The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Section 3 Taking forward the changes which are not legal requirements in Sir John Orr's report

Introduction

48 This section of the report explains the parts of Sir John's review which are not legal requirements and sets out the process that Scottish Ministers, having taken account of our views, recommend that local authorities, the police and march organisers should follow (if this is appropriate). The guidance for local authorities repeats some of what appears in this section and, as we said earlier, there is some crossover between the two publications.

49 There are a small number of Sir John's recommendations which we decided could not be put into practice fully or could only be achieved by taking a different approach. This section of the report makes it clear if we had to consider a different approach to meet a particular recommendation. The Scottish Ministers were happy with our approach in this.

Operational date

50 As it says in the chair's foreword and paragraph 22, the statutory conditions on marches and parades will not come into force until 1 April 2007 because the Scottish Ministers want to give local authorities, the police and the organisers enough time to consider the changes to the law and to prepare for the new process. As a result, it follows that the procedures set out in this section of the report will not come into operation until the same date.

Period of notice

51 Under the first part of Sir John's report, Scottish Ministers, on our advice, would recommend the following.

Recommendation 4: Local authorities and the police should set up 'single gateways' within their organisations to deal with procession notifications.

52 Sir John Orr's report highlights that organisers often send their notifications to a number of local-authority departments and that they could then find themselves dealing with a number of contacts at the local authority and the police. He believed that this could cause confusion for the organiser and may have led to inconsistent advice being given out from different parts of the organisations. To deal with the problem, Sir John recommended that 'single gateways' are set up. (In other words, there is one point of contact in the authority for organisers to contact.)

53 The Scottish Ministers welcome Sir John's recommendation and would invite local authorities, the national park authorities (it is important that they are included in this process) and police forces, if they have not already done so, to use the 'single gateway' process set out at paragraphs 45 and 46 of the guidance for local authorities.

Recommendation 6: Local authorities should complete risk assessments and impact analyses on notifications to provide good quality, factually-based information to inform the decision-making process.

General

54 Our recommendation on assessing risk is reflected in paragraphs 62 to 64 of the guidance for local authorities. In brief, we decided that it would be enough for local authorities to assess the risk of holding a procession by taking account of all the considerations set out in law and any other relevant information which may be available. If a local authority believe it is necessary, they can ask the organiser to carry out a risk assessment (see Annex C of the guidance for local authorities which provides information on what might appear in a standard risk-assessment form).

55 An organiser may not need to carry out a risk assessment for less significant marches and parades. A local authority should decide the circumstances under which they consider that an organiser's risk assessment will be needed and let the organiser know. A local authority should ask the organiser to send their risk assessment to them with the notification to hold a procession.

Recommendation 7: The Scottish Executive should ensure that there are effective monitoring arrangements in place to demonstrate that local authorities and the police are implementing the new procedures in a way appropriate to their local circumstances with a regular public report produced.

56 As mentioned earlier in this report, the Scottish Executive has been in discussion with the Accounts Commission and HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary and has met separately with COSLA. You can find a general note of the information to be collected from local authorities in paragraph 9 of the guidance for local authorities. However, when we wrote this report, the Scottish Executive was continuing its discussions with COSLA and had not made a decision on how to collect the information on marches and parades from local authorities. As a result, the Scottish Executive will be writing separately to give local authorities more advice.

57 In terms of monitoring the role of the police, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary ( HMIC) does not have a legal duty to gather statistics or information from Scotland's eight police forces. However, they do this each year. As a result, HMIC will add some relevant questions into their inspection procedures and statistical returns each year. If necessary, they may make further recommendations to the relevant police organisations for improving performance.

58 Getting information back from local authorities and the police fulfils just part of the monitoring process. We agree that it would also be important to get a view from march organisers and community organisations. Because of this, it is likely that the Scottish Executive will be asking them about how the changes to the way that marches and parades are handled has affected them. The Scottish Executive will put all the information it collects into a report which it will publish in summer or autumn 2008. Further reports may follow.

Recommendation 8: Local authority associations and police associations should ensure good practice is shared more widely.

59 Sir John Orr's report suggests that it is important for experiences surrounding processions to be shared more widely so that those involved in the process can learn from others. We agree that it would be valuable for local authorities and police forces to share their experiences.

60 Our recommendations on how best to take this forward are shown in paragraphs 47 to 50 of the guidance to local authorities. We would also suggest that the channels to be put in place should follow the principles of the single gateway process (see paragraphs 45 and 46 of the guidance for local authorities and paragraphs 52 and 53 of this report). We have designed the model outlined in paragraph 46 of the guidance to provide communication between the relevant officers within local authorities and the police, in a way which is as easy as possible. We would suggest that COSLA take the lead in setting up the 'e-mail group' we describe in paragraph 50 of the guidance and that they report back to the Executive once the group has been set up.

Informing and involving the community

61 Under the second part of Sir John's report, we would recommend the following.

Recommendations 12, 13 and 14: Local authorities should establish mechanisms appropriate to their areas to ensure that communities are able to express views on processions; should take into account wider views, including community views, when taking decisions on procession notifications and put in place clear procedures for considering community views.

62 Sir John Orr's report goes into some detail about the procedures that should be put in place to make sure that communities' views and other wider views are taken into account.

63 As we said in paragraph 40, the 1982 Act does not include community consultation but there is a condition in Section 63(9) of the 1982 Act for local authorities to keep and make available lists of processions and those not allowed to go ahead. There should also be arrangements in place to provide information about processions to people who ask for it under Section 63(10) of the Act. And, Section 63(8)(iv) of the 1982 Act says that local authorities must consider how far a procession would disrupt the life of the community before deciding whether to place conditions on it or ban it completely.

64 We would also repeat the advice in paragraphs 55 to 59 of the guidance for local authorities that there are other ways of giving communities the information they need. The community planning process, under the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 (see paragraph 47), could also be used as a basis for considering how public services could be provided for processions which take place regularly in the area.

You can find the Executive's guidance on community planning at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/localgov/cpsg-00.asp.

65 The issue of involving the community is a strong theme of Sir John's report. Scottish Ministers share Sir John's vision and this is reflected in this report, the guidance for local authorities and the terms of the 2006 Act. Because of this, the methods local authorities use for involving their communities will form a central part of the information the Scottish Executive will collect under recommendation 7 of Sir John's review.

Decision-making

66 Under the third part of Sir John's report, we would recommend the following.

Recommendation 15: Local authorities should remain responsible for taking decisions on procession notifications.

67 Sir John's report notes that, under the 1982 Act, local authorities are responsible for making decisions about procession notifications (after consulting the Chief Constable). Sir John says, in his report, that there is no justification for setting up an independent national organisation to take on the role of deciding whether processions can go ahead.

68 We agree with Sir John's comments.

Recommendation 18: Local authorities should respect key traditional dates but organisers should be prepared to compromise over routes where necessary.

69 Sir John's report says that there are certain dates which are traditionally important to various organisations and communities. His report also recognises that local authorities should, as far as possible, continue to respect these dates but that there needs to be discussion and compromise around routes. He also notes the commitment from the Orange Order that they would co-operate in this and the Apprentice Boys of Derry have recognised the need for genuine and voluntary negotiation.

70 We have considered this recommendation and recognise the need for local authorities to continue to respect these important traditional dates. We welcome the commitment from the Orange Order and the Apprentice Boys of Derry in Sir John's report. However, it is still the case that some organisations often hold a number of local events on the same theme or hold similar parades on a number of separate occasions, for example, women's section, juvenile sections and bands associated with a particular lodge. As a result, one lodge may hold a variety of parades across the same route on many occasions throughout the year.

71 While recognising that local authorities have no legal powers in this area, we would recommend that a local authority hold meetings with marching organisations to open discussions on:

• whether there are possibilities to reduce the number of marches by combining individual section marches; and
• getting organisers to confirm why they need to send in multiple notifications to hold separate parades with a similar theme in the same area (sometimes on consecutive weeks).

72 The Scottish Ministers would point out that the outcome of discussions on the number and the routes that processions take may also help to remove or reduce the number of conditions which a local authority may have to otherwise place on the procession. For example, a minor re-routing of a march may be enough to make sure that disruption is reduced to a level which will allow the march to go ahead without other conditions needing to be placed on the organiser. If organisers compromise on the number of processions, it may also help to create savings for local authorities and the police as there will be fewer notifications to process and fewer processions for the police to attend.

Recommendation 19: Organisers should provide a written, signed notification providing the key information required by the local authority.

73 Sir John Orr's report notes that the current law sets out the information that organisers should include in their notifications. It also notes that some local authorities already give organisers a form while other authorities need only a written notification. Sir John recommends that a written, signed notification should be provided and says that local authorities should use the information in the notification as the basis for an initial discussion between local authorities, the organiser and the police.

74 We support this recommendation and believe it will create a common process. We also agree with Sir John's observation that it will be useful to use the notification form as a basis for discussions between the local authority, the organiser and the police (see paragraphs 77 to 82 of this report and paragraphs 60 and 61 of the guidance for local authorities). We would also advise that using a standard form will help local authorities and the police with better record-keeping.

75 The Scottish Ministers agree with our approach and have approved the standard notice form in Annex D of the guidance for local authorities. Local authorities can adapt the form to suit their purposes but the main information needed under Section 62(3) of the 1982 Act must feature in any version. If a local authority is going to ask the organiser to carry out a risk assessment, the assessment should - where practical - be returned with the notification form (see paragraphs 54 and 55 of this report).

76 We would suggest that local authorities use paper notification forms and make electronic versions available on their websites. Local authorities should ask organisers to send copies of the notification to them and the appropriate police area office and that organisers keep one for themselves. The form should contain the contact details of the local authority's lead official. It would also be good practice on a local authority's part to refer the organiser to their 'how to' guides (see Annex B of the guidance for local authorities), either by sending a copy of it with the notification form or by referring the organiser to the appropriate website link.

Recommendation 20: There should be a precursory meeting following the submission of a signed notification facilitated by the local authority, involving at least the organiser and the police, resulting in a signed outcome agreement.

77 Sir John's report says that local authorities should hold a precursory meeting with the organiser, the police and other important groups which may be relevant. Sir John goes on to say that this discussion would be useful for allowing everyone to go through the notification to discuss any possible problems.

78 We support the recommendation and the guidance for to local authorities sets out how these meetings might fit in to the new process. Local authorities should consider the merits of inviting community organisations to these precursory meetings so they can have their say and give feedback on their experiences of any similar marches that may have been held in their area.

79 The guidance for local authorities does not go into detail about when a local authority may or may not need one of these meetings and so this section of the report covers that issue and what these meetings might cover. While we realise that a precursory meeting is not always needed, we would suggest that this should be the exception rather than the rule. If a local authority feel that a meeting is not necessary, they could discuss issues surrounding a routine or small-scale march quickly and agree matters over the phone or by e-mail instead. Local authorities may not need a meeting of this kind, for example, if:

• the organiser is experienced in holding processions;
• the procession is following a known or regular route;
• no previous problems with the procession have been recorded;
• the local authority are confident that no serious risks would arise from holding the procession; and
• the notification meets the conditions of a local authority's existing policy on processions in relation to - timing, route, music playing, numbers of people involved, and so on.

80 However, local authorities must arrange a meeting if:

• the organiser's risk assessment reveals that there are a number of risks associated with holding the procession;
• little is known about the organiser or the organisation;
• the number taking part or the number of expected onlookers is expected to be substantial;
• the stewarding arrangements appear unsatisfactory (not enough numbers or training provided);
• the procession forms part of a series of processions in the same area;
• the timing or route conflicts with a planned community event, parade or other event in the area for example, a local gala, football match, race and so on;
• it is likely that the procession will cause a lot of disruption to traffic, residents and businesses;
• its route passes through communities which may be strongly against it;
• plans for leaving the area afterwards are not good enough;
• there may be potential for conflict, public disorder or damage to property; or
• there is a history of conflict, public disorder, damage to property or considerable public complaint in relation to previous processions by the organiser, the organisation itself or its followers or the proposed route.

81 If a local authority are holding a meeting, they should provide the venue and be closely involved in all aspects of the discussion. The Scottish Ministers agree with the recommendations that the precursory meeting covers:

• the information provided by the organiser in the signed notification form;
• the information provided by the organiser in their risk-assessment form;
• the local authority's code of conduct;
• the possibility of combining the march with another procession;
• the reason for holding the procession;
• the route;
• the timing;
• the number taking part;
• the arrangements for people meeting up before the march and then leaving afterwards;
• the arrangements for stewarding and information on any training that they have carried out;
• the operational matters to do with policing requirements, traffic, parking, and community issues;
• displaying flags and emblems to make sure that there would be no items at the parade which might break Section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000;
• any concerns the police or the local authority may have had about previous parades; and
• contingency plans, in other words, what alternative is in place if there is a delayed start, poor weather, alternative route and so on.

82 We would recommend that a local authority gives all those at the precursory meeting a note of what was agreed and, where possible, that everyone signs an agreement.

Recommendation 21: Once the notification has been considered by the local authority, the authority should issue organisers with a 'permit to process' outlining what had been agreed and what was expected.

83 Sir John's report says that it would be helpful for all those concerned if the outcome of the notification was recorded in a consistent way. This is described in his report as a 'permit to process' which would bring together the main parts of the process. Sir John says that the permit should record:

• what was agreed at the meeting;
• the code of conduct that organisers and those taking part will be expected to follow; and
• the formal conditions that might apply.

