« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Review of Marches and Parades in Scotland
13 Recommendations on second element of remit - informing and involving the community
Introduction and summary
13.1 The second element of my remit was to look at how the community could input into decisions about marches and parades. I saw two distinct parts to this element of my remit: the first ensuring that the community was better informed; and the second ensuring the community had a way of expressing views about procession notifications.
13.2 A careful balance needs to be struck, between the rights of those who want to exercise their right to peaceful assembly through a procession and the rights of the community to go about their daily lives unhindered and without disruption. Without that balance, the exercise of rights by one section of the community can interfere with the exercise of the rights by another section of the community. It was clear that some people thought that not enough importance was being put on the rights of the community to go about their daily lives unhindered. It was also clear that some people would simply like certain types of marches banned. However, that is not appropriate in a democracy and my recommendations are aimed at striking an appropriate balance. My recommendations addressing the numbers and effects in communities of marches, in Chapter 15 should also be helpful in minimising the disruption felt, so helping communities feel less threatened by some marches and the behaviour they associate with them.
13.3 My recommendations will improve information given to communities by requiring local authorities to prepare and publicise an annual digest of processions, provide up-to-date information about up and coming processions to communities and to an 'opt-in' list of key interests. My recommendations will also ensure that: communities are more involved by requiring local authorities to develop appropriate mechanisms to give communities the opportunity to express their views; local authorities can consider those views as part of their overall assessment of procession notifications; and communities know how their views will be considered.
Recommendations
Informing the community
13.4 I heard many anecdotes over the course of the Review about the effects of processions where communities did not find out about potentially disruptive events until very shortly before they were taking place. That prevented people and businesses from making other arrangements which they could have done had they been told further in advance. This was supported by the telephone survey which showed that almost 40% of people wanted to be told more about processions in their area. It cannot be right that people get minimal or no warning of processions which can cause considerable disruption to their ability to go about their normal daily lives. Greater warning will allow people to make more informed decisions and reduce the irritation they feel at unexpected disruption.
An annual digest
13.5 To ensure that communities get more information about marches well in advance, I recommend that local authorities produce an annual digest of marches at the beginning of every calendar year, up-dated regularly and well publicised. Local authorities should decide the most appropriate way to publicise the digest, perhaps through council newspapers, council websites, having a copy available in council offices and libraries or through circulating to representative groups (for example chambers of commerce or community councils) within the area to allow them to highlight it to their networks. In preparing the digest, local authorities should bring together the organisers of processions, based on their experience and records of events arranged in the previous years. This will help to ensure that there is clarity around the dates for future processions and identify early in the year where there is the potential for clashes. The digest should be updated and recirculated every quarter. The digest should be a comprehensive list of all processions so that communities know well in advance about potential disruption. I am sure that organisers will be receptive to this local discussion. I was pleased to note the offer made by Cairde na hÉireann that they would be prepared to meet with the representatives of the Loyal Orange Institution to discuss the dates of their processions to ensure that clashes could be avoided.
Recommendation 9
- Local authorities should prepare an annual digest of processions with organisers at the beginning of the calendar year and update it every quarter and ensure the digest is well publicised and accessible.
Information about decisions on processions
13.6 An annual digest needs to be supplemented by regular information about processions once decisions are taken on notifications. I recommend that once local authorities have taken their decisions, they publicise the procession widely using the most appropriate medium. Again, I think that it is important that the local authority decides how this is best done in their area. They could, for example, make use of local media (newspapers and radio) to draw attention to the procession, email alerts, websites, posters on routes or in local authority offices or maybe sending letters to those who will be affected. I considered whether publicising processions should be the responsibility of the organiser and, while I would encourage organisers to provide better information and engage with communities, I think the duty to ensure that the community is informed of potential disruption should lie with the local authority.
Recommendation 10
- Local authorities should provide up-to-date information about forthcoming processions to local communities using the most appropriate means.
An 'opt-in' list for information
13.7 It is important for local authorities to ensure that some key groups receive updates about processions. I recommend that each local authority develops an 'opt-in' list so that people can identify if they want to receive further information about processions. For example, churches could opt-in so that they were aware of processions happening in their area so that they could avoid clashes with services such as funerals or draw attention to possible problems with already arranged services such as weddings. Business groups could also opt-in to getting information so that they could rearrange deliveries that were planned at the same time as a procession. Transport operators could also be alerted to allow them to plan altered services where necessary. This opt-in list already operates well in the City of London where businesses receive email alerts of potential disruption caused by processions.
Recommendation 11
- Local authorities should maintain an 'opt-in' list for organisations to receive information about processions.
