Scottish Government

Review of Marches and Parades in Scotland

8 A summary of written responses

Introduction

8.1 I wrote to over 1,000 organisations inviting their views on the areas covered by my remit:

• The period of notice required to be given to local authorities, the police and communities for proposed marches and parades (currently seven days);
• The best way to ensure community input into decisions about marches and parades;
• The basis for determining when to restrict, refuse or reroute marches and parades;
• The number of marches and parades occurring in communities and the effects these have; and
• The costs of policing marches and parades.

8.2 Given the pivotal nature of the Review, I ensured that my letter went to the widest range of possible interests including: local authorities; the police service; the fire service; the NHS; the enterprise network; tourist boards; community planning partnerships; social inclusion partnerships; housing associations; trade unions; political parties; voluntary organisations; youth groups; sports groups; faith groups; and organisations which arrange marches. I also invited organisations to circulate my letter around their own networks. The breadth of the consultation networks reflected the wide range of possible interests in the Review. To ensure that the work of the Review was brought to the attention of a wide audience, information was also posted on the Scottish Executive web site and circulated to local media across Scotland. I invited comments to be sent to me by 24 September 2004 but was prepared to accept submissions after that date.

Responses

8.3 In total, I received 361 written submissions. They came from a wide range of organisations as well as from members of the public. A list of all who contributed is at Appendix A. I would like to thank everyone who responded. The submissions I received have helped to inform my recommendations. They were valuable in supplementing the other views I have heard from the face-to-face meetings I held and survey information I collected. They ensured I heard the views of a wide range of people with an interest in my work.

8.4 This chapter of my report summarises in some detail the main points that emerged from the submissions. I have grouped the views according to the categories of respondents and in line with the five areas of my remit:

• submissions from local authorities and local authority associations (32);
• submissions from police associations (3);
• submissions from other parts of the public sector (4);
• submissions from community councils (14);
• submissions from business organisations (6);
• submissions from transport organisations (6);
• submissions from the voluntary sector (5);
• submissions from religious organisations (12);
• submissions from MSPs (1);
• submissions from organisations which arrange marches (12);
• submission from individuals (30);
• standard submissions from individuals (216); and
• views forwarded from the Scottish Executive (20).

A summary of the general issues emerging from the response

Period of notice

8.5 Over 95% of those who commented on the period of notice agreed that the current seven day period was too short to allow meaningful consideration of notifications by local authorities and the police. It allowed no time for any wider consultation, including with the community. Suggestions for lengthening the period ranged through 14 days, 21 days, 28 days, one month, two months, six weeks, three months to six months for certain sorts of processions. Over 80% thought 28 days represented a more appropriate notification period. Around 5% drew attention to the need for a shorter notification for exceptional circumstances, for processions organised in response to unforeseen local, national or international events. Respondents recognised that organisers were already acting responsibly in giving more than seven days notice. Those who thought seven days was long enough were in areas where there were limited numbers of processions taking place.

Community input

8.6 On balance, respondents generally supported the idea of greater community involvement. Respondents considered who should be involved and suggested in addition to community councils, local authority interests and the police, the following groups could be included; community groups; groups that could demonstrate that they were representative of the community; residents groups; businesses (direct or through chambers of commerce); professional or trade bodies; public transport operators; churches, places of worship and faith groups; and youth groups.

8.7 Some respondents expressed caution about community input into the decision making process, feeling it risked a vocal minority with strongly held views dominating the process. The role and responsibility of councillors in representing their community views needed to be recognised and continue. The purpose of consultation and what community could influence needed to be clear. The time and resource implications of community consultation also needed to be borne in mind. There was a need to think about who would have a right to comment or object, and the process for considering those comments and objections as part of the decision making process. Some people felt the current legislation needed to be changed to ensure that community views could be taken into account.

8.8 Respondents made practical suggestions as to how consultation with the community could be achieved. Generally there was support for advertising notifications about processions in the local media. Organisers could be required to advertise their parade and to demonstrate that they had done this. Organisers could be required to distribute flyers to local residents and particular groups such as churches. Notifications could be posted in libraries and other public or local authority buildings. Notifications needed to make clear the timescale for objections and where those views should be sent. Local authorities could make use of existing mechanisms for gauging views, such as local community planning structures or their local area committees. A few respondents suggested a general poll or referendum to establish communities' views.

Decision making

8.9 Respondents agreed that there was a careful balance to be struck between the rights of marchers and the rights of communities to go about their daily lives without unnecessary disruption.

8.10 A majority of respondents agreed that local authorities should continue to take decisions about notifications. In reaching those decisions, local authorities should be able to take into account a wider range of issues. Respondents suggested that those wider issues could include:

• protection of public safety;
• protection of public order;
• the level of disruption to traffic;
• the level of disruption to public transport;
• the level of disruption to pedestrians;
• the level of disruption to the life of the community;
• the likelihood of public nuisance;
• minimising noise;
• the views of the communities;
• whether organisers were 'fit and proper' to organise a march;
• the background of the organisation, no history of illegality or confrontation;
• experience and behaviour associated with previous marches;
• the object and purpose of the march;
• the possibility of intimidation;
• whether the march was deliberately provocative;
• whether the march was likely to provoke considerable counter demonstration;
• the atmosphere created by the march and the impact on community relations;
• if the march caused offence to the majority of the community;
• the previous behaviour and experience of marches - for example were previous conditions properly observed;
• the implications for police time and resources;
• whether there were other events on at the same time;
• numbers and frequency of marches taking place;
• general health and safety issues; and
• the scale of police resources necessary to police a march.

8.11 Respondents thought local authorities should have flexibility to impose appropriate restrictions including those on the route, time, date and duration. Routes were an important area where there could be compromise. Respondents suggested a variety of approaches including that: marches should only be permitted in residential areas if a minimum level of intrusion can be guaranteed; marches should be restricted to main arterial routes where possible; marches should avoid small narrow streets in residential areas; marches should avoid shopping centres; if the march was considered to be religious or sectarian in nature it should avoid areas of a predominantly different religion than those of the marchers or not walk past a place of worship if a service is in progress; generally marches should not be held in town centres but in parks or other locations, to minimise disruption. It might be possible to agree specific routes for marches to take.

8.12 A minority of respondents suggested confrontational processions which demonstrate a religious or racial bias or promoted sectarian behaviour should be banned.

8.13 Local authorities and some others thought that detailed guidance would be helpful in ensuring that there was a more consistent approach to decision making across Scotland. Decisions had to be explained to organisers and the process needed to be properly informed and transparent.

Numbers and effects on communities

8.14 While local authorities and the police received few formal complaints about marches, it was clear from other respondents that some marches, particularly those described as 'sectarian' were causing issues for communities. Some respondents recorded the disturbance and intimidation they experienced at these marches. They felt that such marches had a detrimental effect on Scotland's image. Such marches were particularly disruptive to people's ability to go about their daily lives, ranging from small irritations such as not being able to cross roads until the march had passed to requiring changes to be made to previously planned church services, weddings and funerals. Some of the large annual marches effectively shut off small villages.

8.15 Generally the specificity of the examples which respondents highlighted related to the numbers of processions taking place and the frequency of disruption, the behaviour of onlookers, including drunkenness, and general anti-social behaviour. Marches were felt to have a negative effect on business turnover. They disrupted public transport and also disrupted people's daily arrangements.

8.16 Many respondents identified the contribution that organisers had in mitigating the effects on communities and reducing the amount of disruption caused. Some supported a code of conduct for marches. Some organisers already had these in place and a code would need to build on these. The behaviour of participants was important in how the community was affected by the march. Others suggested organisers needed to look at the numbers of marches being arranged by their organisations and ensure that marches were being arranged for appropriate and substantive reasons.

8.17 Some respondents suggested that guidance for organisers would be helpful. It should set out rights, obligations and responsibilities. It could cover health and safety issues. Organisers needed to ensure that they had effective stewarding and marshalling in place. Organisers were receptive to this, describing initiatives they had underway and recognising the need for more training. The guidance could look at the stewarding arrangements and local authorities, or the police, should be prepared to look at training for stewards.

Policing costs

8.18 The policing costs of parades were considered to be significant. Views on police costs diverged, with respondents divided as to whether organisers should be required to contribute to costs or not. Those opposed to the suggestion that organisers be required to pay for policing costs, felt it prejudiced political freedoms, the freedom of speech and people's right to peaceful assembly. As most marchers were taxpayers, some respondents felt that they had already contributed to police costs. On balance most respondents were opposed to the suggestion. Those that supported the suggestion that organisers pay for policing costs, felt it was right marchers should pay rather than expecting the community to meet their costs. Some suggested that organisers should at least pay a proportion of their costs and others suggested that a charge could be discretionary with the police able to charge when they though appropriate, for example if the march required a higher level of policing than usual. Given police resources were finite, costs should be able to be taken into account when considering notifications. A number of respondents were concerned about the effects on normal policing levels. Rather than charging for police, some suggested organisers be required to take out insurance or a bond against damage.