84 We agree with this recommendation but, as we said in paragraphs 15 to 16 of this report, we believe that the term 'permit to process' is not appropriate and that the term 'letter of confirmation' should be used instead. The letter of confirmation should not be sent until the local authority has the wider views of their community and those on their opt-in list, and after they have taken account of discussions with the organiser and the police. Local authorities can decide on the content of the letter and the conditions that may have to be put in an order. Because of this, we have not produced a draft standard covering letter as local authorities should decide what they want to say to the organiser.

85 The debriefing meetings (see paragraphs 87 to 92 of this report and paragraph 65 of the guidance to local authorities), which may need to take place after a procession has been held, should cover any areas of concern to the people involved. (This will include any concerns expressed by the communities and local businesses and whether there were any aspects of the letter of confirmation or the order which the organisers did not keep to). If there have been some serious concerns raised, the local authority should let the organiser know at that meeting that the possibility of holding future processions may be at risk.

Recommendation 22: Organisers should not be required to pay a fee for a notification to organise a procession.

86 Sir John says in his report that some people suggested that organisers should have to pay a fee. However, he points out that asking organisers to pay a fee would run the risk of creating a two-tier system of those who could afford to pay and those who could not. We accept Sir John's reasons for his recommendation and agree that organisers should not pay a fee.

Recommendation 23: Debriefing meetings should be held after processions with the organisers, local authority and the police and other relevant groups resulting in a signed record of what occurred.

87 Sir John says in his report that little debriefing takes place and notes that often there would only be debriefing if something had gone wrong during a procession. We agree that a debriefing meeting offers the chance to examine how the procession went to see whether the procession met the agreed conditions. Paragraph 65 of the guidance for local authorities sets out some general guidelines on debriefing meetings. This section of the report examines the issue in more detail and sets out our views on how local authorities should take this recommendation forward.

88 Scottish Ministers recommend that debriefing meetings should not be needed for small-scale, 'straightforward' marches which have passed off without incident. However, it would be a good idea for local authorities to host short debriefing meetings for all large-scale processions even if these have not attracted trouble. This will allow all those involved to share their views on the event and provide information on how these events could be handled better in the future. We also note Sir John's comments that the meeting should be followed up by a signed record of what happened. We believe that there can be no guarantee that everyone at the meeting will come to one view which they would all sign up to. Because of this a local authority should provide a formal note of each debriefing meeting instead and send it to all those who took part.

89 There is no requirement about the timescale in which this meeting should take place. However, the purpose of the meeting would be to agree and produce a record of what happened at the procession so that local authorities and the police can take account of this record when deciding whether a future procession should be prevented, or whether conditions should be placed on this type of event.

90 A local authority should automatically arrange a debriefing meeting if a procession has caused conflict, there was public disorder, damage to property or there were many complaints. The debriefing meeting should involve the organiser and the local authority's officials (as well as the key police officers responsible for overseeing the policing of the procession). If appropriate, a local authority should also invite a representative from the local community or any person who has comments to make about the procession. The meeting should cover:

• the content of the letter of confirmation;
• how the organiser dealt with the procession, including stewarding arrangements;
• how the people in the parade and onlookers behaved, if appropriate;
• policing arrangements;
• public order incidents for example, any drunkenness, or verbal or physical abuse;
• the action that had to be taken by the police on the day to maintain order and the number of arrests that were made (see also paragraphs 121 to 123);
• any failure to follow the local authority's code of conduct;
• any failure to keep to the terms of the discussion at the precursory meeting (if any);
• any failure to keep to the content of any order made;
• significant traffic or other disruption; and
• any complaints received.

91 As we said earlier, a local authority should use the meeting as a basis for analysing the effect of holding the march so that they can identify the wider implications of holding similar processions in the future. This would be the 'impact analysis' which should come up with answers to the following.

• Having carried out the risk assessment and discussed the known risks with those concerned, what risks might there still be with holding this type of procession in the future (for example, disruption to traffic, communities, public disorder and so on)?
• Who and what will continue to be most at risk (for example, businesses or the public)?
• What measures could be taken to reduce the risk in the future?
• Having considered how to deal with all the risks, will it be possible to sort out any other risks in time for the next notification for a similar procession?
• What continuing pressure will this type of procession have on resources in the area in the future (the police, the emergency services and so on)?
• Are there enough precautions now in place which will allow marches of a similar type to go ahead in the future?

92 If any serious concerns are raised at the debriefing meeting, the local authority should tell the organiser in a follow-up letter and let them know that the possibility of holding future processions may be at risk. The local authority should record the note of the meeting and the outcome of the impact analysis and hold them on file with other relevant papers.

