthened.

As promised, Tina and the Nanas ended their occupation on 26^th of August. Everything was tidied away, and the field was meticulously litter-picked by a fingertip-search, which was filmed. A note was delivered to the land owner, to advise that the Nanas had left as promised, and that all was tidy. The press and police were also informed.

Then the fun started. The very next day – the 27^th of August – Cuadrilla (through the landowner) turned up to ‘evict’ the clean and empty field. Tina and her fellow-protestors then found themselves in court on the 28th.

At the court proceedings, it was made clear that if no-one stepped forward to say they would be the ‘named defendant’, proceedings would go ahead anyway, and someone would be selected at random to be ‘the person’. Tina decided to step forward and be the target and take the worst that Cuadrilla could throw at her.

Tina is on record as saying ‘Aside from being an integral part of this, I am also much lighter on responsibilities than others and also own very little – so my name went forward. I had no real idea of what would come.’ Brave woman!

Tina went back to court in October, where the costs for the ‘belated eviction’ were set at over £60,000. Following an appeal, the costs were later reduced to just over £55,000. An offer of £500 was subsequently rejected by Cuadrilla/the landowner.

Nothing further happened for a little while.

Tina goes on to explain ‘On 7th May 2016 a man approached me at a family fundraising day in Blackpool and tried to serve legal papers. Two weeks later at an event in Yorkshire, a man in a stab-vest tried to enter to find me to serve papers’.

[Author’s note: I find the stab vest to be nothing short of bizarre. From what I’ve seen of the ‘Nanas’ they are more likely to feed you copious amounts of cake and biscuits. What did he expect? To be attacked with a Swiss Roll or a Victoria Sandwich?]

Tina goes on to say ‘I provided an address, phone number and email to both the courts and Cuadrilla’s solicitors; there was never a need to search for me, let alone in a stab-vest! I am a concerned grandmother exercising my right to peacefully protest; not a violent criminal’.

Tina was named as the ‘Judgment Debtor’ and received a summons to appear at Blackpool Law Courts on 24^th June 2016. Failure to attend, the papers say, would result in her being found ‘in contempt of court’.

Tina decided to draw a line in the sand, saying:

‘Since getting involved five years ago, I have been through quite a lot because of my stand against this vile industry and our complicit government bodies; my faith in a fair democracy and just law is battered. This time I do not want legal representation, as it seems the purpose of which, is to simply reduce the impact on me – not to address the unfairness’.

‘So I will tell the Court Officers that I will not pay any amount. This is more than the simple fact of not being able to pay; this is about reaching my own line-in-the-sand in this long struggle’.

‘Five years of travelling throughout the country in order to attend public meetings, helping inform the new groups that are springing up faster than Cuadrilla’s wells, encouraging deeply concerned residents, lots of camping out and the constant interaction with officials, police and government has been too eye-opening. I now see clearly that this industry will use any means, fair or foul, to silence opposition. Time and again, it shamelessly uses our law courts against peaceful protesters’.

‘I believe our law courts should be used as a means to seek true justice, not as a weapon against opposition. Our law courts and legal system are a costly indulgence that eats time and money that activists just don’t have. So many individuals have been kept away from further protest with injunctions and court dates that have mostly ended up with ‘not guilty’ verdicts from a few understanding judges’.

The fracking industry has shared many misleading reports about benefits versus risks, misled communities and refused to accept the lawful decision of planning committees; and yet tries to mark activists like Tina Rothery as criminals.

Tina, and it seems activists everywhere are not prepared to take this lying down.

After mentioning the latest court date on social media, an event along the lines of ‘I am Spartacus’ was created by supporters, along with the hashtag #IamTinaRothery. UK activists, who oppose this industry, responded with photos of themselves holding signs saying #IamTinaRothery. They were very soon joined by activists from around the world, helping to turn #IamTinaRothery into a rapidly expanding international movement. It appears the whole world is disgusted with the likes of Cuadrilla.

Tina says of the movement ‘I am honoured by the support, but know that this is not about anyone ‘being me’ – but about me being a representative of others who stand with the same determination to stop this industry before it harms us all. I don’t know what happens next but I will not be stopped; because this is an obligation, not a choice’.

In fact, the hearing lasted half an hour. Tina took a McKenzie friend, but no legal representation. She respectfully declined to supply details of her income or circumstances, or to engage in anything that might render legitimacy to a process that she does not recognise as just. Essentially, Cuadrilla knowingly chose to incur the trouble and cost of an ‘eviction’ (or not!) from an empty field, for ideological reasons.

Speaking from the steps of the court building afterwards, Tina said, ‘With respect to the judge and the court, I said I don’t feel this is representative of justice, so I will not engage further in the process to collect information about these costs’. To cheers from supporters, she added, ‘I made this statement on behalf of myself and the entire movement that refuses to be bullied any further’.

Cuadrilla now have five days to decide how to proceed. If they insist, a summons will be issued for Tina to attend court to make full payment of the disputed amount. Tina, however, is adamant that she will not be paying it. At that stage, an arrest warrant can be issued and, in all likelihood, Tina Rothery will become Nanashire’s first jailed grandmother. That, of course, may not be the publicity that Cuadrilla is seeking.

Soon, we will know.