A summary of submissions received from local authorities

8.19 I received responses from 30 local authorities as well as two local authority associations, COSLA and SOLACE. All 32 local authorities also provided statistics on the number of marches which had been notified to them and some provided some very detailed and helpful information on their current processes. I have drawn on this material elsewhere in the report, in Chapters 6 and 7 on current processes and statistics. The responses broadly welcomed the review as an opportunity to look at the arrangements for marches and parades, given the legislation governing the processes had been in place for over 20 years, allowing those arrangements to be considered in the changing human rights context.

Local authorities' views on the period of notice

8.20 Without exception, local authorities considered the seven days notification period inadequate and two commented that it definitely should not be shortened. Local authorities felt that seven days did not allow them sufficient time to consider notifications properly, liaise with other services, inform the public, nor did it allow any discussion with organisers to take place. Local authorities stressed that although they met current timetables, the current system worked only because most notifications were non-controversial and organisers of marches and parades acted responsibly and gave considerably more notice than seven days required in statute. Seven days would not allow councils to arrange committee meetings. Many authorities in their guidance for march notifications, highlighted the importance of giving as much notice as possible, most encouraging organisers to give one or two months. To improve advance planning, the local police in one local authority area had written to organisers of events in 2003 to ask them to complete notifications outlining their intentions for 2004 and 2005 events.

8.21 There were mixed views on what an appropriate notification would be and suggestions made varied from 15 days, 21 days, six weeks, one month, two months through to three months. Over 45% (15) of respondents agreed that a month (28 or 30 days) was a more appropriate time period. Others suggested a longer timetable for large marches which would require more bodies to be involved in making arrangements.

8.22 20% (6) said that it was important to have an exceptional provision allowing local authorities to dispense with the full period of notice if it were appropriate, for example in circumstances which could not have been foreseen.

Local authorities' views on community input

8.23 Under current processes, local authorities rely on elected members to represent their community views about march notifications. Three local authorities commented specifically that this system worked particularly effectively, given the existing statutory framework, as elected members had a high awareness of the feelings and concerns of their communities. Under present arrangements, some local authorities considered the views of their roads department and of the police and felt that the priority should continue to be afforded to their views.

8.24 A majority of the local authorities, commenting generally, supported wider community input in the decision making process. However, this support was qualified by some important caveats:

• Scope of current legislation - Several local authorities commented that they felt that the current legislation did not allow them to take into account public opinion. They were of the opinion that the law needed to be amended to allow them to do so. They felt that court decisions had demonstrated, that under the current legislation, public opinion was not sufficient grounds to ban a parade. There was no provision in the current legislation for communities to comment and so felt that the community had no formal role in feeding into the decision making process;
• Purpose of consultation - Some respondents highlighted that there was a fine balance to be drawn between people's right to march and the community's right to conduct their normal daily lives. Any wider consultation needed to be carefully framed as, while it was clear that members of the public found certain parades distasteful, peaceful protest was a fundamental right. There was a risk of raising and then frustrating expectations of the public if they felt that their views were being ignored. There needed to be clarity about what the public could influence and how their views would be taken into account;
• Implications for time and resources - Local authority respondents felt that any wider consultation would be time consuming and resource intensive. It would therefore be important to ensure that local authorities had the discretion to decide how best to gauge community views in their own area which fit best their own circumstances. There was scope to use existing consultation methods: people's panels, local community planning, area committee structures and community councils. Arrangements for consultation needed to be practical and workable; and
• Who had a right to comment - A number of authorities commented that it would be difficult to define who had a right to comment (for example, was it the whole of the local authority area or people living on the route) and to make sure that views being expressed were genuinely representative and not simply the views of a vociferous few.

8.25 Some authorities made practical suggestions as to how community views could be invited including:

• inviting views on larger parades through a newspaper advert;
• requiring organisers to advertise their parade for 14 days and for objections to be submitted to the local authority to consider in reaching their decision;
• requiring organisers to advertise their parade through flyers to local residents and businesses and to make direct contact with local churches and to put a notice in the press;

extending a list of people who required to be consulted under statute to include local community groups, community councils and particular groups affected, for example, churches. At least four authorities raised the role that community councils should have.

8.26 Four respondents thought that there was merit in considering the processes for licence applications under the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 where there was an established process for direct community involvement.

8.27 Respondents also commented on how objections from the community should be considered. Organisers of marches needed to be made aware of them to allow them to be considered and should have the chance to be able to put forward their views. Local authorities thought it would be appropriate to consider community views as part of their overall consideration and, if objections had been raised, this should be at a meeting of the appropriate council committee.

Local authorities' views on the basis for decision making

8.28 The key issue for local authorities in reaching decisions about marches was to find an appropriate way to balance the rights of freedom of expression and of peaceful expression with the rights of others. The most appropriate way of striking that balance was looking carefully at routes and that is where they felt that there was most scope for compromise and discussion. Local authorities recognised the inherent difficulties in reconciling sometimes conflicting views.

8.29 Local authorities commented that decisions on notifications should remain with them. Most local authorities thought that the current decision making framework was too narrow and restricted their ability to make decisions about marches in their area. The framework for making decisions needed to be objective and fair. The current scope that local authorities had for making decisions was limited and not well understood by the public.

8.30 Local authorities agreed that public safety and public order issues should be the principal criteria in informing decisions. Police views would continue to be very important. However, they felt that it would be helpful to broaden the sorts of issues which could be taken into account. Suggestions of the issues which could be taken into account included:

• the level of disruption to traffic;
• the level of disruption to public transport;
• the level of disruption to pedestrians;
• the level of disruption to the life of the community;
• the likelihood of public nuisance;
• the views of the communities;
• whether organisers were 'fit and proper' to organise a march;
• the background of the organisation, no history of illegality or confrontation;
• the object and purpose of the march;
• the possibility of intimidation;
• whether the march was deliberately provocative;
• whether the march was likely to provoke considerable counter demonstration;
• the previous behaviour and experience of marches - for example, whether previous conditions were properly observed;
• the implications for police time and resources;
• whether there were other events on at the same time; and
• general health and safety issues.

8.31 Local authorities also made suggestions about the appropriateness of certain routes for marches and suggested some general principles for reaching agreements over routes including:

• marches should only be permitted in residential areas if a minimum level of intrusion can be guaranteed;
• marches should be restricted to main arterial routes where possible;
• that marches should avoid small narrow streets in residential areas;
• marches should avoid shopping centres;
• if the march was considered to be religious or sectarian in nature it should avoid areas of a predominantly different religion than those of the marchers;
• if the march has a religious or sectarian nature it should not march past a place of worship when a service is in progress; and
• marches should, in general, not go through town centres or pass places of worship.

8.32 Some local authorities highlighted the need for some clear and national statutory guidance. This should set out the reasons that could properly be taken into account in reaching decisions. It would help when decisions were challenged in court, ensure consistency, fairness and openness in reaching decisions and remove political pressure to ban marches arranged by lawful organisations which were generally disapproved of. The ideology of a march should not, by itself, be a factor for a ban. The guidance should cover the formal procedures for the consideration of objections at a hearing. Guidance should be developed by the Executive in consultation with local authorities and the police.

8.33 Some authorities thought it would be helpful to share good practice, for example in looking at ways of facilitating mediation. Some local authorities suggested it would be helpful to hold debriefing meetings after marches to learn from experience. The meetings should involve local authority departments, the police and the organisers. Another suggested that local authorities should get a report from the police after the march.

Local authorities' views on numbers and effects on communities

8.34 Local authority responses made clear the variety in the numbers of marches happening across Scotland. Those with few marches felt that the numbers and the effects on communities were manageable. However, there was more disruption and detrimental effects in those local authorities with a greater number. In general, local authorities received few formal complaints about marches.

8.35 There were mixed views about whether quotas should be set for the numbers of marches that took place in any one community. Some authorities thought this would undermine the freedom of peaceful assembly. Others thought that looking at the amount of disruption experienced by a community was appropriate and local authorities ought to be able to take into account the frequency of marches as well as the routes to minimise disruption and the impact on community relations. They thought that measures to encourage the consolidation of marches would be helpful and achieve reduced disruption and costs.

8.36 Some local authorities thought a statutory code of conduct for marches, drawing on the conditions already set by many local authorities for marches as well as organisers' codes of behaviour, would be helpful. The code would govern the conduct of a march and cover topics such as: organisers' responsibilities for the conduct of a march, levels of stewarding, the width of a march, what could be carried and displayed at a march, the playing of music, sanctions for future marches if things went wrong and other possible penalties. Such a code would only work with the co-operation of marching organisations.

Local authorities' views on policing costs

8.37 There were mixed views on the merits of charging for police time and for local authority time. Those that opposed the suggestion felt that there was a risk that it could prejudice political freedom. They accepted that the costs should be found from general resources, although thought that allocations from central government funding should take account of these costs. Some authorities recovered costs associated with traffic management measures, others did not or exempted certain community groups from the requirement.

8.38 However, there was some support for requiring organisers to make a partial contribution to policing and administrative costs, as long as it was not too excessive to make it impossible to organise events. They drew attention to the parallel with football clubs which had to meet policing costs within their stadia. One authority thought that local authorities should have the discretion to recover costs as and when appropriate. Another thought that the chief constable ought to have the discretion to charge when the march required a higher level of policing than would normally be required. There was support for requiring organisers to take out insurance or a bond against damage which would ensure that local communities did not have to meet all the costs of marches in their area.

8.39 A few councils looked at the possibility of charging an administrative fee for various events, for example for marches not recurring annually, and whether it would be appropriate to charge a fee for notifications. Most concluded that it would not. Other local authorities thought that organisers should meet the costs of administrative work associated with notifications, and the cost of any adverts, if a notification required to be advertised.

A summary of submissions from police associations

8.40 The eight police forces commented through the three police associations. Their responses were set against the general presumption of people's right to march and the need to achieve a balance between that right and the rights of others not to be disturbed and disrupted.

Police associations' views on the period of notice

8.41 All three associations felt that the seven days notice period was too short. It did not give sufficient time to the police to consider notifications or prepare for marches nor did it allow communities to be consulted. 28 days would allow time for consultation and public notification to be given to communities, giving them a set amount of time to comment. Decisions should only be taken once those views had been considered.

8.42 The police associations recognised that some organisations already gave more than seven days notification but it would be helpful to set this on a statutory footing. Larger marches needed a considerable amount of police planning. It was recognised that there was a need to have an exceptional circumstances clause. There needed to be some consistency with other timetables - for example, formal road closures required around eight weeks.

Police associations' views on community input

8.43 The police associations supported wider community input into the decision making process. Currently the community could really only comment through their local councillor. Consulting the community would ensure that local authorities were better informed of the range of issues associated with a march. Communities would be well placed to comment on the scale of disruption. Local authorities could receive information that would allow them to consider the march's impact on the: restriction of movement including access for emergency vehicles and public transport; restriction of normal community activity; restriction of access to public amenities such as hospitals; and restriction of access to places of worship. The community might express views on costs; intrusion; tensions and fear and the impact on shops and other businesses.

8.44 They made the point that proper consultation required time to complete. The police associations suggested that march notifications could be published in the local media and posted in public buildings. The notification would advise people who wanted to express a view of the timescale and an address for comments. Communities should be allowed a reasonable amount of time to express their views - one association suggested at least two weeks. Consultation should also include community groups.

Police associations' views on the basis for decision making

8.45 Generally the police associations thought it right that local authorities remained responsible for taking decisions on march notifications. They felt that there was some confusion about the role of the police and it could appear that decisions were based on the police's views. One association suggested that it might also be appropriate to consider the establishment of a Commission, covering the whole of Scotland, as the appropriate place to take decisions, with that Commission being obliged to publish decisions, although they felt that current arrangements were working.

8.46 The police associations thought that it was important that local authorities were able to take a wider range of issues into account when reaching decisions on notifications. Currently, decisions were generally taken after formal consultation only with the police. The police based their comments on public safety. They were in a difficult situation if required to admit that there could be situations with which they could not cope. Local authorities should be able to weigh up wider views, including community comments, to allow them to take a view on the relative benefits of a march and costs in terms of disruption and policing. It was important that local authorities could consider wider inconvenience and disruption to community life, such as traffic disruption and the changing nature of roads which could be busy and dangerous. This was appropriate under the terms of the human rights legislation, as the right to peaceful assembly was a qualified one.

8.47 Local authorities should also be able to take into account previous behaviour as evidence of the likelihood of future disorder, including the behaviour of non-participants and onlookers which would prevent public disorder or crime. The police association which suggested this felt that would be appropriate in human rights terms, under an authority's right to use the margin of appreciation in interpreting ECHR decisions, to allow them to take account of their knowledge of national circumstances.

8.48 It was suggested that it would be helpful for local authorities to give a written determination, setting out clearly which of the qualifications under Article 11 of the ECHR were being applied in a decision. This would help to ensure organisations understood the decision making processes which, in one police association's view, needed to be transparent and the reasons for decisions properly explained to organisers.

8.49 The police associations thought that there should be scope for councils and organisers to negotiate on the number of processions and for restrictions to be set on the number. Organisers needed to act responsibly and co-operatively to restrict the number of minor unnecessary parades which occupy police time and cause disruption. Organisers could self police their notifications and perhaps prioritise their parade notifications. The frequency, in some areas, was felt to lead to a concentration of attention, tension and disruption.

8.50 Local authorities should be able to impose restrictions on route, time, date and duration and be required to notify organisers of the restriction. There may be other restrictions appropriate for local authorities to impose and they should have powers to do so. For example, there might be merit in holding parades away from public highways, in parks. While participants might consider this to be overly restrictive it would limit disruption to communities who might support such a proposal. It was important organisers continued to have a right of appeal.

8.51 Generally the police associations thought there needed to be more clarity around the legislation and whether local authorities were, in fact, giving permission for marches. Currently the legislation gave them the power to restrict or prohibit processions. If local authorities did neither it could reasonably be argued that they were de facto approving the procession. There was support for a formal approval given, underlining the local authority's responsibility and making accountability clear. A pre-parade document would help to define responsibility and accountability mechanisms.

8.52 One police association raised the issue of spontaneous events with no advance warning which could cause operational difficulties for the police. The legislation governing these events, the Public Order Act 1986, was not easy to enforce as it was often difficult to identify the person in charge and difficult to prove if an offence had been committed.

Police associations' views on numbers and effects on communities

8.53 The police associations thought it important to recognise the diversity of marches taking place across Scotland and that most processions were relatively peaceful events which did not cause risks to public safety. However, it was also important to recognise that most processions were organised by groups often described as 'sectarian'. The sectarian nature of some parades was a particular feature of one aspect of Scotland's history and culture. The Irish influence was clear and opposing elements collided at parades, with implications for the way those parades were regulated. Such processions, and the events that happened around them, caused significant concern, disturbance and intimidation to some residents, business people, religious congregations and visitors. These processions often posed the biggest challenge for the police and to community harmony. The behaviour of onlookers at these parades caused particular concern. One association thought that Republican and Loyalist organisations appeared to be increasing their profile through organising a greater number of marches and extending the traditional marching season along new and sometimes controversial routes.

8.54 The police highlighted the difference in resources needed from one or two officers to large numbers of staff. Some marches along busy roads required a higher number of officers to ensure public safety and to divert transport which could cause disruption. Officers could be unable to deal with every offence that takes place on a march day which could appear, to observers, that the police were ignoring offences or allowing them to occur. Observers were not aware of all the facts an officer had to consider in policing a parade. The frequency of minor parades was occupying police time and causing disruption.

8.55 The police associations felt it would be helpful to have detailed guidance for organisers. There was currently guidance available for organisers of general and of sporting events. That guidance could set out rights, obligations and responsibilities. It was also important that the guidance covered responsibilities about marshals and stewards. The police associations thought that there was scope for professionalising stewarding. It might be that members of the organisation who are closely connected to those participating in the parade, and are unwilling or unable to regulate behaviour, were not the most effective stewards. The numbers of stewards required needed to be determined in agreement with police and the relevant local authority, following a risk assessment.

Police associations' views on policing costs

8.56 The police associations accepted that policing marches was a legitimate police duty but all felt that the cost of policing parades represented a significant call on police resources which should be examined. Resources were finite and the policing of marches that required a sizeable police presence reduced resources available for overtime patrols. Some parades required a disproportionately high call on resources. While there were no circumstances which presented an unmanageable problem, there could be circumstances which presented such a threat to public order that the police presence required would be an unacceptable burden to the police budget. Such a heavy police presence would have negative connotations for the police service in terms of public reassurance and overall community engagement strategies.

8.57 The police associations explained that the competing demands on police resources, with a significant number of officers deployed whether through frequency of parades or in response to a threat to public order, could have detrimental effects on normal policing levels in communities. It should be appropriate for local authorities to factor competing demands into setting restrictions. Ensuring that there was an integrated policy framework to resolve possible disputes over contentious parades would be valuable to the police.

A summary of submissions from other parts of the public sector

8.58 I had four responses from the wider public sector. Three responses from parts of the National Health Service and one from Historic Scotland.

8.59 The NHS responses highlighted that it would be useful to ensure that they were consulted, as a matter of course, when march notifications were being considered to ensure that the health and welfare of those taking part could be taken into account. It would also allow hospitals to plan for a possible increase in referrals. If there was trouble at a march, then that could put a strain on health service resources. There was concern about the effects of the misuse of alcohol. One response also suggested that marches could have a detrimental effect on people's health if they perceived a threatening atmosphere and felt intimidated.