Involving the community
13.8 Providing improved information about processions is very important but it is not sufficient in itself. People need to be able to express their views about processions and to know what scope they have for influencing the decision making process. Under the current system, local authorities seek the views of the local elected member as representative of their community, as under the statutory timetable, they have little time to do otherwise nor are they required to do more. I also noted a degree of caution in local authorities as to how far it is appropriate for them to take into account wider views, such as those expressed by the community. They drew attention to Sheriff Court judgements concerned about making decisions based on 'emotion or personal feeling' and emphasised that there needed to be substantive information to back up decisions founded on 'public perception'.
13.9 It is important that local authorities do more to ensure that they are aware of public views on a procession. It is also important that the public understands what they can influence. It is clear under human rights legislation that views which differ from the majority view should be heard. Prohibiting a procession simply because the group represents a view that annoys or gives offence to others is inappropriate in a democracy. Local authorities should not be making decisions on what legal organisations stand for but on the risk and impact of the procession. They might conclude that the risk and impact would be mitigated if there was a change to the route or other conditions applied. People need to be clear that simply because they do not personally like an organisation, that is an insufficient reason for a ban. Without that understanding about the context and what they can influence, people will naturally be frustrated if they feel that their views are not being taken into account.
Mechanisms to enable the community and others to express views
13.10 I reflected on whether each local authority should be required to establish a parades panel bringing together a wide range of interests to comment on procession notifications or should hold referendums on processions. I concluded that this would not be appropriate and that views could be sought more effectively in other ways. There is no need for local authorities to create additional mechanisms to do this. Community engagement and consultation is an important cornerstone in the way in which local authorities are required to work and they should build on these existing mechanisms.
13.11 I recommend that during the 28 day notification period, communities are given an opportunity to express their views on procession notifications. The mechanics for doing this will be for the local authority to decide so that views are gathered in a way most appropriate to that authority. The local authority must make clear how the community can make their views heard and publicise notifications appropriately to allow them to put forward views. This will ensure that decisions are not being taken on perception or feeling, but that it is demonstrably evidence based. I would encourage local authorities to take a broad view of who would have an interest in expressing views about notifications.
13.12 There are a variety of mechanisms that might be appropriate in enabling the community to express views. Some obvious ones include views being coordinated through: local elected members; community councils; local area committees; community engagement mechanisms under community planning or local community planning arrangements; other forms of community engagement such as community safety partnerships; or people's panels. Some local authorities may prefer to invite comments to be sent direct to the 'single gateway' by the identified deadline.
13.13 The monitoring system proposed in recommendation 7 could look at whether local authorities have in place effective mechanisms to gather community views.
Recommendation 12
- Local authorities should establish mechanisms appropriate to their areas to ensure that communities are able to express views on processions.
Taking account of community views
13.14 Some local authorities are concerned that the current legislation does not allow them to take into account community views and they can only properly take into account the views of the police in considering procession notifications. This could be regarded by some as a somewhat narrow interpretation of the legislation and of associated sheriff judgements, which seem to suggest that it is hearsay and unsubstantiated perception that should not form the basis for decisions. However, it is important that there is clarity around the views that local authorities can and cannot properly take into account when reaching their decisions. I recommend that it is appropriate that local authorities should take into account a wider range of views than those of the police as part of their consideration of procession notifications. The wider range of views should include community views. This should lead to more informed decision making.
Recommendation 13
- Local authorities should take into account wider views, including community views, when taking decisions on procession notifications.
Procedures to consider the views of communities and others as part of the notification process
13.15 Local authorities should be required to take into account the views of communities and others when deciding on whether or not to prohibit or impose conditions on a procession. Community views will be those expressed through the mechanisms developed under recommendation 12. How they take those views into account will be for local authorities to decide. However, they should ensure that they have transparent procedures in place to enable them to consider community views in a consistent way. They should explain to organisers and to the community how community views will be taken into account alongside the other views and information they have. It will be for local authorities to decide how to do this most appropriately, but they will want to consider how community views will be made available to organisers and whether there is scope for anonymous views to be considered. Local authorities may want to consider developing procedures parallel to the ones they have in place for objections to formal licence applications under the licensing provisions of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982.
13.16 The monitoring system proposed in recommendation 7 could look at whether local authorities had in place effective mechanisms for considering community views.
Recommendation 14
- Local authorities should put in place clear procedures for considering community views.
Second element of remit: informing and involving the community - summary of recommendations
Recommendation 9
- Local authorities should prepare an annual digest of processions with organisers at the beginning of the calendar year and update it every quarter and ensure the digest is well publicised and accessible.
Recommendation 10
- Local authorities should provide up-to-date information about forthcoming processions to local communities using the most appropriate means.
Recommendation 11
- Local authorities should maintain an 'opt-in' list for organisations to receive information about processions.
Recommendation 12
- Local authorities should establish mechanisms appropriate to their areas to ensure that communities are able to express views on processions.
Recommendation 13
- Local authorities should take into account wider views, including community views, when taking decisions on procession notifications.
Recommendation 14
- Local authorities should put in place clear procedures for considering community views.
« Previous | Contents | Next »