Numbers and the effects on communities

93 Under the fourth part of Sir John's report, we would recommend the following.

Recommendation 24: Organisers should continue to act responsibly in ensuring processions are organised for appropriate purposes and consider the scope for combining processions on certain occasions.

94 Sir John's report recommends that those responsible for organisations which arrange many parades on the same day, celebrating the same event, should look at combining processions to reduce, as far as possible, disruption caused in an area.

95 You should read paragraphs 69 to 72 of this report which describes how local authorities, the police and the organisers might take this forward.

Recommendations 25 and 37: Local authorities and the police should ensure that they keep statistics on the numbers of processions taking place and the associated policing costs. Local authorities should consider relevant police costs when reaching decisions about march notifications.

96 Sir John's report notes that there is limited reliable information about the number of processions which have taken place in Scotland. His report points out that better record-keeping will allow communities to have better information about the number of processions being held and the associated policing costs involved, and also that policing costs can often be significant. He also goes on to say in his report that it is not enough to ban a procession on the grounds of cost alone, but that it would be fair to consider police costs in reaching a decision about a notification and whether local authorities should place restrictions on a procession to help reduce police costs.

97 On recommendation 25, Scottish Ministers would suggest that the statistics on the number of processions held in a particular area are taken from the lists local authorities keep (see paragraphs 40 to 47). On recommendation 37, we support the comments in Sir John's report but would point out that local authorities cannot take account of police costs when considering notifications as this is not an important part of whether or not a march can go ahead. Local authorities should ask the relevant police force to give them the actual costs associated with holding each procession. A local authority should not use estimated costs as this may lead to publishing inaccurate figures and there may be accusations from the organisers that the information being provided was misleading.

98 In line with the 'single gateway' process, the police should pass information to local authorities regularly so that they can put the figures into statistical tables. Local authorities should publish the information on their websites at the end of the year and give it to marching organisations. Local authorities may also want to consider sending the information to those organisations named on their opt-in lists. Local authorities may want to consider publishing a table in the following format:

Table showing statistics on the numbers of processions that took place in 2007/2008 and the associated policing costs.

99 The Scottish Executive may collect the information on processions and associated policing costs for their report. (See the text on recommendation 7 in paragraphs 56 to 58.)

Recommendations 26 and 30: As part of their planning process, organisers should consider whether it is necessary to take out public liability insurance; in certain circumstances, should the risk assessment demonstrate it is necessary, local authorities should be able to require organisers to take out insurance or provide a behaviour bond.

100 We welcome the comments in Sir John's report about insurance and behaviour bonds. However, we and Scottish Ministers have decided that it would not be possible to put these recommendations into practice on all occasions because a march organiser may not be able to afford to take out public liability insurance or provide enough funds to cover a behaviour bond. And, insurance companies may not be prepared to offer insurance for every public procession if they consider there is a likelihood that they will have to make a payment.

101 There is also the possibility that making all march organisers take out insurance could be challenged because this affects Article 11 of the ECHR. This is because not every march organiser will be able to get insurance or may not be able to afford it. If a local authority thinks that it is likely that a proposed procession will cause public disorder or damage to property, they can make an order which either prevents the procession, or place certain conditions on it to reduce any risk. In any event, the Scottish Ministers do not think that local authorities could run the risk of not restricting a procession if the event is most likely to cause public disorder or damage to property, simply because a march organiser has taken out insurance.

102 Nevertheless, Scottish Ministers agree with us and consider that it would be good practice on the part of the organiser to try and get insurance which is appropriate to cover the risks associated with holding the procession. Local authorities should encourage this and may want to invite the organiser to say in the notification form whether they have insurance. Local authorities may also want to ask the organiser to give them a copy of the insurance certificate. They could provide this at the same time they send the notice to hold a procession. If they do not get insurance, it should not affect the decision on whether the march can go ahead with or without conditions.

Recommendation 27: Local authorities should produce 'How To' guides for organisers of processions.

103 Sir John Orr's report acknowledges that organising an event involves a lot of detailed planning and says that the planning process, particularly, for larger events needs to be approached in a professional and well-organised way. Organisers need to be aware of the full range of laws which could apply to their procession. He also says that a number of local authorities in Scotland have already produced guidance for organisers of events. As local authorities will have a single gateway to handle notifications, he recommends that local authorities should also think about developing guidance for organisers of events including processions, and draw on what currently exists appropriate to their circumstances. Appendix I of Sir John's report provides a summary of the main elements for a 'how to' guide.

