What are PSPOs?
Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs) impose bans on activities in public spaces. The order can be issued if a council officer believes an activity is having a ‘detrimental effect’ on the ‘quality of life in the locality’. There is no requirement for public consultation or for the order to be passed through full council, and there is no workable appeals system.
There are now over 2000 PSPOs in England and Wales, each of which contains up to 35 separate restrictions. This means tens of thousands of new controls in public spaces.
Over the past decade PSPOs have extended state control over everyday activities, including bans on:
sleeping in public, busking, cycling, swearing or shouting, making noise, handing out leaflets, walking too many dogs at a time, failing to carry dog bags, loitering, standing in groups, silent prayer, street preaching, asking for charitable donations, picking up stones, climbing trees, amplification, political campaigning, licensed pedlary, begging, standing in groups, sale of lucky charms, revving or playing music from a car, idling, ball games, flying kites, causing 'annoyance', rummaging in bins.
These controls are criminalising everyday life, taking away fundamental freedoms, and having a very negative effect upon a large range of groups.
PSPOs do nothing to stop criminal or serious nuisance behaviour – indeed, they channel police and council officers away from serious issues towards policing everyday conduct.
There is a strong argument for scrapping this power entirely. If it remains, these are our minimum demands for reform.
1. Subject PSPOs to stringent review before issue
Currently a PSPO can be issued by a single council officer, without even carrying out a public consultation. This lack of procedure is the reason that many PSPOs are badly drafted, overly broad, even sometimes containing spelling mistakes. The majority of PSPOs ignore the statutory guidance, which says that orders should only target activities causing nuisance or harm, and not ‘everyday sociability’ such as standing in groups or playing games.
The issuing authority should have to demonstrate that the PSPO text is compliant with legislation and statutory guidance. The PSPO should be subject to extensive consultation, with responses solicited from groups that will be affected (such as buskers, dog walkers, homeless people, or local campaigners). The PSPO should also be subject to full democratic scrutiny within the council, such as passing through full council. These procedural requirements should be introduced into primary legislation.
2. Establish proper PSPO appeals
The current appeal system through the High Court is prohibitively expensive and performs no role checking the use of the power. There have only been four appeals in over 10 years, three of which were financed by US pro-life groups; this is not therefore an appeal system that functions for local people.
There needs to be a system whereby PSPOs can be easily and cheaply appealed by local groups or interested individuals. This could be a magistrate’s court appeal (where the appellant is not liable for council costs) or appeal through a council committee that is open to the public. A regularly used and cheap/free appeal system will ensure that the power is subject to regular checks, and that members of the public gain rights and formal input into the operation of this power.
3. Ban ‘fining for profit’ for PSPO offences
Currently 75% of PSPO breach penalties are issued by private enforcement companies that are paid a portion of every fine issued. This is leading to widespread injustice, with the majority of fines now issued for trivial (or non-existent) offences. The 19,000 people fined in 2023 included a busker playing outside a Bruce Springsteen concert and a cyclist locking his bike to a bike rack.
There should be a prohibition on ‘fining for profit’ for PSPO offences, introduced into the primary legislation or failing that into the statutory guidance. Incentivised punishment greatly compounds the problem of overly broad PSPO laws and has no place in an impartial or fair criminal justice system.
- TAKE ACTION! Sign Downing Street petition by a busker calling for banning of incentivised punishment
4. Scrap plans to increase PSPO penalties to £500
The Crime and Policing Bill will increase PSPO on-the-spot penalties from £100 to £500; this is absurdly out of proportion with the nature of PSPO offences. The majority of penalties are currently issued for anodyne actions such as begging, walking a dog on a beach, standing in a group, ‘idling’, failing to show dog bags, cycling, busking, drinking alcohol in public, feeding the birds, handing out leaflets, sleeping in public, or use of amplification. These are not actions that merit the sizable penalty of £500, which will be unpayable for some and life affecting for many.
5. Allow PSPO FPNs to be appealed in magistrate’s courts
Currently there is no means to appeal an on-the-spot fine for PSPO breach: a person must wait to be prosecuted, which carries the potential of far higher costs if convicted (the person would probably lack representation at their prosecution).
The non-compliance of a PSPO with the statutory guidance or legislation should be available as a grounds of appeal of a PSPO FPN in court. Given the large volume of PSPO penalties, this would provide a vital avenue for checking the use of this power, and ensuring that penalties are targeting issues of significant public nuisance rather than everyday sociability.