Notting Hill Carnival Strategic Review - Intelligent Space

1.8 The Carnival Review Group concluded the first stage of its inquiry with the publication of its
Interim Report in February 2001 17 . The report placed great emphasis on the public safety
challenges posed by the Carnival’s immense growth and it was published with the intention that
both the findings and the fourteen substantive recommendations 18 would be considered by the
Carnival organisers and statutory agencies as part of their planning process for Carnival 2001.
Public Hearings, Stakeholder Engagement and Practical Involvement
1.9 The second stage of the Review Group’s work took two critical paths. With a view to conducting
a more detailed examination of the issues raised during the public consultation, a series of public
hearings located in community venues were organised over a period of four months. At these
hearings, key organisations and individuals were invited to address members of the Review
Group on the issues raised in their earlier responses to the public consultation. The hearings
covered an array of topics, including: press reporting and media coverage of the Notting Hill
Carnival; the aspirations and work of the five Carnival Arenas; the transparency and
accountability of the management and governance structures surrounding the Carnival; the longterm
development and sustainability of the Carnival and its artistic content; the role and
development of carnival arts and carnival education in schools; an assessment of the Carnival’s
potential to act as a catalyst for local economic development; the impact that future growth in
the number of people attending the Carnival; and the role of the statutory agencies. With
attendance figures totalling 826, a striking feature of these public hearings was the extent to
which they became forums for the exchange of information between members of the various
Carnival arenas, the organisers and concerned residents.
1.10 In addition to the hearings, in each financial year, approximately £200,000 19 in the Mayor’s
Culture budget was ring-fenced to provide additional resources for public safety-related
planning and operational activities in the 2001, 2002 and 2003 Carnivals. With the publication
of its interim report, the Review Group provided the lead on implementing some of its key
interim recommendations, using the additional funds where necessary to strategically target and
deliver on the critical safety and long-term recommendations of increasing steward numbers 20
and gaining a better understanding of the Carnival environment and crowd behaviour 21 . In the
run up to Carnival 2001, the Greater London Authority (GLA) played a central role in convening
a number of strategic planning committees. Focusing specifically on transport and
communications, these committees were successful in developing a more integrated and coordinated
media and transport strategy for the Carnival. In 2002, the work of these committees
was incorporated into a central multi-agency planning committee for the Carnival, the
Operational Planning and Safety Group (OPSG). Membership of this group was made up of
representatives of the Carnival organisers and the statutory agencies. The GLA also became a
member of this group and therefore, one of the distinct features of this review was its
involvement in the Carnival planning and decision-making process. This provided members of
the Review Group with an opportunity to observe the relationship between the Carnival
organisers and the various statutory agencies and obtain first hand experience of the event
planning process.
Building Knowledge and Expertise: Independent Research
17
Notting Hill Carnival Review: Interim Report and Public Safety Profile Recommendations for 2001
18
Interim recommendations are set out in full at Appendix 5
19
The exact figures were £250,000 in 2001, £215,000 in 2002 and £215,000 in 2003.
20
Recommendation 3(a) in Notting Hill Carnival Review: Interim Report and Public Safety Profile Recommendations for 2001
21
Recommendation 4(a) in Notting Hill Carnival Review: Interim Report and Public Safety Profile Recommendations for 2001
34