104 We agree this recommendation, but, as we say in the guidance for local authorities, the Scottish Executive does not plan to provide a standard guide as they consider that it would not be possible to draft one which would fit all purposes. Local authorities should draft their own guides in line with what is appropriate to their circumstances. Annex B of the guidance provides an outline of the information which might appear in a 'how to' guide. Local authorities should share good practice widely (see paragraphs 59 and 60 of this report on recommendation 8) and ask for support and advice from other local authorities when drafting guides.

Recommendation 28: Local authorities and the police should develop a code of conduct for organisers and participants and this should be set out in the 'permit to process'.

105 Sir John's report recognises that many local authorities and police forces have voluntary codes of conduct in place and that some organisers also have their own codes. He notes that these codes cover things like:

• timing;
• routes and arrangements before and after the event;
• conditions about where people will march - such as how wide the march will be and in what part of the road; or
• conditions about noise - such as where and when music can be played and loudhailers used.

106 As shown in the guidance for local authorities, Scottish Ministers agree our recommendation that local authorities should be free to decide whether they want to create or adapt a particular code of conduct. It is also up to them to decide whether they want to adapt one code for all processions or provide a set of codes to suit particular types of procession. The Scottish Ministers agree with our recommendation that local authorities should give the code of conduct to organisers with the notification form.

107 Local authorities cannot take any immediate action if the organiser, or anyone involved in the march breaks the code of conduct that is provided. However, local authorities will need to take this into account when making future decisions about whether a similar procession can take place. Section 63(8)(c) of the 1982 Act says that local authorities can account for whether any guidance or code of conduct was followed when deciding what conditions to place on similar processions.

Recommendation 29: Organisers should ensure that their existing codes of conduct reinforce the behaviour expected of participants in the 'permit to process'.

108 Sir John's report notes that many organisers already have detailed codes of conduct governing the behaviour of their members and others during processions. These are important in making sure that the people involved behave in an appropriate way. However, Sir John recommends that organisers should make sure that their codes of conduct reinforce the behaviour expected of people taking part as set out in the 'permit to process'.

109 We agree with the recommendation and would advise that organisers' codes should reinforce the behaviour they expect from those taking part in any march. However, we would suggest that codes operate in a way appropriate to local circumstances. For example, common ridings events, which involve whole communities, and other traditional festivals will need a completely different approach by organisers to those processions which are held by loyalist and republican organisations. We would suggest that all codes are linked so that everyone involved is aware of their own responsibilities.

110 While organisers have a lot of responsibility for making sure the people taking part behave well, this does not mean that they are not responsible, as individuals, for their own actions. The organiser should tell those taking part what general standard of behaviour is expected of them and that it is likely that they will be arrested if they commit an offence.

111 Scottish Ministers agree with our recommendation - while also acknowledging that not all codes will involve the same approach towards controlling behaviour (see paragraph 109) - that organisers' codes should make sure that they account for the following.

• The organiser must co-operate with the local authority and the police from the time they send the notification up until its end point.
• The organiser must identify themself to the police officer in charge at the start of the procession.
• The organiser must make sure that, if the procession is cancelled, the local authority and the police are told promptly (and in writing within at least 48 hours).
• The organiser must make sure that everyone involved is aware of the conditions that have been placed on the procession.
• The organiser will take responsibility for making sure that anyone under the influence of alcohol or drugs is not allowed to take part.
• The organiser will make sure there is an appropriate ratio of stewards to people taking part and make sure that stewards:
  • are well-briefed by organisers and given guidance on their role within the procession before it starts;
  • carry identification and wear suitable clothing (for example, fluorescent jackets) to make themselves easy to identify;
  • co-operate fully with the police;
  • behave in a proper way;
  • make sure that people taking part keep to directions about their own public safety and that of members of the public; and
  • accept responsibility for the behaviour of all those involved, bands (where appropriate), and those following the procession.
• The organiser should make sure that the behaviour of people taking part cannot be seen as being deliberately aggressive and should note that local authorities will take account of any public disorder, antisocial behaviour or damage to property resulting from the procession in any notification received in the future from the organiser for a similar procession.

112 Again this depends on the type of procession, but organisers should, in general, make sure the following take place in relation to routes.

• Wherever possible, processions should follow main roads as opposed to being channelled through residential areas.
• Those taking part do not march more than four abreast, keeping to the left-hand side of the street.
• Police are helped in guaranteeing that traffic and pedestrians will be able to pass.
• The procession is split into sections to avoid disruption to traffic and pedestrians.
• Where possible, all music will stop when approaching and passing places of worship while services are in progress or as instructed by the police.
• All those involved leave in an orderly and timely way at the end of the procession.

Recommendation 31: Organisers should recognise the degree of responsibility they have for the behaviour of onlookers and exercise appropriate influence to improve behaviour where they can.

113 Sir John's report recognises that it is often the case that any disruption and intimidation at marches is not caused by the marchers themselves but by those who choose to watch. He goes on to say that the fact that a procession is taking place puts a degree of responsibility on the organisers and they should use their influence to make sure that onlookers behave appropriately.

114 We support this recommendation and would refer to the text provided on recommendation 29 in paragraphs 108 to 112. We also welcome the commitment made by key march organisations who signed a statement with the Justice Minister and Strathclyde Police on 2 May 2006 to agree to work together to weed out 'hangers-on' who set out to cause trouble at marches and parades. We have attached a copy of the statement that they have signed up to in Annex C.

Recommendation 32: Organisers should ensure that they have effective stewarding arrangements in place for the management of processions, and local authorities and the police consider whether there is appropriate training that can be offered.

115 Sir John's report makes the point that organisers and the police have a shared responsibility for controlling processions. He also notes some of the main issues that organisers should be taking action on (the number of stewards, their training and equipment, identifying stewards, briefing stewards, the chain of command and communication). Sir John also welcomes the assurances given by the Grand Lodge of Scotland and the Apprentice Boys of Derry that they would be happy to work with the police and local authorities to make sure their stewards are well trained. The cost of any training should be met by the organiser.

116 We support this recommendation and recognise that better-trained stewards will lead to fewer incidents at marches which should, in turn, reduce the burden on the police. We have considered whether there is appropriate training that could be offered and, while noting that the local authorities and the police are not expected to help with any of the cost, would suggest that stewards receive training in:

• how to handle emergencies;
• crowd control;
• basic first aid;
• the public order laws and any other relevant law (such as health and safety and so on); and
• understanding the powers and duties available to the police.

117 We would also recommend that stewards receive high-visibility jackets or vests which make them easy to see. The chief steward should also give all stewards a formal and detailed briefing on the day, which could include:

• the general duties of stewards;
• the conditions which have been placed on the event;
• any police instructions that have been given about the event; and
• what communication channels will be used on the day.

118 The chief stewards should also go to the debriefing meeting (see paragraphs 87 to 92) so that they can share their account of the way the event was handled and any concerns can be tackled in time for the next event.

Recommendation 33: Bands playing at processions should identify a named individual who will be present on the day to be responsible for the conduct of the band and its supporters.

119 Sir John's report picked up on the comments received that there is a need to have stricter control on the behaviour of bands and their followers. In response, he recommended that as part of the process of providing notice, the organiser should include the names of the bands that will play at the procession and the name of the band member who will be responsible for their behaviour.

120 In response to this recommendation, we have inserted a section in the draft notification form in Annex D of the guidance to local authorities which the organiser will fill in. This section of the form relates to the bands that are expected to play at the procession along with an entry where the organiser should give the names of the band member or stewards who will take overall responsibility for their behaviour.

Recommendation 34: The police should exercise their enforcement powers appropriately and, in liaison with stewards, ensure the policing of onlookers is effective and their actions considered as part of the debriefing process.

121 Sir John's report notes that the police already have enough powers to tackle poor behaviour at marches (see annex B of this report for details of the powers available to the police). He recommends that any police action taken at a procession should be included in the formal debriefing process. He also says that a review of how the police acted would help with policing arrangements for future processions.

122 We have considered this recommendation and believe that a review of how stewards act during the procession should form part of the debriefing process (see paragraphs 87 to 92). We recommend that the key police officers report on the action that had to be taken on the day to maintain order and the number of arrests that were made. A senior steward from the procession should give their view on how effective the stewards were. The local authority should record a note of this discussion and send a copy to the organiser.

123 As we said earlier in this report, local authorities will not need a debriefing meeting for small routine marches unless there are aspects of the march which concern the police, the local authority concerned or the community.

Recommendation 35: Local authorities without byelaws prohibiting the consumption of alcohol in public places should consider putting them in place.

124 Sir John says in his report that some of the problems associated with behaviour at marches is fuelled by people drinking alcohol. He notes that 27 local authorities have bye-laws in place to prevent alcohol being drunk in public places, covering more than 450 towns and villages and the cities of Glasgow, Dundee and Aberdeen. Sir John recommends that those authorities without bye-laws should consider introducing them or at least examine other ways of tackling the problem.

125 We have considered this recommendation and note that by-laws have significantly reduced the nuisance and disorder normally associated with drinking in public. The Scottish Executive will continue to support local authorities that come forward with by-laws proposals.

Police costs

126 Under the fifth part of Sir John's report, we would recommend the following.

Recommendation 36: Organisers of processions should not be required to meet policing costs.

127 In his report, Sir John says that views were mixed on whether organisers should have to pay for the policing costs associated with their parades. However, Sir John points out that any form of charging may well affect someone's right to march. With this in mind, Sir John recommends that organisers should try to work with the police to help reduce the policing costs associated with their processions.

128 We have considered this recommendation and Scottish Ministers agree with the suggestion that, where relevant, local authorities should tell march organisers at the precursory meeting of the expected police cost associated with holding their procession. This would help to bring into focus that costs associated with policing certain marches can be high. However, we would emphasis that the issue of police cost is not a factor for preventing a march from going ahead.

129 The Government is under an obligation to take reasonable measures to protect those who are using their right to march (the Plattform Arzte Fur Das Leben v Austria (1988) 13 EHRR 204 case refers). Section 17 of the Police (Scotland) Act 1967 also places a general duty on the police to protect life and property. As a result, the Executive considers that it is not unreasonable for local authorities to prevent a procession, or to attach conditions to it, after considering whether there are enough police officers or resources to police the event. When taken together, these should allow a local authority to place restrictions on processions to prevent disorder and protect the rights and freedom of others.

130 Local authorities are also under a duty to keep to the ECHR. As a result, they will need to make sure that the actual reasons for preventing or restricting a procession do not affect a person's right to march.

131 To meet Sir John's other recommendation on organisers working with the police to reduce costs, the Scottish Ministers consider that it would be worthwhile stressing the costs of policing similar processions to organisers and highlight where the local authority and the police consider that organisers could combine certain processions with other similar events. Local authorities might also want to consider sending organisers a copy of the table which we recommend local authorities keep to satisfy recommendation 25 (see paragraphs 96 to 99).

Recommendation 38: Police forces should ensure that there is appropriate briefing provided for officers policing processions and that it includes information about the reasons for the procession and the relevant background to the organisation involved.

132 Sir John's report acknowledges that most marches pass off with little incident and that this is due to the police, the organisers and those taking part. However, he says there is the opportunity for the police's briefing to include information on the background, culture and the specific reasons for the march to make sure that officers understand the marchers' point of view and can better understand the likely flashpoints. March organisers could also have a role to play in explaining the role of the organisation.

133 We consider that most police forces will already be giving their officers detailed operational briefing for processions in their area. The Scottish Ministers agree with us but believe that the standard and content of the briefing will vary and will depend on the knowledge and experience of the individuals providing it. As a result, it may be useful for this report to set out the list of standard information that should be given to officers involved in policing the procession.

134 Each force will decide the content of its briefing material, but briefing for processions which have caused difficulties in the past or briefing for new processions should give officers more information than those needed for more standard processions. The following list gives an idea of the material that forces should be providing routinely.

• The name of the organisation and background information about them.
• The reason for holding the procession.
• Any known information about this particular procession.
• Details of any previous processions held and any known past difficulties.
• The number of marchers and onlookers expected.
• The route that the procession will take and the reasons why it has to follow that route.
• Details of any known flashpoints along the route.
• Anything else about the procession that officers should know.

135 It might also be useful for a small group of police officers to carry out a site visit of where the march is to be held and to meet the organiser. This will allow an officer to become familiar with the actual route that the marchers will take. The organiser could also let those present know the reason why their organisation is holding the procession.

Final remarks

136 This report and the guidance for local authorities form the background for long-term changes that the Scottish Ministers want to see made to the process of dealing with notifications to hold a march or parade and the ways that local authorities should keep communities and local business regularly informed.

137 We and the Scottish Ministers realise that this will not be achieved overnight and that it will take some local authorities more time than others to put all the recommendations of Sir John Orr's report and the good practice highlighted here and in the guidance into practice. That is why Scottish Ministers are not introducing the changes until 1 April 2007. As is made clear throughout this report, ECHR is still most important and local authorities should make sure that they do not infringe these rights when considering whether to place conditions on a procession or ban it.

138 The Executive will be monitoring the activities of the local authorities and the police and examining how they are responding to the major changes set out in this report and guidance. The Executive will publish a report of activity for 2007/2008 and may produce future reports on activity. The Scottish Ministers will be interested in seeing how local authorities, the police and march organisers are coping with the changes and the progress being made to make sure that marches and parades are handled in a more modernised way.

139 The Scottish Executive will keep the reporting requirements and the governing law under review.

« Previous | Contents | Next »