 |
| People protesting Cheshire West and Chester Council's proposed Public Space Protection Order. Source: http://www.chesterchronicle.co.uk/news/chester-cheshire-news/chester-public-space-protection-order-10473411 |
It has become common practice within councils in the UK to
undertake public ‘consultations’ before making decisions that will directly
affect communities in the local area.
One such decision that councils have consulted on is the
implementation of Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs) in places around the
UK. These new powers have been available for councils in the UK to use since
the passing of the 2014 Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act.
PSPOs are a particular geographically-defined form of antisocial behaviour order. Similar to ASBOs, but for places rather than people. Councils
can consider using PSPOs if they are aware that certain activities in
particular public spaces have, or are likely to have, negative effects on
quality of life. When an order is put in place, anyone partaking in one of the
predefined ‘anti-social’ activities in the area covered by the PSPO may face
fines and/or prosecution.
While these new measures have drawn plenty of controversy by
themselves (see campaigns by the Manifesto Club), the way that councils consult with communities before
implementing the PSPOs has consequently also come under increasing scrutiny.
I came across consultation issues in my previous work on the regulation of busking in Camden. Here, Camden Council were getting the opinions
of stakeholders on their proposal to license busking throughout Camden.
In this case, however, there was a feeling amongst many that
the consultation was inadequate for a number of reasons:
- Buskers and activists felt that the voices of
people who live outside Camden were largely ignored by the council, despite Camden
being an area of wider significance nationally and internationally.
- People from all groups were concerned that the
questions used in the consultation were biased, in that they implied that the
council’s proposals were going to go ahead (e.g. using phrases such as ‘do you
agree that…’).
- Perhaps most importantly, some councillors
suggested that many consultations are done simply as a means to an end – a
tick-box exercise where being seen to be consulting was more important than the
actual quality of engagement with people affected by the issue. The council
could then justify whatever eventual decision by claiming that the consultation
was thorough.
As real as these issues are, in this and other contexts, my
decision to write a blog post about consultations was actually based on a
success story.
Earlier this year, Cheshire West and Chester Council
proposed to implement a PSPO in Chester’s city centre targeting busking, rough
sleeping, begging, feeding pigeons, consuming alcohol/legal highs, and
urinating/defecating. All of these activities would have been prohibited
outright apart from busking, which would have required buskers to undertake a
‘quality assessment’ by the council, only play on council-designated pitches,
and play at restricted noise levels. Anyone violating the order would face a
maximum £100 fixed penalty notice, or a fine of up to £1,000 on conviction at
court if they continued with the prohibited activities.
In keeping with the current trend in consulting, the council
launched a consultation for these proposals on 23rd July, running
until 15th October. I responded to the consultation, mainly as
someone who has worked closely with Keep Streets Live in their campaign to
encourage councils to adopt their Best Practice Guide for busking, rather than
creating additional legal architecture to regulate it. But I am also concerned
about the powers that the 2014 Act gives authorities generally, encouraging
legal intervention for activities in public space that simply have the potential to cause someone a nuisance.
In my response, I therefore argued why I felt that the PSPO should certainly
not be adopted for busking, rough sleeping, and begging, while expressing my
concern with the use of the 2014 Act in general.
Although I’ve become used to expecting the worst from
council consultations, Chester’s councillors actually listened to respondents.
When an overwhelming majority of respondents said that they did not support
using a PSPO to regulate busking and rough sleeping, the council removed these
measures from the proposals. And given that 77% of respondents supported using
a Best Practice Guide for busking, they have decided to take steps to use this
approach instead.
For the other activities – public urination/defecating,
alcohol/legal high consumption, pigeon feeding, and begging – the consultation
showed that responses were mixed, with slightly more in favour of PSPO
restrictions than against. The council is therefore going to discuss these
issues further before making a decision in early 2016.
What this all demonstrates is that, when done well, local
authorities can use consultations to make informed decisions that reflect the
views of stakeholders. On the basis of the consultation responses, you couldn’t
argue that Cheshire West and Chester Council’s next steps have been
unreasonable. Unfortunately this does not always happen in practice.
It seems that there are new councils each week that propose
to use PSPOs to regulate activity in public space. Last week, both Exeter City Council and Kettering Borough Council launched their proposals to introduce the
measures for activities as diverse as begging, skateboarding and swearing. In
light of this trend, it is more important than ever that councils follow
Chester’s lead and ensure that their consultations are fair, responsive, and
listened to accordingly.
Further reading
See geographer Bradley Garrett's piece in The Guardian on PSPOs and public space:
See this page for all of the Chester Chronicle's stories on the proposed PSPO in Chester town centre:
