Review of the 2016 Independent Report on Marches, Parades and Static Demonstrations in Scotland

While recognising that final discussions and decision-making has to take place with the most up-to-date information available, in keeping with the spirit and recommendations of the Orr Review, at a minimum, both the local authority and police should issue acknowledgement of a notification and raise any issues that are clear from the outset at an early opportunity. This will ensure that organisers are apprised of any likely issues or problems and are given a reasonable time to prepare and, if necessary, make any appeals.

[Local authorities and Police Scotland]

Limited progress.

Falkirk aim to issue and acknowledgement within 24 hours; West Lothian acknowledge all notifications 'without delay' and advise as soon as possible if a Safety Advisory Group (SAG) will be required. This is very good practice.

Other local authorities do not issue formal written acknowledgments: there does not seem to be any pressing reason for them not to do so.

Local authorities and police should give further thought as to how meaningful and proactive engagement involving the community, and as set out in the Orr Review, can take place.

[Local authorities and Police Scotland]

Limited progress.

This is clearly an issue to which local authorities and Police Scotland has given considerable thought, although the means to carry this forward remains unclear. A key issue here is local context: some local authorities report that they have few – if any - problems or issues surrounding parades; others report that they have more serious issues around specific events, such as community gala days with associated alcohol consumption and anti-social behaviour; others have no issues with parades themselves, but regular problems of anti-social behaviour in their aftermath. It is quite clear that there is no single model of community engagement to be achieved.

One key difficulty here – discussed later in this report – is that for some 'contentious' marches local authorities are wary of raising public expectations that unpopular parades will be prohibited. The circumstances in which local authorities can place restrictions or prohibit marches are, of course, very limited – and it is not at all clear that a wider public appreciate this. This echoes issues raised in the 2016 Report (e.g. 2.24; 2.29).

For several local authorities (e.g. West Lothian) the SAG will discuss 'additional community engagement' where it is seen as appropriate. This usefully attends to context and ensures communication will be more targeted and effective: good practice.

North Lanarkshire operates 'Community Matters' local partnership meetings and community forums across their area – this allows for any issues, including on marches and parades, to be raised by any resident. Many local authorities will have similar processes, and these could be used to air issues around marches and parades and to explain the ways in which local authorities can, and cannot, act. Glasgow are currently undertaking a major review of their procedures which will touch on these themes and will involve widespread consultation in the city. The review is scheduled to report in 2020.

Police Scotland and march and parade organisers should prioritise dialogue with a view to establishing/re-establishing fuller police engagement with steward training and deployment.

[Police Scotland and march and parade organisers]

No progress to report.

Note that this issue has become particularly important in relation to small organisations conducting very large processions (see section on Other marches and parades above)

Police, local authorities and march and parade organisers should work together to ensure clear procedures are in place for all marches and parades, with clear and consistent briefing, including agreed written action plans. Where appropriate – for example, where additional conditions were attached to a march or parade, or where issues of concern are raised by any of the key parties – Police Scotland, local authorities, march and parade organisers and local communities – de-briefing should take place.

[Police Scotland, local authorities and march and parade organisers]

Limited progress.

The precise 'best practice' approach to these matters will vary according to the various contexts in which a procession takes place. The practice of both West Lothian and Falkirk is that where a SAG approach is deemed necessary, a de-brief will follow the event. This seems sensible, proportionate and consistent. Parading organisations in the West Lothian and Falkirk areas have praised both Local Authority's fair and transparent approach to their events.

March organisers have noted that such practice in other local authority areas are inconsistent or absent.

The Scottish Government should continue in dialogue with those who may have concerns over static demonstrations, such as local authorities and Police Scotland, to explore what support and advice can be given.

[The Scottish Government]

Limited progress.

Note that static 'counter-protests' have increased in salience and impact (see section on Glasgow above).

Both local authority and police respondents suggested that some form of Notification process for static demonstrations would be exceptionally helpful in facilitating such events and ensuring public safety – but it is unclear whether and how this could be made compulsory and how such a system would be administrated. It might be noted that many groups holding static demonstrations do inform the police and local authority ahead of time as a matter of routine and of courtesy. Local authorities should give some thought on how to encourage groups to do so and ensure that a clear point of contact is in place.

