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

Recommendations

There are several recommendations in the 2016 Report where no discernible progress has been made, although similar issues were raised in this review. In light of these:

(a) The Scottish Government should look to the previous recommendations on static demonstrations (recommendation 3.6) and on the legal definition of public assembly (3.7) and consider whether any further discussion on these issues is necessary.

(b) Local authorities should ensure that their websites are fit for purpose – and for statutory obligations – in terms of recommendations made in the 2016 Report (namely 3.58 and 3.62). Most local authorities have made good progress on this, whilst others have made little or none. The Scottish Government should further review progress on this in 2021.

(c) The Scottish Government should refresh its guidance to local authorities (and a wider public) in light of the agreement reached between COSLA and Police Scotland on Temporary Traffic Regulation Orders (TTROs). That guidance might also, usefully, provide advice on the types of objections local authorities could take into account when making decisions about marches and parades. The guidance should be framed in light of human rights and of statutory Public Sector Equality Duty.

Events since 2016 have also highlighted other areas where existing policies could be bolstered by small (but significant) shifts in how they are put into operation:

(d) Local authorities should give some thought on how to encourage organisers to voluntarily notify their intention to hold a static demonstration or assembly and ensure that a clear route for contact is in place.

(e) Local authorities should consider whether a concise summary of decisions made between organisers, Police Scotland, and local authorities in the process of dealing with the notification can routinely be made public. This would give transparency and legitimacy to the processes in facilitating marches and parades that are often unseen. The refreshed Scottish Government guidance (see (c) above) should highlight this as best practice.

(f) It is necessary to recognise the considerable costs that public bodies, not least Police Scotland, can occasionally face in facilitating marches and parades. This report heard, in particular, of the impact on staffing resilience and morale for Police Scotland over events in Glasgow and it is important to note these. It may be useful to consider whether other agencies – such as traffic/parking wardens or community enforcement officers - could be co-opted into the more routine aspects of policing parades (e.g. managing traffic). This may not reduce the financial cost of facilitating a march or parade but it might help to ensure that conventional and tactical officers are freed up for other policing duties. Police Scotland could initiate a discussion on this, liaising with local authorities/COSLA and other agencies in the first instance, on what powers might be delegated, for what purpose, and how this might be achieved.

(g) It seems clear that there is a particular burden on public resources when relationships between the key parties to marches and parades are under strain. Investment in 'fostering good relations' at local levels will do much, in the medium to long term, to improve the resilience of these relationships, and to build (in particular with parade organisers) trusted channels of discussion and negotiation. Building such relationships should be seen as the responsibility of all parties to a march or parade, organisers, police, and local authorities. Whilst fostering good relations between individuals and groups across protected characteristics is a statutory requirement under the Public Sector Equality Duty, it should also be seen as best practice in all situations. Where relationships around marches and parades have been damaged or eroded, the local authority should strive, in the first instance, to repair them.