THE far-right Scottish Defence League has been banned from marching through Edinburgh city centre next Saturday to protest against immigration over fears that it would cause disruption and because two earlier marches were planned for the same day.
Edinburgh Council’s Licensing Sub-Committee gave approval to two earlier marches on October 3 by the Scotland for Elephants group and the Walk for Democracy organised to mark the 250th anniversary of the birth of Thomas Muir of Huntershill.
The committee then voted unanimously to ban the Scottish Defence League (SDL) anti-immigration march after hearing reports from Police Scotland and council officials about fears of disruption and an “excessive burden” for the police caused by the cumulative effects of three marches on one day.
Under Government guidance, when march licensing clashes occur, those who apply first are given priority – the Muir march was organised last year, while Scotland for Elephants applied on September 3. The committee was told the SDL applied on September 4.
The SDL’s application stated the reason for the event was “freedom of speech” but its Facebook page had made it clear the march was to protest against immigration and they had said so to police and council officials.
A letter from Police Scotland laid out reasons for their objections to the march.
Chief Superintendent Gillian Emery informed the committee that before two recent SDL events in Edinburgh, organisers had cooperated with the police and council officials but they “were unable to influence significant elements of the SDL group who were confrontational and failed to comply with police direction.”
She said this was compounded by “ineffective stewarding” which saw “the potential for serious disorder.”
Emery added: “I am no longer confident that the cooperation of the organisers is indicative of wider elements of the SDL membership and affiliated groups.
“There can be little doubt that some of the opinions expressed by SDL are controversial. The recent high-profile refugee movements from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq, coupled with the UK and Scottish Governments’ committing to taking in a large number of Syrian refugees, conflicts with the well-document views of the SDL and the stated purpose of their match, ie ‘against immigration.’
“It should therefore be expected that the SDL event will attract some level of opposition, especially given that the public mood, reflected in and/or influenced by the media, is generally sympathetic to the plight of the refugees.”
The planned route of the march up the High Street to the City Chambers was also a cause for concern.
Committee convener Gavin Barrie stated a wedding had been booked for the City Chambers and questioned why the organisers wanted their march to end at the Chambers.
Graham Walker, organiser of the SDL, said the group could move somewhere else, and he was then asked if he could vary the day of the march, only to tell councillors that intending participants had already booked flights and trains from London.
A police representative at the meeting said: “Mr Walker engages fully with Police Scotland in the planning process ... but history has shown that Mr Walker’s influence over the people attending these marches has become less and less and the potential for disorder as a result has become more and more significant.”
A key issue was a late notification on Thursday from the Unite Against Fascism (UAF) group wishing to hold a counter-demonstration at the same time and same place as the SDL.
Walker claimed notice of this counter-event was already appearing on the UAF’s Facebook page and was told by Barrie that the UAF or any other organisation would need to apply for permission and if they went ahead without it, “that will be a police matter.”
Barrie said: “We appreciate that people want to demonstrate and counter-demonstrate.
“I still have significant concerns about public order in this matter and everything else that is going on in the city that day, and I don’t think we can negotiate a new route at this time.
“It leaves the committee with no other option but to see that you don’t march, that we are banning it and from everything that’s apparent, we are putting a banning order on it.”
The committee voted to ban the march, citing the increased risk to public order and because it might cause undue disruption to the life of the community.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here