Some consideration should be given by the Scottish Government as to whether a change in the legal definition of a 'public assembly' (reducing it from 'twenty persons or more', perhaps in line with the previous change in England and Wales) would have a positive impact in Police Scotland's powers to deal with static demonstrations where public order is threatened. This consideration should take into account the effectiveness of such a change, in light of any issues around proportionality and on the human rights of those demonstrating.

[The Scottish Government]

Limited progress.

Note that this issue was again raised in discussions with Police Scotland.

Local authorities should give consideration to how they present information and procedures on marches and parades, ensuring that clear and consistent information is readily accessible online. If information is not given online, clear guidance about where it can be accessed is essential.

[Local authorities]

Mixed. Good progress made by many local authorities. Little or no progress made by others.

Several local authorities reported and described good progress on this and, overall, it would appear that the standard and accessibility of information available on local authority websites has markedly improved. For example, the 2016 Report (3.10) pointed to a lack of information on the Comhairle nan Eilean Siar and Midlothian websites. Both websites are now much improved, providing clear and helpful guidance.

It is clear, however, that some local authorities have complex websites where information is difficult to find; some have very limited information; some too have outdated information. A check of all 32 Local Authority websites (in December 2019) shows great variation in the clarity and extent of information provided:

• For some websites the relevant pages are difficult to find, and information is out of date or absent.
• Other websites are easier to navigate but may have incomplete information (such as current notified processions, or limited details of routes, starting times etc). Very few websites provide estimates of the size or duration of the parade – this would be very helpful information.
• Some local authority websites contain obsolete and/or misleading information. Clackmannanshire's Notification materials, for example, still require organisers to contact Central Scotland Police.

As reported in 2016 there are various models of good practice available. The review of websites in 2019 suggests that very good models would include the websites of Argyll & Bute, Glasgow, Inverclyde, North Ayrshire, Perth & Kinross and West Dunbartonshire.

Local authorities should give some thought to the way in which their notification process is presented and explained, such that adequate recognition is given to the rights and responsibilities of march and parade organisers. Good practice examples to facilitate any general 'refresh' of materials is readily available.

[Local authorities]

Mixed progress.

Some local authorities have reviewed and refreshed these materials (e.g. Midlothian, Moray, West Lothian):

• Moray refreshed their materials in December 2016 and now offer a clear and comprehensive document on all aspects of the process.
• Midlothian issued useful Guidance on processions in October 2016.

Others have reported 'no progress' on this issue – though these tend to be rural areas where the number of processions is relatively low. Several local authorities who did not contribute to this report appear to have made no progress, whilst others have made excellent progress (see 3.13 above).

At least two Local Authority websites require Notifiers to confirm that they will abide by standard conditions and/or a code of conduct, but do not actually provide these materials to potential organisers.

Local authorities and police should give further consideration to using the Event Planning and Operations Group (EPOG)/Safety Advisory Group process as used by The City of Edinburgh Council and Scottish Borders Council respectively, as a model that could be adapted to local circumstance.

Local authorities and Police Scotland

Mixed progress.

Several authorities have used such models over a number of years and these vary by size and urban/rural contexts (such as Dumfries & Galloway, Edinburgh, Scottish Borders, West Lothian).

Some local authorities have given this serious consideration, and a SAG model has been implemented or is planned (e.g. Falkirk, 2017; South Ayrshire, 2020). Other authorities have given the issue consideration and concluded that such a structured approach would not be suitable for their particular circumstances (e.g. Highland). It is encouraging that local authorities are considering (and in some cases rejecting) this model in light of their own contexts – one size, of course, cannot fit all.

Those few local authorities who still require organisers to separately notify Police Scotland should consider adopting the single notification model used by the majority of local authorities.

[Local authorities and Police Scotland]

No progress.

Most local authorities already had this system in place before 2016.

Local authorities which still require separate Notifications (according to their websites) include Angus, Clackmannanshire and Stirling.

Those local authorities who do not have clear codes of conduct and guidance on standard conditions should adopt a policy of providing these as per the recommendations circulated in 2005 and 2006. Those who do have such policies should ensure that they can be readily accessed, are written in plain English and are easily understandable.

[Local authorities]

Some excellent progress

Again, several local authorities have reviewed and refreshed these materials (West Lothian undertook an impressive refresh of their webpages in 2017) or have plans to do so (Glasgow 2020). Falkirk have considered introducing a Code of Conduct but have delayed this until there is clarity over the position of Temporary Traffic Regulation Orders (TTROs) – on which see 3.90 and 3.91 below.

One excellent piece of practice is undertaken by West Lothian, whereby a parade notifier can ask for specific standard conditions to be waived if it suits the particular context or aspirations of the processions. Where this is deemed acceptable to both the local authority and Police Scotland the standard condition is waived. Where Police Scotland do not find it acceptable the matter is referred to the Licensing Committee for decision.

This is a clear and consistent policy which ensures that the local authority is not imposing a 'one size fits all' policy and allows flexibility in how processions are actually conducted. This is highly commendable.

As noted in 3.19 above, at least two Local Authorities require Notifiers to read and abide by documents which they are not supplied with through the Local Authority website.

Where guidance is not already provided on what (minimum) level of stewarding might be expected, local authorities should consider this. This need not be formalised as a 'standard condition', but could be in the form of indicative guidance.

[Local authorities]

Some good progress

West Lothian provided a cogent argument against 'generic guidance' on stewarding, since appropriate stewarding would depend on the nature and size of the procession, as well as its route. For many annual processions, they note, the effectiveness of stewarding will have been tested at previous events. Where West Lothian has any concerns about levels of stewarding this is remitted to a SAG where Police Scotland can provide advice. Again, taking a contextual approach, relevant to local experience and tried and trusted practice, is to be commended.

Dumfries & Galloway, in their database of processions, routinely record both the 'expected number of marchers' and the 'number of stewards'. This is very good practice.

It would be good practice for those local authorities who make no general comment on the hours of the day when music will be normally acceptable to do so. This can be worded in a flexible way that allows for local contexts and considerations to play a full part in the notification process.

[Local authorities]

Limited progress.

It is clear that music is not an issue in many local authority areas. This, for example, has not arisen in Highland but they will, nevertheless, monitor the issue through the Notification process. Again, one size cannot fit all and local authorities should ensure that their procedures are suited to local contexts.

Local authorities should consider whether Standard Conditions relating only to 'places of worship' are fit for their intended purpose. If the intent is to protect 'solemn occasions' from unreasonable noise then they should be broadened to encompass a wider range of places (The City of Edinburgh's formulation offers a good example of how to do so). This, however, places a clear onus on local authorities to give clear and carefully explained guidance to both organisers and police.

[Local authorities]

Limited progress.

For some local authorities, given the nature of processions under their jurisdiction, this is not seen as a relevant issue for action.

West Lothian reviewed its relevant standard condition in 2017. That now states:

The organiser of the procession shall ensure that any band or bands taking part in the procession cease playing for a distance of 50 metres before and after passing any place of worship or other location where a recognised religious, cultural or legal ceremony is taking place.

Local authorities should consider whether a 'blanket ban' on music around places of worship or places where religious, cultural or legal ceremonies take place regardless of whether a service or ceremony is taking place is disproportionate.

[Local authorities]

Limited progress.

For many local authorities this has not been an issue and no action has been deemed necessary.

One Local Authority noted that the blanket policy laid down in other local authority areas could be construed to be disproportionate. They also noted that identifying all places where ceremonies might be taking place might place an overly onerous burden on the organiser/local authority.

Wherever possible, clear details of what can be allowed on the day, including on issues such as allowing spear-tops on banner poles, should be set-out and recorded in advance of the march or parade to avoid uncertainty on the day itself.

[Local authorities, Police Scotland and March and Parade Organisers]

Limited progress.

It is clear that these issues have not arisen in many local authority areas and no action has been necessary. Again, as an example, Highland will seek to monitor this through their notification process so as to ascertain if this is relevant to them.

Local authorities should review the information on future marches and parades they currently provide. Where a clear and comprehensive list of marches and parades, with full information on matters such as the process for comment and/or objection, is not already provided online, local authorities should give consideration as to how this information can be provided.

[Local authorities]

Mixed Progress.

A number of local authorities have reported updating and refreshing their websites in regard to these issues. As well as being good practice, this can be seen as a positive form of community engagement.

Other local authorities, however, do not appear to give any information on forthcoming parades or give out-of-date information. One Local Authorities' information, for example, has not been updated since July 2018.