8.60 In commenting, the Scottish Ambulance Service drew attention to the variable effects of marches for its services. It was important that they received information about the duration, route and diversions, and numbers and purpose. That allowed the service to complete a risk assessment of its services and resource cover. In areas where there were more marches, that had an implication for resources and response times, due to disruption.

8.61 Historic Scotland described the impact of marches for them as minimal, although some of their properties were involved as assembly areas, for example for local 'riding of the marches' and for other local groups. Edinburgh Castle was also affected but the police ensured that they had good information in advance.

A summary of submissions from community councils

8.62 I received 13 submissions from community councils and one from the Association of Scottish Community Councils.

Community councils' views on the period of notice

8.63 Most community councils had a view on the period of notice. Three thought seven days was an appropriate timescale - any longer would appear 'big brotherish' - which currently worked but during that period there was a need to give information to the community. The majority, however, thought the period should be lengthened. There was a range of views about the appropriate time period: 14 days, 21 days, six weeks, 28 days or three months. The favoured response was 28 days.

Community councils' views on community input

8.64 Eleven respondents commented on community input. A couple felt that community views were best represented through the elected member and wider consultation might not be beneficial if there were particularly partisan views within the community. However, the majority welcomed wider community consultation.

8.65 Six thought that community councils should have a formal role in the process, as they did for other notifications and licence applications, and made suggestions as to the role. Two suggested that communities could feed their views through community councils to coordinate and forward to the local authority which could be seen to fall under their duty in the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to 'ascertain, coordinate and express to local authorities' the views of local people.

8.66 As well as community councils, seven respondents suggested other organisations that should be consulted. These included a broad range of local organisations and mentioned specifically residents groups, trade associations and youth organisations. They should be fully consulted about the time and route of a proposed march and be able to make objections about marches taking place in their immediate area. Local authorities would be required to consider any objections raised.

8.67 Four respondents made suggestions as to how the community could be informed. Most favoured information being given through an advert in the local press, others suggested the local authority website, posters in local authority offices and flyers distributed asking for opinions.

Community councils' views on the basis of decision making

8.68 Community councils mentioned the need to balance the rights of marchers with the public's rights to go about their business without disruption. However, it was important that there was a balance and the right to march had to be seen as 'a public right which has to be exercised with due regard for the rights of other members of the public'. One community council felt that the rights of marchers appeared to take priority over the rights of residents. It was important to respect private and family life.

8.69 There were mixed views on who should be responsible for making decisions. Some community councils thought that the police should be responsible for making decisions rather than local authorities whereas others thought that it should remain with local authorities. The types of issues that community councils thought should be taken into account when decisions were reached about marches, included:

• considerations about public order;
• considerations about public safety;
• considerations about health and safety;
• disruption to traffic;
• disruption to local businesses;
• disruption to the community;
• ways of minimising noise;
• whether the purpose of the march was likely to lead to violence;
• whether the march was deliberately provocative;
• whether there was likely to be trouble;
• behaviour at previous marches;
• the community's views about the march and the outcome of any general feedback;
• whether the community felt there were too many marches;
• whether the march causes offence to the majority of the community;
• whether the police are able to police the march effectively; and
• the scale of resources required to police a march.

8.70 In reaching decisions about routes, the following were suggested as issues to consider. Routes should:

• be developed that cause the minimum impact on residents;
• avoid town centres;
• avoid possible flashpoints for trouble;
• avoid disrupting emergency services; and
• generally avoid housing estates.

Community councils' views on banning processions

8.71 In their responses, community councils recognised that there was a need to respect people's human rights. However, some thought that certain marches should be banned, such as 'confrontational marches which demonstrate religious, racial or sexual bias' or 'religious or sectarian marches' should be banned, or at least limited, or 'all religious marches should be banned as they cause trouble and disruption and reinforce the image of bigotry in the West of Scotland'.

Community councils' views on numbers and effects on communities

8.72 Community councils had mixed views on the numbers and effects. Some community councils noted their concern about the numbers of marches taking place. Others felt that the numbers were not causing a particular problem. Noise and general disruption were raised as issues of concern. The behaviour of onlookers was also causing problems in some areas, detracting from the quality of life and 'giving a bad impression to visitors and tourists'. Others felt that marches were positive in bringing visitors to towns.

8.73 Responses also drew attention to problems caused through alcohol consumption and wanted to see the police being more proactive in tackling drunkenness. Some community councils wanted to see quotas set for marches, or only marches which involved 75% of the local population going ahead.

Community councils' views on Policing costs

8.74 Eleven respondents commented on the issue of police costs, and opinions were mixed. Two felt that costs should be met, as currently, through council and police budgets. Four suggested that organisers should be required to pay or, at the very least make a significant contribution to, the policing costs of their march. Others felt that whether payment was required should depend on the purpose of the march. For example, marches that were of benefit to the population, or were community marches or were by youth groups should not be required to meet costs whereas others, for example those with limited or no connection to the local population, should pay.

8.75 One respondent felt that the community which pays the council tax should have a chance to comment on whether they feel it an appropriate use of resources, given that most marches are a minority activity and of little relevance to most people. Another respondent, commented on their perception that there was increased policing associated with some Orange Order marches and it was important that the scale of policing was proportionate.

A summary of submissions from business organisations

8.76 I received six submissions from businesses and organisations representing businesses.

Business organisations' views on the period of notice

8.77 Three respondents offered views on the period of notice. All felt that seven days was inadequate. Twenty-eight days seemed a reasonable period to allow 'a systematic system of checks and assessments to be undertaken'. During this period, they felt that businesses should also be given notice of forthcoming marches.

Business organisations' views on community input

8.78 Three respondents thought it important to ensure that business views were considered as they were an important part of the community. There were existing mechanisms for gathering business views, through chambers of commerce, community councils or local area committees. They should have access to information and an opportunity to register their concerns. Businesses make plans about staffing, distribution and stocks well in advance and needed to be given sufficient notice to change their plans if necessary.

Business organisations' views on the basis for decision making

8.79 Business respondents were clear that it was important to respect people's rights to peaceful assembly although that needed to be balanced with the rights of others to go about their normal activities. They thought that organisers should take their responsibilities seriously and recognise that their march caused an often negative economic impact. Two respondents commented that in a democracy there were many other more effective ways to draw attention to a cause, which should be encouraged.

8.80 Business respondents thought that there should be restrictions on the routes and timing for marches and, wherever possible, marches should not go through the city centres and should not take place at peak trading periods. One respondent suggested that there should be a limited number of marches permitted within a specific timetable and organisers should bid for slots. There was also a suggestion that particular routes should be developed for marches, avoiding the city centre, possible bottlenecks and key routes through cities. There needed to be authorised alternative routes for public transport operators. The police should be able to move marches to less sensitive areas. Respondents felt there was some confusion in the current system about who had the authority to make decisions. Businesses looked at the reasons for marches, commenting that there needed to be a serious reason for marching. Some marches were not and created a negative image. There was some agreement that marches which were offensive, for example in promoting sectarian or racist views, should not be permitted.

Business organisations' views on numbers and effects on communities

8.81 Business respondents described the economic impact of marches. They were in no doubt that marches affected business saying that if marches resulted in street closures 'tills stop ringing' and retailers lost 'the serious shopper and serious money'. The majority of marches appeared to have 'a negative impact on businesses, particularly retail business'. They felt people avoided city centres, preferring to shop at out of town shopping centres. The disruption was not restricted to the duration of the march and lost turnover was never regained. Businesses recognised that there were positive aspects to some marches which were a demonstration and celebration of different facets of a multi-cultural society and enjoyable for residents and visitors alike. However, they were clear that was not always the case and there were instances where 'marches cause severe and lengthy disruption to civic and business life and are viewed with bemusement by tourists'.

Business organisations' views on policing costs

8.82 Four respondents commented on the question of policing costs. Most were sympathetic towards requiring organisations to meet at least some of the costs associated with their marches, which were often significant, although this should not impact negatively on smaller organisations without financial resources. One respondent thought that, in recognition of the capital city status, Edinburgh should be given additional funding to cover the costs of policing marches. Two respondents thought that organisations should pay the full social costs of marches, including compensation to businesses which lose turnover due to the march.

A summary of submissions from transport organisations

8.83 I received six submissions from transport organisations, managing trunk roads or providing public transport.

Transport organisations' views on the period of notice

8.84 Four organisations commented on the period of notice, agreeing that seven days was not long enough. Bus operators wanted a longer period from 14 days to six weeks to ensure that they were able to plan and deliver altered routes and to tell their customers of the changes. One organisation said that it would be important to ensure that the notification period allowed sufficient time to take into account the possible need to close roads and to ensure those procedures could be properly followed.

Transport organisations' views on community input

8.85 One organisation commented that transport operators ought to be better and more consistently informed about marches. It was felt that the current system of advance notice was a little erratic.

Transport organisations' views on the basis for decision making

8.86 All six respondents commented. The bus operators felt it was important that decisions on march routes take into account the need to maintain access and freedom of movement for those not involved on the march. Respondents recognised the right of people to march but they felt that the routes should not cause severe disruption to normal life. Decision making should take into account the disruption to bus services and the approved routes should minimise that disruption.

8.87 Other respondents suggested that priority routes be protected and bus routes be taken into account in considering what was a priority route. Developing standard diversion routes would be helpful so that people became familiar with those diversion routes which were the same each time. A more consistent better planned approach could limit the scale of the disruption to the overall network. One respondent thought that disruption could be minimised if the times when marches could take place were restricted, avoiding peak periods and Saturdays in city centres. More careful consideration should also be given where two or more events were taking place in the same day requiring the same road to be closed at different times. Sporting events and road works should also be considered alongside the notification to allow an overall assessment of disruption.

8.88 Current legislation did not require local authorities to consult with roads authorities and one operator thought that ought to be standard procedure to ensure that the effects on traffic was taken into account. Another respondent felt that marches should generally be discouraged from trunk roads as they were not suitable due to vehicle speed and volume of heavy goods traffic on those roads. Should a march take place on a trunk road, there needed to be a formal road closure in place.

Transport organisations' views on numbers and effects on communities

8.89 Five organisations commented on the numbers and effects of marches. Most respondents commented on the disruptive effect that marches had on public transport, particularly bus transport. The disruption undermined the efficiency of the system. Passengers could not rely on bus services when disrupted by march routes. One operator had experienced 31 road closures in the first six months of 2004. The effects of road closures were felt throughout the day, not just when the march was taking place or just in the vicinity of the march, but more widely through the network. The lack of advance planning meant that it was difficult for bus operators to offer services to those participating in the march. The disruption had a direct financial cost on bus operators.

8.90 One organisation was concerned by the ad-hoc nature of current traffic management procedures. They wanted to see procedures properly regularised in the interest of all road users.

Transport organisations' views on policing costs

8.91 Respondents did not specifically comment on policing costs.

A summary of submissions from the voluntary sector

8.92 I received five submissions from organisations in the voluntary sector, covering residents' groups, a council for the voluntary sector and a group tackling sectarian behaviour.

Voluntary sector views on the period of notice

8.93 Four organisations commented. Two respondents agreed that given the number and nature of processions in their area, the current arrangements worked well. 2 organisations felt that seven days was inadequate to allow notifications to be properly considered by local authorities. A longer period would allow them to consult more widely with organisers, the police and the local community and would allow the police more time to plan their deployment of resources. One felt 28 days would be appropriate, another suggested that for annually recurring marches, six months could be given. One organisation highlighted the need to allow exemptions to a longer notification period.

Voluntary sector views on community input

8.94 Two organisations commented. One thought that the community council and other representative bodies should be able to comment on marches that were considered to be controversial. Another respondent thought it important that while the final decision on marches should continue to lie with local authorities, local communities should have a chance to make their views known, particularly around frequency, timing, routes and the previous behaviour of the participants. Local authorities could seek views through advertisements in the local media and in prominent places, and views should be given to the local councillor or direct to the local authority.

Voluntary sector views on the basis for decision making

8.95 Four organisations made comments related to the decision making process. Two respondents agreed that given the number and nature of processions in their area, the current arrangements worked well. The police were involved in advising on routes and timing and the small number of marches passed without incident.

8.96 Two organisations felt that there should be changes to the process. One residents' group felt that all marches which 'intimidate, deliberately or otherwise' should be restricted as local communities should have a right not to feel threatened, intimidated or needlessly inconvenienced. They felt there was a need to ban all marches which appeared sectarian. To minimise disruption there should be scope for marches to take place outwith the city centre, in industrial estates. One respondent felt it was right that local authorities continued to take decisions, but that they should be able to take into account the views of the community and the police in reaching those decisions. While they recognised a right to march, there should be scope for banning marches if there was credible evidence that the march would lead to sectarian violence. This would involve looking at whether the march organisers had convictions related to sectarianism, and reports from the police on the behaviour of march participants during past marches. Local authorities should also have the powers to impose conditions about: the consumption of alcohol; the organisers' stewarding requirements; the times at which music could be played; the need to take routes which avoided residential areas; and banning sectarian singing or chanting. To help inform decision making, the police should file a report after each march detailing the experiences of that march.

Voluntary sector views on numbers and effects on communities

8.97 Two organisations commented. One felt that the no one organisation should have so many marches that it monopolised facilities or resources. Another felt that generally there were too many marches associated with the Orange Order and Republican causes taking place. These types of marches led to sectarian behaviour which intimidated local people and risked violence. They felt that numbers could only be reduced through agreement and consultation and proposed discussion between local authorities, the police and groups organising marches. Should that discussion fail, they thought there should be additional sanctions. To improve behaviour at marches, a respondent suggested there should be a code of conduct for organisers and participants. Local authorities or the police should also help organisers train stewards. If there was sectarian behaviour at marches, then the police should consider charging people with a religious aggravation charge.

Voluntary sector views on policing costs

8.98 Three organisations commented on policing costs. One residents' group was concerned about the effects that marches had on the police's ability to carry out their normal day to day duties and feared that community policing suffered as a result. Another residents' group felt that it was wrong for local communities to have to meet the costs of policing for marches which caused disruption and felt that policing costs could be reduced if organisers ensured they had more better trained stewards. However, they did feel that larger marches should be required to meet some of the costs. One organisation recognised that, in a democracy, the costs of marches needed in general to be met by tax payers. They thought that, depending on the nature of the march, there should be limited circumstances in which the police should be able to recover part or all of their costs. In addition, if organisers breached agreed conditions, then local authorities should be able to require organisers to contribute to policing and if, before the march, local authorities felt there was a risk of a breach occurring, they could require organisers to put up a bond against that risk.

A summary of submissions from religious organisations

8.99 I received 12 submissions from religious organisations: five from the Roman Catholic community; four from the Protestant community; two from the Sikh community; and one representing the Jewish community.

Religious organisations' views on the period of notice

8.100 Six respondents commented that seven days was insufficient. It did not allow time for local authorities to consider the notification nor for communities to be informed and have an opportunity to comment. An extended period would allow greater consultation and more in-depth consideration. Two respondents suggested a 28 day notice period and one suggested that there needed to be exceptions to this to ensure non-recurring protest marches in response to issues could take place.

Religious organisations' views on community input

8.101 There was agreement from the six respondents who commented that better consultation with the community was important. One Protestant respondent was cautious and recognised the right of communities to know about marches occurring in their area but feared that in an increasingly secular society, people might want to see all forms of religious expression banned. One Sikh respondent suggested that local authorities should have a single point of contact where information about marches could be accessed. Local people should be contacted and their views sought, but while it was appropriate to consider their views, that should not encourage racial or religious prejudice. One Catholic respondent felt it very important to take community views on marches as they were sought on many other issues.

8.102 Respondents made suggestions as to how the consultation could be achieved. The Jewish respondent suggested that there were mechanisms put in place to consult quickly and effectively when the need arose. There should be adverts in the local media, including community specific media such as the Jewish Telegraph, and information available in minority languages. There needed to be clarity on how the views would affect the decision making process. A Catholic respondent suggested that community views could be taken into account by organising polls of the local community. One Protestant respondent suggested that the timing of events should be discussed with communities to minimise disruption and to avoid clashes with religious services, enabling people safe access to their place of worship. A Catholic respondent agreed and also suggested that communities should be able to object to the frequency of marches and negotiate a limit to the numbers of marches which affect their area in a year.

Religious organisations' views on the basis for decision making

8.103 Ten respondents commented. One Protestant respondent made clear that people should be free to march to safeguard the principle of free speech but that this should be subject to appropriate qualifications and should respect the rights of others, although acknowledged that this was a difficult balance to strike. Others shared that view, including two Catholic respondents who accepted marching as an important part of civil liberties which should be protected, and the Jewish respondent who recognised the right to free speech and to holding political opinions but that it was important to balance the rights of one section of the community with the rights of other sections of the community.

8.104 Some respondents commented that decision making should look at the effects of the march. A Sikh respondent said that it was important to allow marches that brought people together but not to allow those which divided society and caused hatred and animosity. A Catholic respondent said that it was important to respect the rights of community to privacy and to a peaceful life and they should be protected from marches which brought disruption, inconvenience and fear. A Protestant respondent recognised the right to march was important but that it should be understood alongside the right of a community to be protected from violence and intimidation. Some marches were used to stir up hatred or promote feeling against a specific part of society. There was a difference between people who were marching as it was the only way to make their views heard and those who marched to demonstrate their strength. The Jewish respondent suggested that it was important to take into account whether the march impinged on the safety and feelings of vulnerability in the various communities affected by the march. Some communities, because of their history of persecution, could feel particularly isolated and uneasy about certain marches.

