Notting Hill Carnival Strategic Review - Intelligent Space

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1.74.5 consolidating organisational and financial structures • creating a progressive environment for the growth of bands; • helping find suitable and affordable spaces for the bands; and • supporting the development of a continuing professional development/ training programme for Carnival artists and organisers. 1.74.6 ensuring a safe and harmonious Carnival environment • working with the Carnival organisers and partners to improve stewarding; • exploring the provision of raked seating for spectators; • ensuring that any future Carnival route is designed with the needs of Carnival as an art form in mind; and • ensuring that artistic and cultural integrity are given serious consideration alongside safety pragmatism. 1.74.7 securing long-term partnerships for Carnival Statutory Agencies • contributing to the co-ordination of the funders’ group and liaison with Carnival organisers; • continuing to work with the archives, museums and gallery sectors; and • helping to secure long-term commercial partners. 1.75 Taken together, the key statutory agencies involved in the planning of Carnival were united in their views about the growth of the event and its impact: ever increasing numbers of Carnival spectators and revellers would mean ever increasing demands on finite public resources. Agencies acknowledged the unique nature of Carnival and its status as London’s single most diverse and celebratory community festival of Caribbean culture. In their opinion, the Notting Hill Carnival was an ‘unplanned’ event in that it did not conform to the conventional event planning process of other similar major London events. This process necessarily involved the event organiser submitting detailed plans to the agencies for comment so that any safety implications could be identified and addressed: “Because the event is not ‘planned’ the usual assurances sought from an event organiser cannot be obtained and we have categorised Carnival as an ‘unplanned’ event.” 41 Recognising the lack of managerial capacity and financial constraints of the organiser, the police, local authorities, transport agencies and emergency services did as much as possible to provide an event planning framework to support the Trust in discharging its responsibilities. The Media 41 “A Safer Carnival: A Global Risk Management for Council Services”, Special Events Group, City of Westminster (August 2002), p6 56
1.76 The role of the media in shaping and influencing how the Notting Hill Carnival is perceived has always been a key area of concern for members of the Carnival community. In recognition of this, the Review Group devoted its first public hearing to an examination of how the Carnival is portrayed by the mass media. Those submitting evidence to the Review Group were keen to point out that the way in which the Carnival is reported by the press tended to perpetuate and reinforce the popular racial stereotypes about black and ethnic minority people and events. Rather than focus on the cultural and artistic aspects of the Carnival, there appeared to be an overwhelming media pre-occupation that associated the Notting Hill Carnival with crime, drug use, illegal traders and other forms of conflict or anti-social behaviour. Members of the Carnival community also expressed their growing disquiet at the fact that the Carnival was often portrayed as a hedonistic street party. 1.77 Whilst the Review Group acknowledged that the media’s interest in the Carnival as a focal point for conflict and crime as opposed to creativity and community was, to a large extent fuelled by the event’s vivid history of police-community confrontations and riots, this was not now the case. There was a clear need for more balanced and informed reporting about the Carnival, the various disciplines and its wider significance and meaning. The point was made even more clearly in an article, which appeared in the British Medical Journal in 1989 42 . This article recounted an exercise conducted by medical staff at the accident and emergency departments of St. Charles’s Hospital and St. Mary’s Hospital to document the number and nature of injuries sustained at the 1989 Carnival. The figures were then reviewed in light of media coverage of the riot that occurred on Monday 28 August 1989. The study found that in general, the broadsheet papers quoted figures for the number of injured that broadly reflected the number of people actually seen at the hospital accident and emergency departments. By contrast however, some of the tabloid press quoted much higher figures for the number of injured. The study concluded: “Though it is not surprising to discover that some elements of the British press report events in a sensationalist manner, it is worrying to reflect upon the harm that this may cause. The public, reading about the civil disturbance at the 1989 Notting Hill Carnival, might be misled to believe that attendance could pose a risk of serious personal injury. The figures for injuries requiring hospital attention show this not to be the case, despite reports of a riot. …..It is quite feasible for a massive number of people to congregate in an inner city area, over a period of two days, without placing an excessive burden on the attendant medical services.” 