Some local authorities give incomplete information – often dates and routes are well-specified, but actual timings are not.

It should be noted that providing such information is required by the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 (as amended by the Police, Public Order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2006):^[20]

63 (9) The local authority shall compile, maintain and make available to the public, free of charge, a list containing information about—

(a) processions which have, after the coming into force of this subsection, been held in their area;

(b) proposed processions which they have, after that time, prohibited under this section.

63 (10) A local authority shall make sufficient arrangements to secure that any person, body or other grouping resident in or otherwise present in their area who makes a request for the purposes of this subsection is enabled to receive information about processions which are to or might be held in that area or in any part of it specified in the request.

There are many examples of good practice in how to provide such information:

• Perth & Kinross has a very clear description of forthcoming parades, clear information on how to make comments, and a deadline for doing so.
• South Lanarkshire offers clear and comprehensive information including maps of the procession route.
• South Lanarkshire also provide a useful pro-forma for lodging objections.
• West Lothian carries very clear information about parades and offers clear and helpful guidance on making a representation/objection on a proposed parade.
• Note, too, the potential use of the Tell Me Scotland website which some Local Authorities may find effective and convenient (see 3.62).

Those local authorities with an existing information opt-in list or key interest groups list should make this fact clear on their websites to ensure those interested in being included have opportunity to do so. Where a local authority does not have such lists, they should be introduced.

[Local authorities]

Mixed progress.

As noted above, making information about forthcoming parades easily available is a good way to pursue meaningful community engagement, and is also a statutory duty.

Several local authorities have noted how their opt-in list is advertised, with some aiming to give them greater prominence on websites. Others, however, fail to offer any such information on their websites.

It might be noted that local authority administered opt-in lists are not the only way to fulfil this function. Some Local Authorities (including Renfrewshire, West Lothian) make use of the Tell Me Scotland website where the public can sign up for alerts on notified processions in their area and have discontinued 'opt-in lists'.

West Lothian view this as 'a much more effective and up to date approach' to communicate accurate information. Other local authorities may wish to investigate whether they could save time and resources through Tell Me Scotland.

Local authorities should provide clear and concise guidance on how to make comments or objections about marches and parades and on what considerations can be taken into account.

[Local authorities]

Good progress.

Several local authorities have updated their websites and/or documentation to provide clear advice.

Other local authorities, however, provide no such information.

See comments in 3.58 above for some examples of good practice in this respect.

Clarity is urgently required on a number of issues relating to Police Scotland's current position on their (lack of) emergency powers relating to pre-planned marches and parades. If Police Scotland have received legal advice on this position then they should be encouraged to publish it. They should also be encouraged to publish details of any consultations they have carried out with external bodies, not least local authorities, in relation to their position.

[Police Scotland]

[Scottish Government response 2016: The Scottish Government acknowledges the concerns around the use of TTROs raised in the report, and the need for greater clarity on this issue. We also recognise that the impact of changes in policy around TTROs is not confined to marches and parades. We are in dialogue with Police Scotland with the aim of gaining clarity on this issue and we will give further consideration in light of any information we receive.]

Mixed progress

TTROs continue to be an issue of concern to both local authorities and to parade notifiers. The 2016 Report noted that there were several issues surrounding the legal basis and the extent to which TTROs were required, and no consistent approach to these questions across Scotland.

The 2016 Report further noted that this uncertainty and inconsistency was seriously undermining relationships in some local authority areas between parade organisers and local authorities.

By 2017 it was clear that Police Scotland and various local authorities were in possession of different legal opinions on these issues. In October 2017 Police Scotland wrote to local authorities to reiterate their position that:

… in the absence of a TTRO, it did not have the required legal authority to carry out the duties it had previously undertaken (such as closure of roads and control of traffic) and that it would advise event organisers to contact relevant roads authority to apply for TTROs (with associated cost implications).^[21]

Following this letter, TTRO policy was discussed by the Scottish Police Authority, with the following points minuted:

• SPA members stressed the importance of early consultation and engagement on potentially complex public interest issues of this nature.
• Police Scotland will engage directly with Scottish Government to reach a shared understanding on the legal position.
• SPA members encouraged Police Scotland to engage with COSLA, Transport Scotland and other relevant partners in adopting a multi-agency, problem-solving approach to the issue.^[22]

