Minute of meeting of the Civic Government Appeals Board of East Dunbartonshire Council held within the Council Chambers, Tom Johnston House, Civic Way, Kirkintilloch on Tuesday, 13 November 2007.

Present: Councillors GIBBONS, JARVIS, KENNEDY and WALKER

In Attendance: P. Dow Solicitor

P. Kelly Litigation and Licensing Manager

E. Lynch Committee Administration Officer

L. Moore Administrative Assistant

Also in

Attendance: Sergeant J. McGinty Strathclyde Police

Chief Superintendent T. Russell Strathclyde Police

Councillor Jarvis (Vice - Convener) presiding

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Councillors Moody, Renwick and Ritchie.

1. CIVIC GOVERNMENT LICENSING

Notification of proposal to hold a Public Procession

Mr Edward Ingram, 4 Annick Drive, Bearsden G61 1HH

There was submitted Report CSD/267/07/PK by the Corporate Director (Corporate Services), copies of which had previously been circulated, seeking the Appeals Board's consideration and determination of a notification of a Public Procession received from Mr Edward Ingram, 4 Annick Drive, Bearsden.

Attached as Appendices to the Report were a copy of the Notice of Proposals to hold a Public Procession, together with 21 objections by members of the public to the procession, observations from Strathclyde Police and a brief history of the issue stated to be the focus of the march provided by the Assistant Manager, Information and Archives. The Report also detailed that the guidance produced by the Scottish Executive recommended that a Code of Practice be prepared to “best fit” processions which were most commonly held in each local authority. A copy of the Council's Code of Conduct had been provided to each organiser. The Code of Conduct “inter-alia” provided guidelines for organisers and participants. An excerpt of the guidelines in relation to the Council's responsibility was contained within the Report.

The Applicant, Mr Edward Ingram and the National Organiser, Mr Jim Slavin, were present. Objectors, David Letham, Frank Hanlon, Kenneth Cassells, Amanda Cuthbertson, Stephen McLean and Alex Blair were also present.

Having been advised of the procedures to be adopted during the Hearing, the Objectors in turn were invited to address the Board on the terms on their objection, at the conclusion of which members of the Board and the Applicant were given the opportunity to question the objectors. In response to comments made by one of the objectors regarding the timescale for notification of the procession, the Litigation and Licensing Manager advised that in terms of the Procedure Manual regarding timescales for notification to hold a public procession, the Council had adhered to the specified timescales. The organisers had complied with the 28 day notification period and objections had been received within the required timescale. Notification of the parade was placed on the Council's website on 30 October 2007.

The Police were then invited to address the Board regarding their observations, at the conclusion of which the Applicant was heard in support of the application. Members of the Board and the objectors were then given the opportunity to ask questions during the course of which a leaflet produced by the organisers outlining the purpose of the march and which had been circulated in the Kirkintilloch area, was tabled for information. Thereafter, both parties summed up their respective cases.

In private, the Board considered the application taking account of the objections, the Police observations and the representations of the Applicant.

On reconvening, in the presence of both parties, Councillor Kennedy, seconded by Councillor Walker, moved that in the interests of public safety and public order, the application be granted, subject to there being no bands present or live music played and that the route be altered to begin at Old Mill Park Road then eastward to Glasgow Road then to Kilsyth Road and then the Memorial site, which became the decision of the Board.

Councillor Gibbons on intimating his dissent commented that he was opposed to the grant of the application as he was of the opinion that the Applicant should come back to the Board at a later date following engagement with the local community and the Council, with a more acceptable plan including no mention of provocative bands or music and a better route. This would also give the Police more time to investigate the incident regarding the memorial plaque. He further commented that he respected the Applicant's right to freedom of speech, however, intimated his concern for public safety.

The Convener advised the Applicant, that the decision of the Board would be intimated in writing.

CIVIC GOVERNMENT APPEALS BOARD,

13 NOVEMBER 2007

276