1.78 However, the carnivalists also accepted that the media were not entirely to blame. At the time of the Review Group’s public hearings, there was an overwhelming consensus view that in order to transform and indeed challenge negative media images and news reporting, NHCT as the event organiser needed to adopt a much more proactive approach to cultivating positive relationships with key reporters across all media sectors. The Trust was criticised for being in the main, slow, reluctant and unreliable in providing information to the media. The organisation did not appear to be driving the carnival news agenda and its ability to react to breaking news stories was weakened by the fact that funding only allowed the Trust to engage a public relations company for three months of the year to cover the Carnival Season. The Review Group accepted that weak communication links between the Carnival organiser and (i) the media, (ii) carnival participants, (iii) local residents and (iv) the general public, meant that the news agenda was continually made by others, such as local politicians, police and disgruntled residents. 1.79 In its interim report, the Carnival Review Group recommended that the GLA work with the Carnival organisers to develop a communications strategy that would include residents, 42 “Notting Hill Carnival 1989 – The Facts”, H. L Cugnoni, T. Challoner, R. Touquet, St. Charles’s and St. Mary’s Hospitals, London (British Medical Journal, Vol.299 11 November 1989) 57
Page 3 and 4:
Notting Hill Carnival A Strategic R
Page 5 and 6: Contents Foreword Preface Carnival
Page 7 and 8: Preface Lee Jasper, Policy Director
Page 9 and 10: This strategic evaluation was made
Page 11 and 12: The Challenge: Executive Summary Th
Page 13 and 14: • recognises the grassroots natur
Page 15 and 16: provide the level of flexibility re
Page 17 and 18: • the development of a four-year
Page 19 and 20: SEU TEZ TfL WCC Social Exclusion Un
Page 21 and 22: and delivering these events has gro
Page 23 and 24: (a) the development of a multi-agen
Page 25 and 26: to commit considerable resources in
Page 27 and 28: (b) establish a Carnival Arts Educa
Page 29 and 30: Introduction The Review Process Und
Page 31 and 32: increase its overall investment in
Page 33 and 34: 1.4.3 the involvement of and consul
Page 35 and 36: 1.11 A third aspect of the Review G
Page 37 and 38: surgery of another Trinidadian, Dr
Page 39 and 40: mobilising strategy, which allowed
Page 41 and 42: ecause the plight of minority ethni
Page 43 and 44: are shown in Figure 1 below as blue
Page 45 and 46: Practice was introduced in 1993, se
Page 47 and 48: 6. It is the responsibility of the
Page 49 and 50: 1.53.2 lack of general awareness of
Page 51 and 52: planning process of Carnival. A key
Page 53 and 54: not be allowed onto the Carnival ro
Page 55: made available to provide opportuni
Page 59 and 60: Public Safety, Responsibility & Acc
Page 61 and 62: initiate discussions with DCMS, GOL
Page 63 and 64: presented and was unable to provide
Page 65 and 66: The Issue of Public Safety Recommen
Page 67 and 68: 2.4 In the main, whilst these recom
Page 69 and 70: Underground and London Transport pr
Page 71 and 72: number key public safety issues and
Page 73 and 74: Table 3: Carnival Public Safety Mat
Page 79 and 80: Stewarding & Route Management at Ca
Page 81 and 82: times, interrupted or delayed. A nu
Page 83 and 84: issues ranging from accommodation,
Page 85 and 86: Crime at Carnival 2.28 Making safe
Page 87 and 88: Event Management and Close Down Tim
Page 89 and 90: number of casualties treated - 598,
Page 91 and 92: • The installation of a temporary
Page 93 and 94: 2.53 In 2000, the circular Carnival
Page 95 and 96: Analysis of Carnival 2001 2.59 In A
Page 97 and 98: Figure (6): Barrier Locations at th
Page 99 and 100: 2.70.3 floats reduce available spac
Page 101 and 102: West-East “Ell” Route: the West
Page 103 and 104: circular route. The lowest route cr
Page 105 and 106: of the Carnival procession would be
Page 107 and 108:
Evaluating the Carnival Public Safe
Page 109 and 110:
Wider Implications for Major Events
Page 111 and 112:
survey evidence on visitor numbers
Page 113 and 114:
Independent Strategic Co-ordination
Page 115 and 116:
framework for land use and developm
Page 117 and 118:
Carnival Management & Leadership In
Page 119 and 120:
19. A clear distinction must be dra
Page 121 and 122:
The Coopers & Lybrand Report (1988)
Page 123 and 124:
Table 10: Three-Year Executive Mana
Page 125 and 126:
The Arts Council Review (2001) 3.18
Page 127 and 128:
job description and progression Art
Page 129 and 130:
Carnival - at least in the short to
Page 131 and 132:
The Value of Carnival Funding Carni
Page 133 and 134:
(a) create a new post of Carnival A
Page 135 and 136:
Carnival as Part of a Wider Strateg
Page 137 and 138:
4.7 Held annually on the late May b
Page 139 and 140:
• the first year of the Lambeth S
Page 141 and 142:
The Benefits of Carnival Arts in Te
Page 143 and 144:
carnival art projects. Although it
Page 145 and 146:
esearch that is already available w
Page 147 and 148:
• the key infrastructure and oper
Page 149 and 150:
evenues within the industry are all
Page 151 and 152:
meals and microwaveable snacks mean
Page 153 and 154:
aise sponsorship in 2001 was as a d
Page 155 and 156:
Part V: Future Vision - The Way For
Page 157 and 158:
additional growth-related stresses)
Page 159 and 160:
London Carnival Development Program
Page 161 and 162:
Priority Areas No Key Recommendatio
Page 163 and 164:
Appendix 1 Selected Bibliography Al
Page 165 and 166:
London Arts Board (2000) Making a d
Page 167 and 168:
The Greater London Authority Carniv
Page 169 and 170:
• How could health and safety fac
Page 171 and 172:
Stephen Hotson Area Commander, Brit
Page 173 and 174:
1. We believe that NHCT must be sup
Page 175 and 176:
7. In relation to the content of Ca
Page 177 and 178:
Day/Date Presenters Topic of Discus
Page 179 and 180:
Veteran’’, he has over 35 years
Page 181 and 182:
Goldsmiths College, the Caribbean C
Page 183 and 184:
Appendix 8 The Carnival Code As the
Page 185 and 186:
Notes 187
Page 187:
Notes 189
show all

Notting Hill Carnival Strategic Review - Intelligent Space

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?