A tripartite group was set up in early 2018 bringing together Police Scotland, local government, and the Scottish Government to seek resolution around TTROs.^[23]

In May 2019 the matter was again discussed by the SPA, where it was noted that the tripartite group had:

… agreed to seek further legal advice from senior counsel. Group members anticipate that jointly commissioned advice and a judgment from a senior QC may carry sufficient weight to inform organisational guidance on policy and practice across working group members, and help facilitate resolution.^[24]

In the SPA meeting discussion centred around the 'significant' and negative impact this ongoing issue was having in inter-agency relationships:

Members heard that in an attempt to achieve a national approach this issue has caused significant difficulties with relationships between Local Authorities and Police Scotland and that the potential reputational impacts on relationships was significant.^[25]

In November 2019 the SPA noted that:

Senior Counsel opinion has been received [by the tripartite group], and has been considered by the joint working group. New shared guidance, informed by Senior Counsel opinion, is being prepared jointly by Police Scotland and local government partners. This will be available in the coming months, and current practice will remain unchanged as the new guidance is being developed.^[26]

Thus, progress appears to have been made on the legal questions raised around TTROs and new shared guidance is in preparation. It will be hoped that this is produced as soon as practicable, not least since TTROs continue to pose difficulties and concerns for many local authorities and for parade organisers.^[27]

Throughout this review the TTRO issue was raised by local authorities across Scotland. One rural authority, for example, noted that Police Scotland had informed them in 2017 that they would no longer support traffic management for processions, and that notifiers would in all cases have to engage (and pay for) a Traffic Management Company, and in some cases apply for a TTRO, to ensure the safety of participants. Upon that position being challenged Police Scotland agreed to consider each procession individually.

Another authority noted continuing 'confusion and inconsistency' in Police Scotland's position on TTROs and who should bear the costs involved in securing one. Another rural authority was concerned about an anticipated parade in 2020 and the likelihood that the notifier would refuse to pay for a TTRO. It is clear that urgent guidance is needed on what costs can be justifiably, and legally, recovered from parade organisers.

Another Local Authority, with a substantial number of parades, continue to face a Police Scotland insistence that all marches require a TTRO, and that Local Authority continues to bear the very considerable financial costs. They view the situation around TTROs as 'somewhat challenging' and note that for the many smaller parades they facilitate the TTRO policy is a 'disproportionate burden'.

One Local Authority noted that clear guidance and consistency of policy around police powers and TTROs was 'long overdue'.

Uncertainty and regional inconsistency in policy continues to have damaging effects. One Local Authority described some parade organisers as clearly 'stressed' about TTROs, and attentive to, and somewhat suspicious of, the general notification procedures as a result. This required substantial effort on the part of the Local Authority to maintain good relations and rapport with groups they had long dealt with without issue.

Parade organisers have long been concerned about TTROs, not least the lack of 'positive transparency' on when one is required and for what reason. Many such organisations operate 'nationally' and, for them, the matter of regional inconsistency is acute and confusing.

In summary, whilst we seem to be much closer to resolution of the difficult questions around TTROs than we were in 2016 this has been a slow process, and one which continues to put strain on the key relationships in marches and parades, that is between organisers, local authority, and Police Scotland.

Whatever emerges from the tripartite group there will be several challenges and questions ahead:

• Given the inconsistency of policy and practice across Scotland, moving to a 'national' position will require that at least some local authorities and Policing divisions will need to change their practice. This will require good support and good guidance. These parties will need to be equipped with a clear and consistent appreciation of how (and why) the new arrangements should be put in place.
• There needs to be an open and transparent discussion on costs, not least since there seems to have been an assumption on the part of Police Scotland, and many local authorities, that the costs for TTROs should be borne by the organiser. This is discussed further below.

It remains unclear (to a lay reader) whether marches and parades fall under the definition of events as described in the existing legislation, and the extent to which multiple TTROs can be issued for the same stretches of public roads without the express permission of Scottish Ministers. If necessary, legal advice should be urgently secured and published. This could be jointly sought by Police Scotland, local authorities and the Scottish Government.

[Police Scotland, Scottish Government, local authorities]

Mixed progress

The issue of Ministerial consent was raised explicitly by one authority since this requirement had extended the period needed to secure a TTRO 'by a number of weeks'. Again, we await clarity and guidance on these issues.