Notting Hill Carnival Strategic Review - Intelligent Space

Wider Implications for Major Events in London
2.97 Of equal relevance is the report of the investigation by the London Assembly into the
planning and subsequent cancellation of the London New Year’s Eve event that had been
planned for 31 December 2000 67 . The Report recognized that although central London’s
street patterns presented considerable challenges to running a safe event, these obstacles
could be overcome and that successful major events were possible in London provided the
following conditions were in place: sufficient lead-in time of at least 18 months; a dispersed
‘footprint’; the event needs to be spread both in time, over the day and evening, and in space
across Central London and beyond; sufficient resources; empowered leadership; a committed
multi-agency partnership; effective project management arrangements; and effective
decision-making capability.
Recommendations
Revisiting Accountability
16. The Carnival Public Safety Matrix offers an analysis of the various roles, responsibilities and tasks
that are delivered by members of the OPSG. We believe that the Matrix clearly demonstrates that
whilst there has always been a community-based organisation to co-ordinate the Carnival, the
limitations of this organisation – both in financial and human resource terms – has meant that its
ability to fully assume the role of ‘event organiser’ with responsibility for public safety, has not
been achievable. As a consequence, the evidence suggests that in reality, the MPS, the Royal
Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (RBKC) and the City of Westminster (WCC) have been required
to commit considerable resources in order to compensate for the inability of the event organiser
to assume full responsibility for the Notting Hill Carnival’s public safety issues. We believe that
with public investment comes public accountability. Given the level of operational responsibility
assumed by the OPSG in general and the local authorities and police in particular, it is our
recommendation that:
(a) the terms of reference of the OPSG, the Statement of Intent and Code of Practice should be
revised to reflect and acknowledge the various levels of operational responsibility assumed by
members of the group. These documents should be reviewed on an annual basis and revised
accordingly, as the professionalism, sustainability and delivery capacity of the communitybased
event organiser increases, such that it is then able to assume greater operational
responsibility;
(b) greater transparency and accountability for the decisions being taken by the OPSG can only
be achieved by making the minutes of all group meetings public. The group should also be
responsible for producing an annual Public Safety Strategy and detailed review, all of which
would be subject to independent scrutiny by the London Assembly, the Audit Commission
and the Health & Safety Executive (HSE); and
(c) consideration be given to greater involvement of the HSE. There is an urgent need for an
independent agency that is capable of leading on matters of public safety at the Carnival.
Such a body could be responsible for co-ordinating the resources of the various statutory
67
“Future Major Events in London”, London Assembly, Greater London Authority (March 2001). Membership of the committee
comprised, Eric Ollerenshaw (Chair), Jennette Arnold, Jenny Jones and Lord Graham Tope.
112