8.105 Respondents commented on routes. Compromise over routes was important for one Catholic respondent. Another Catholic respondent thought that marches should be confined to certain times and areas to minimise inconvenience, avoiding city centres as far as possible. One Protestant respondent thought that it was important to look at routes to ensure that they were not being chosen to stir up hatred. Sometimes routes were chosen to demonstrate the superiority of the marches over the community they were marching through and care needed to be taken to avoid this. Marchers should not generally march in the face of other's objections or fear. One Catholic respondent wanted to see routes which led to the harassment of particular groups altered to prevent people being afraid for their safety. Others commented on the timing of marches with both Protestant and Catholic respondents suggesting marches should not be held at times when religious services were taking place. Another Protestant respondent suggested that marches should be held at less busy times of the day.

8.106 One Catholic respondent highlighted the problems for local authorities brought by larger marches and felt it could be difficult for them to ensure public safety, given the numbers participating, and that they would need to consider health and safety, issues carefully. One Protestant respondent suggested that restrictions should only be imposed when there were concerns about public safety or where the march would significantly diminish the ability of the general public to go about their business. One Catholic respondent described the other issues that local authorities should be able to take into account as including consideration of: the frequency of marches and enabling communities to negotiate a limit on the numbers taking place in their community; routes that went down the same street twice in the same day should be avoided; clashes with other publicly arranged events such as weddings or masses. It was important that there were serious reasons for marches.

8.107 The Jewish respondent said that the decision making process needed to be transparent to those people who were not used to the political process.

Religious organisations' views on numbers and effects on communities

8.108 Ten people commented on the numbers and effects on communities. The behaviour of marchers was important and one Protestant respondent highlighted some marches caused anxiety in communities, offended or intimidated residents and the march should be conducted in a way that was sensitive to the concerns of the community. A Catholic respondent agreed, highlighting the need to ensure that marchers behaved in a way that minimised disruption, for example ensuring that traffic could flow past the march.

8.109 Both Catholic and Protestant respondents commented on the disruption caused by marches. Two Catholic respondents commented on the disruptive effect marches had on parts of the community, one suggesting that marches can create 'an atmosphere of unease, fear and alarm'. The timing of marches had meant that church services such as weddings and funerals needed to be changed. They commented on marchers' behaviour. Large marches in small villages could mean that access is disrupted and the village effectively shut off. Two Protestant respondents agreed and drew attention to the considerable disruption caused to those wanting to attend church services if marches were held on a Sunday.

8.110 The behaviour of onlookers also caused concern with one Protestant respondent describing the 'fear, alarm and sometime injury' caused by onlookers. They felt it important that organisers did not disown responsibility. A Catholic respondent suggested that while it was not fair to hold organisers responsible for individual criminal acts committed by onlookers it was appropriate to take into account such actions in considering future notifications and to ensure that such behaviour could be addressed. Onlookers should not impede the flow of pedestrians and organisers should help to facilitate that.

8.111 Two Catholic respondents also commented on the number of parades taking place. Neither wanted to see any type of parades banned and commented on the importance of ensuring civil liberties but they did think there was scope for reducing the numbers taking place. One suggested regulations about the frequency of marches taking place in the summer. Another suggested that there had been a reduction over the summer of 2004, with fewer causing less trouble, and wanted to see that encouraging start built upon. A Sikh respondent had also felt that the number of marches were reducing in certain parts of Scotland.

Religious organisations' views on policing costs

8.112 Only two respondents commented specifically on policing costs. One thought that it 'would be a disgrace' if people's rights to march depended on the policing costs of the event. The other agreed, that in general terms, in a democracy organisers should not be required to meet costs. However, if the police were concerned that protecting public order and safety would require disproportionate resources, then that should be taken into account in the decision making process.

A summary of submissions from MSPs

8.113 I met with three MPs and six MSPs. One MSP followed up the meetings with a detailed submission summarised here.

MSP's view on the period of notice

8.114 The MSP felt seven days was too short and should be at least 28 days.

MSP's view on community input

8.115 The MSP thought that there was scope for community consultation. To achieve a balance between the rights of marchers and the rights of communities, the council should hold local meetings between marching organisations, the police and community representatives. This would allow better arrangements for marches which created less hostility and more positive feelings in the community. There was scope to use community planning arrangements to engage the community but councils should ensure that they develop a structure to ensure that relevant groups such as shopkeepers and residents along the route can make their views known.

MSP's view on the basis for decision making

8.116 The MSP thought that councils needed to ensure that notifications were considered in an open way. The local authority should be able to decide on a notification and make changes on the basis of their assessment of the balance of rights, taking into account the number of local marches, whether a march is new or traditional, its past record and the views of local people and the police. As well as practical issues, local authorities should also be able to look at the atmosphere created by the march.

MSP's view on numbers and effects on communities

8.117 The MSP felt that some events were well established annual events but felt that the number of marches were increasing. It would not undermine an organisation's right of peaceful assembly to consider the number of marches it held in the same area or through a residential area or past a building in a manner seen as threatening to many. Feeder marches around a major march contribute to people's perceptions that there are too many marches.

8.118 The MSP commented that most people taking part in the march behaved acceptably, but the behaviour of those following was sometimes at fault, often because of excessive alcohol. Depending on the number of officers present, it was sometimes difficult for the police to address such behaviour effectively, and sometimes meant that this behaviour was not recorded in their report of the conduct of the march, making it difficult for a local authority to assess accurately the trouble which occured at previous marches.

8.119 Pre-march discussions should include behaviour at marches, such as the need to respect the rights of local communities to go about their business and not act in a way that suggests marchers 'own the streets though which they march'. There was scope for marches to develop into more inclusive community events and turn into 'a fun day in the park'.

MSP's view on policing costs

8.120 The MSP considered that the Executive should fund police forces to provide enough officers on marches to tackle drunken misbehaviour at marches more vigorously. Policing costs associated with marches was complex. The Executive should look at whether organisers of major events such as large marches or parades, major sporting fixtures and public entertainment should contribute to policing costs to ensure fair treatment.

A summary of submissions from organisations which arrange marches

8.121 I received 12 submissions from organisations which arrange marches. These organisations particularly highlighted the democratic right to march.

Views of organisations which arrange marches on the period of notice

8.122 Nine organisations commented on the period of notice. Six felt the period was too short, one was cautious about the impact on certain types of parades and two felt seven days was about right. The organisations representing Republican groups and the three Loyalist Institutions agreed that the period should be extended although they made clear that they already gave longer than the seven days statutory notice period, months for the larger marches. They suggested 14 days or 28 days would be a better balance and allow local authorities and the police more time to consider and plan. Other groups such as Scottish CND and NUS Scotland agreed that seven days was too short for meaningful consultation. However, they felt it was essential to allow exceptional circumstances for those marches which were organised in response to local, national or international events. The STUC was also concerned about an increased notification period drawing attention to marches arranged at short notice. If the period was increased there needed to be clear guidance on exceptions and, where it was clear that such a march would not cause disruption despite late notification, it should be able to go ahead. Organisers of regular marches should, however, give as much notice as practical. Pride Scotia and the Equality Network felt that seven days was appropriate and that it would be helpful if notifications could be made electronically.

Views of organisations which arrange marches on community input

8.123 Seven organisations commented on community input. Cairde na hÉireann thought that community input should properly come through councillors. The Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland also felt that councillors were the most appropriate route for community views. The Provincial Grand Black Chapter of Scotland thought community views should come through churches, unions and community councils. NUS Scotland suggested extending consultation to take in community councils. The STUC also thought community councils should have a right to be consulted as should resident groups. Communities most regularly affected by march routes should be most regularly consulted.

8.124 In principle, the Apprentice Boys of Derry and the Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland were cautious about the implications of seeking views from the wider community. They were concerned that a vociferous minority might have an input into banning or rerouting parades and thought it was wrong that parades be refused because some members of the community did not like a particular organisation. The Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland was concerned about how wide the consultation needed to be, how long it would last, how the costs would be met and the risk of allowing those with a personal axe to grind to dominate. A democracy needed to tolerate differing views.

8.125 The Equality Network and Pride Scotia agreed with the importance of consulting the community but they saw potential difficulties as some organisations representing particular communities of interest faced discrimination. Such organisations should be allowed to march even if there were lobby campaigns against them or parts of the community felt offended. Decisions needed to respect equality and diversity issues.

8.126 The Apprentice Boys of Derry recognised the importance of ensuring the community received more information about parades in their area. They suggested adverts in the local media would be one way of providing this and were always prepared to meet with members of the community to discuss their concerns. Cairde na hÉireann also wanted to ensure that the community received more information. They provided leaflets to the local community and businesses in advance describing the purpose of a march, its routes and providing contact details for further information. NUS Scotland emphasised they took their responsibility to the community seriously and minimised disruption wherever possible. The STUC suggested that information about marches should be published in a database available on the internet and in libraries, other local authority facilities and through local media.

Views of organisations which arrange marches on the basis for decision making

8.127 Ten organisations commented on the basis for decision making. Cairde na hÉireann, the Apprentice Boys of Derry and Pride Scotia drew attention to the need for councils to deal with notifications more consistently and ensure that all organisations were treated fairly and equally. Cairde na hÉireann said that it should be clearer that local authorities were responsible for taking decisions and that councillors should take and be accountable for those decisions.

8.128 Cairde na hÉireann, the Provincial Grand Black Chapter of Scotland and the Apprentice Boys of Derry specifically highlighted that decisions should primarily be taken on public safety, based on police concerns. For contentious marches, Cairde na hÉireann thought organisers should be required to consult with the local community and, if they were not prepared to do that, then appropriate sanctions could be taken. The Apprentice Boys of Derry thought it important to ensure that organisers were properly involved in the decision making process so that they could work together with the council and the police to avoid bans and to reach amicable decisions.

8.129 The STUC suggested that it was appropriate to take into account the accumulated level of disruption felt by a community when assessing notifications and alternative routes should be considered as an option. The NUS Scotland also felt that it was appropriate to limit the number of marches taking place in any one community. Pride Scotia and the Equality Network felt that passing disruption in itself was not enough to ban a march and the grounds for decisions should be based on legal grounds - for example, the impact on race relations - and ignore personal prejudices.

8.130 The Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland drew attention to organisers' responsibility to ensuring that parades were organised for appropriate reasons and highlighted their own approach which prevented coat trailing parades or inflammatory routes. Organisers also needed to adopt a reasonable attitude when problems arose and said that they would continue to apply 'a co-operative attitude to any legitimate concerns with regard to parade dates, times or routes and to make adjustments where necessary'. Informal discussion and compromise should avoid the need for formal conditions to be set. The Apprentice Boys of Derry also ensured that the governing body looked at notifications before they were submitted to local authorities to ensure that parades were not meaningless and a burden. Cairde na hÉireann agreed organisers had a responsibility to enter into dialogue and minimise the disruption caused by their marches and said that they ensured that they did not organise marches in areas where it would be provocative. They felt organisers should not have several marches taking place within in the same city on the same day.

8.131 While NUS Scotland felt their own marches were unlikely to cause offence to communities, they felt it important that councils take into account the likelihood of a march to threaten public order, cause offence or have a negative or divisive impact on local communities. They were opposed to marches arranged by racist or fascist organisations feeling those marches threatened public safety.

8.132 The Scottish Youth Hostel Association, which organised marches to promote the use of their non-profit making hostels, thought it important that marches should not cause offence to any members of the community and should be conducted in a lawful and peaceful manner. The Scout Association encouraged individual groups of Scouts who had annual parades to their place of worship to liaise with the police and the council well in advance of their event.

8.133 Pride Scotia and the Equality Network felt it important that local authorities did not ban any specific types of marches. Decisions should not be based on prejudice about an organisation and objections founded on prejudice, such as homophobia, should not be considered. They urged caution on setting timing restrictions which would discourage people from participating in marches if they needed to travel some distance. Disruption in itself was not enough to ban a march.

8.134 Pride Scotia and the Equality Network felt that councils should make some practical improvements to the system. For example, keep an overall diary of events to identify possible clashes early on and improve communication between council departments. Making more use of technology would speed up the process.

Views of organisations which arrange marches on numbers and effects on communities

8.135 Eight organisations commented on the numbers and effects on communities. Organisers recognised the importance of their own role in ensuring successful marches and the importance of dialogue with local authorities and the police. Cairde na hÉireann, the Apprentice Boys of Derry and the Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland all had codes of conduct in place for people participating in their marches.

8.136 To avoid marches clashing, Cairde na hÉireann said that they would be happy to meet other organisers, such as the Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland, to discuss their 'respective calendar of events and any issues arising'.

8.137 Organisers emphasised the importance of effective stewarding to the conduct of marches and already tried to ensure that they had effective stewarding in place. The Apprentice Boys of Derry had piloted training for their stewards with a hierarchy of clearly identified marshals in constant communication during marches and with full marshal briefing meetings beforehand, covering the route and arrangements. This had helped marches to run more smoothly. The Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland also ensured that their parades were properly stewarded, that they would be prepared to develop their expertise with more rigorous training and suggested that it would be helpful to draw on police experience. The Provincial Grand Black Chapter of Scotland also made sure that they had internal stewarding in place. The STUC said that organisers were responsible for ensuring effective stewarding but were not responsible for the behaviour of onlookers, which was the responsibility of the police. The STUC had developed detailed knowledge and experience in stewarding and would be happy to share that experience.

8.138 Pride Scotia suggested that clear guidance to organisers would be valuable. Such guidance should cover levels of stewards, the need to take out public liability insurance and health and safety matters. There needed to be more consistency across local authority areas. Cairde na hÉireann wanted to see a code of conduct drawn up for organisers covering the responsibilities and behaviour expected - including bands, stewarding, the notice required - and suggested that organisers should be required to sign a statement renouncing racism (including anti-Irish racism) and sectarianism.

8.139 The Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland raised the issue of public perception which often described all parades organised by the Loyal Institutions as 'Orange' as they were not aware of the differences between the institutions. This was made worse with the more recent phenomenon of band parades which had no connection to the Orange Order and over which the Order had no control.

8.140 Given the purpose behind their marches, Scottish CND commented that they often had established routes and it would be difficult for them to change those routes. The STUC agreed that some routes will see more marches. Some marches did cause discord within communities and did not promote a tolerant and modern Scotland. The Equality Network thought it was important that groups which only organised one or two marches were not squeezed out by groups which organised more frequent parades.

Views of organisations which arrange marches on policing costs

8.141 Eight organisations commented on policing costs. All agreed that it would be inappropriate to require organisers to pay for policing costs. Cairde na hÉireann felt that costs should be met by the state. The Provincial Grand Black Chapter of Scotland agreed and said that marchers already contributed to policing costs through the taxes they paid. The Apprentice Boys of Derry said that they already contributed towards some costs associated with parades such as providing risk assessments, providing toilets and the costs for the cleaning of parks. The Grand Orange Lodge of Scotland said that requiring organisers to pay would be an 'affront to democratic rights and the freedom of speech'. The NUS said that groups, particularly voluntary groups, should not be required to pay. Pride Scotia and the Equality Network suggested that requiring organisers to pay would mean that parades could not take place. Small community groups would not be able to pay costs. It was clear that some events generated tourism and revenue. The STUC thought that protecting the collective freedom of expression was essential and so organisers should not be required to meet additional costs for policing.

8.142 The level of policing was a concern to some organisers. The Apprentice Boys of Derry suggested that some parades appeared over policed and, with more effective stewarding, the number of police present could be reduced. Cairde na hÉireann felt that local authorities should keep the level of policing under regular review. The Equality Network thought that if there were problems with excessive costs of policing particular marches by certain organisations, that needed to be discussed between the police and the organisers.

A summary of submissions from private individuals

8.143 I received 30 submissions direct from private individuals.

Private individuals' views on the period of notice

8.144 About a third (9) respondents commented on the period of notice. All felt that seven days was insufficient, although two made the case that it would not always be possible for organisers to give more than seven days, depending on the reason for the procession. There were a range of suggestions about what an appropriate timescale should be: from six weeks to match local authority committee cycles to six months for Loyalist and Republican parades which were celebrating long standing traditions and anniversaries. The most popular suggestion was two months.

Private individuals' views on community input

8.145 Just under 30% (8) of respondents expressed a view on community input. They were generally agreed that the community had a right to know about the events taking place in its area and a right to express a view. However, there was some wariness about the level of influence that the community should have over proposed marches. Better awareness should remove 'the element of surprise and the sense of shock' when people do not know about marches in advance.

8.146 There were mixed views on who should be consulted. Suggestions included community councils and groups genuinely representative of the community. Another suggested wider views be sought through MSPs, adverts in newspapers, local libraries, community centres, local authority offices and other public places, as well as consultation with Chambers of Commerce, professional and trade bodies, and any other relevant groups who represented community stakeholders. One respondent thought that local authorities should hold a general referendum to agree their policies on marching, covering who should be able to march and when and where those marches should take place. Others felt it would be difficult to find successful ways of engaging with the community.

8.147 Respondents made practical suggestions on how to ensure that the community got better information and were able to comment. Two people suggested that there should be adverts in local papers supplemented by meetings where organisers, such as the Orange Order, would go an explain the reason for the march. Once the decision had been taken the forthcoming march and its route needed to be well publicised.

Private individuals' views on the basis for decision making

8.148 Most people (over 90%) had views on the basis for taking decisions about marches.

8.149 20% of respondents felt that different types of processions should be treated in different ways, according to the reason for the procession. Generally, those that commented suggested that marches organised by Loyalist Orders or Republican organisations should be treated in one category and political protests and community celebrations in another category. Both types of processions caused disruption, but there was a feeling that communities were more prepared to accept disruption linked to events with community, civic, national or job related reasons. One respondent thought that Loyalist Orders or Republican organisations should hold meetings in special venues to minimise disruption to the wider community. Others thought that street protests in general should be phased out as there were now more effective ways to express opposition and displeasure.

Bans and respecting traditions

8.150 Private individuals had strongly held views about the need to ban certain marches or to ensure traditions were respected. A sizeable minority of respondents suggested that certain kinds of marches should be banned. They described the kinds of marches which should be banned as:

• 'all denominational and religious marches which incite violence and are offensive';
• all religious marches which were 'assertive, intolerant and abusive';
• Loyalist Orders and Republican marches which were 'a pernicious residue of religious and political feuds which date back many centuries';
• Orange Order marches which: 'are a blight to our pluralistic society'; 'encourage bigotry and prejudice'; 'promote religious hatred'; 'cause intimidation and harassment'; and 'are anti-Catholic'.

8.151 Other respondents recognised the need to protect people's right of freedom of speech and assembly and suggested this could be respected if they were able to gather in an appropriate venue rather than in the streets. Respondents said that while the rights of people to march needed to be respected, it was also important to respect the rights of communities.

8.152 25% of people were concerned about the prospects of banning Loyalist Order marches. Rather than banning processions, there needed to be better explanation and understanding of why processions were taking place and discussions to promote understanding and tolerance of others' beliefs. Processions should not be banned simply because of the behaviour of opponents. These respondents supported Loyalist Order parades as a way of promoting their Protestant heritage and celebrated historical events which lead to religious and political freedoms. A multi-cultural society needed to respect everyone's rights equally. Banning Loyalist marches would undermine their rights. Most marches were peaceful events 'colourful and musical', 'promoting a proud heritage and culture' with marchers 'acting within the law and dignified at all times'.

8.153 Respondents made suggestions about the kind of issues which should be taken into account in reaching decisions about the routes of marches. Some suggested it was appropriate only to take into account a narrow range of issues (usually public safety and significant disruption) whereas others were keen to see a much broader range of issues taken into account. Suggestions about the kind of issues that should be considered included where:

• there were concerns about public safety;
• the ability of the general public to go about their business was significantly diminished;
• there would be unacceptable disruption to traffic;
• roads were unsuitable for marches due to traffic controlling measures;
• there would be unacceptable disruption to business;
• there had been incidents at previous marches that suggested that the safety and well-being of the community would not be protected or which had caused offence to the community;
• the date clashed with other events requiring a police presence;
• the likely behaviour of onlookers would be troublesome;
• there was a likely risk of harm to the general public due to protestors; and
• there appeared to be doubts about the risk assessment carried out by the organisers or that they would not conform to the march notification.

8.154 On routes, a number of respondents suggested that marches should generally avoid city centres, main thoroughfares, bus routes, and shopping centres.

8.155 There were some specific suggestions about restrictions for Loyalist Order and Republican marches. These included a suggestion that they should take place in areas which did not interfere with the general community, they should not go past places of worship or residential areas where offence could be caused and intimidation felt. These marches should be rerouted if the community was unhappy that they took place in their area.

Private individuals' views on numbers and effects on communities

8.156 45% of respondents commented on the numbers of marches and the effects on communities. Four people specifically commented on their perceptions that there was a 'surfeit of Orange Order marches' and suggested that some communities were disturbed every weekend over the summer. They felt the frequency of marches was the issue rather than the reason for the marches. They had little warning of the marches and so could not plan around the disruption. Marches could disturb the community from early in the morning to later in the evening. A small number of marchers caused disruption for the wider community. Some respondents thought there should be scope for combining marches, perhaps one parade per lodge or one parade for all lodges.

8.157 Many respondents described the type of personal disruption they had experienced through marches taking place in the community, from the frustration caused by not being able to cross roads and missing trains, to detrimental effects on arrangements for weddings, christenings and funerals. Some marches organised by the Orange Order caused particular concerns in communities, causing fear and division. A couple of people felt that there should be guidelines to cover behaviour at marches, governing behaviour to minimise disruption and offence. Another thought that there needed to be a genuine reason for the march and it should not be on 'a whim'.

Private individuals' views on policing costs

8.158 45% of respondents commented on policing costs and the scale of police resources at marches. Respondents were divided about whether marchers should be required to pay or not. Almost two thirds of those who expressed a view said that it was wrong to expect people to pay as it was their right to march. They felt that peaceful marches incurred limited costs, and in a democracy, policing costs should be met by the government and marchers were already making a contribution through general taxation.

8.159 Others thought that some marchers should be required to meet charges. They suggested that Loyalist and Republican marches, or those with a commercial intent, should be required to contribute to policing costs. Some thought that to encourage marches away from city centres, there should be a charge for policing in the city centre but no charge outwith the centre. Others felt that organisations such as the Orange Order, which organised a large number of parades a year, should be allowed a number free of charge and then would be required to contribute for additional parades.

8.160 Some respondents had views on the scale of policing, particularly at Orange Order marches. Given the Orange Order ensured that their marches were effectively stewarded, there should be scope to scale down the police presence and have officers on standby instead. The police were there to supervise the onlookers and direct traffic as the marches were generally well behaved, meeting their own codes of conduct.

A summary of standard letters

8.161 A number of people also submitted their views using the template of a standard letter. I received 216 versions of three slightly different letters.

8.162 187 people wrote in support of everyone's right to peaceful assembly to allow them to celebrate their history and traditions. They felt that society was enriched through a greater understanding and tolerance of all its components. They thought the notification period should be extended to 28 days. They believed that only processions which posed a threat to public safety or contravened the Terrorism Act 2000 should be banned. They did not think that it was appropriate to require organisers of any procession to meet policing costs.

8.163 21 people wrote to support the democratic right to march. They felt that a two month notice period was more appropriate. They thought that community input could best be ensured through educating and informing people. Decisions on restrictions or refusing parades should only be made when there was sufficient information regarding the likelihood of serious trouble at parades. They commented that most parades passed without any trouble and had little effect on most communities. They did not think that it would be appropriate to charge marches for policing costs, as most would be taxpayers and marching organisations did put money back into the economy.

8.164 Eight people wrote expressing their belief that everyone had the democratic right to march as long as they were law abiding. They suggested an extension of the notification period to one month. They felt that community input into decisions could be made by ensuring communities had the right to object. They believed that the police had sufficient information on parades to recommend if they should be rerouted or cancelled. They commented that most parades passed with little or no effect on community life and greater tolerance and understanding of different viewpoints would be helpful in improving community relations. They did not think it was right to charge people for exercising their right to march and felt it would be an infringement of their civil rights.

A summary of responses forwarded from the Scottish Executive

8.165 The Scottish Executive drew my attention to relevant views that had been expressed to it during the course of the Review.

8.166 They had received 18 letters commenting specifically on Orange walks. The majority (two thirds) of those who wrote about Orange walks were strongly opposed to these events seeing them as divisive and having a detrimental effect on Scotland's image. They felt that they lead to sectarian behaviour which should not be tolerated. A couple of people objected that some of the flags flown at marches were inappropriate. Some respondents described their experiences in Glasgow when Orange walks were being held and recorded disruption (being prevented from going about their daily business such as visiting a cemetery, crossing the road, or enjoying a night out) and intimidation (caused by the behaviour of the marchers but particularly the onlookers highlighting sectarian abuse and drunkenness). There was concern about the effects of holding large marches in small towns given the level of disruption. Some people were worried about the impact on police resources. It was felt that most people did not support Orange walks and so they should be banned.

8.167 Other respondents (one sixth) were less opposed to Orange walks and recognised everyone's right to march. However, they felt this needed to be balanced with the rights of the community and suggested that marches take place with limitations. The conditions suggested included: marches should not take place at the same time as church services; routes should not go past churches; fewer marches should be allowed; sectarian music should not be played or bands should not be allowed at all; and organisers should pay towards policing and cleaning up. A national referendum was suggested so that people had a chance to express their views.

8.168 Some people (one sixth) strongly supported Orange walks and did not want to see them banned. They felt that they were an integral part of Scotland's heritage and that the Orange Order was a legitimate organisation with a right to march and a tradition of parading. The marches were lawful. Banning their marches would be more divisive and lead to trouble. It was important to support Protestant traditions as well and, in Scotland, Protestants and Catholics lived side by side.

8.169 Aside from Orange walks, two respondents expressed views relevant to my remit, particularly on the need to ensure that councils could take a wider range of issues into account when reaching decisions. Marches which lead to racial hatred or religious intolerance should be restricted, although freedom of speech needed to be protected. There was also a need to route marches away from areas such as city centres where they caused considerable disruption.