Present
Nora Morris (Pagan & Hampshire resident)
Roy Gillett (President Astrological Association & Acting Chair)
Tim Abbott (Wilton Councillor)
Brian Visiondans
Raga
Arthur Pendragon (Council Of British Druid Orders)
Nick (English Heritage Security)
Duncan (EH Security)
Tim Richards (Wilts Police)
Jeremy Wickham (Wilts Police)
George Firsoff (Secy TRC and acting Scribe)

........(the following arrived during the meeting)
Andy Pulham (Community events manager)
Rowena Stone
Theo Stone
Paul Aitken
Adrian Tibbatts (Resident of Shrewton)

Apologies Dave Griffiths (Crime reduction unit, Home Office GOSW) wtites "I'll be in Spain, getting drunk"
Clews Everard (EH Manager Stonehenge) writes "I am at a meeting in London."

Roy began by outlining the purpose of the meeting, which was to receive a report from the police about drunken and antisocial behaviour in 2001 and discuss how to deal with it in the future. The Solstice Access was a great achievement. This issue should be approached in a spirit of co- operation not of confrontation.
George explained how this discussion fed into a Round Table meeting the following day, and then into a Planning Meeting immediately afterwards, at which the conditions for access in 2002 would be finalised.
Jerry said a decision had not been made on the proposal to ban alcohol in the stones area. It was English Heritage who had to make this decision and manage it, it would become a condition of entry and be enforced by security. In 2001 there were greater alcohol related problems, and police saw people they hadn't seen before. Approaching dawn there was a group antagonistic to authority and to the media people. They were described as "skinheads in football shirts" and there may have been 200 people who were drunk and beyond reason. He favoured a ban, otherwise there would be difficulties at the end of the access.
Arthur interjected the ban would just move the problem to the car park.
George was interested in the identity of the individuals. Were they travellers? Locals? The British National Party?
Jerry said he didn't know.
George said that if there was no ban we could persuade people to accept firm action against troublemakers in view of the threat of a future ban.
Nick said it was part of a risk assessment, the police also knew how in a confrontation all the drunks would gang up against the authorities, even if they had been fighting each other.
Tim thought the ban would be unenforceable and a "red rag to a bull" for some people. He tied this issue into the declassifying of cannabis, this he believed was imminent.
Brian also felt a ban was unenforceable. He was not in favour of alcohol but we had to be realistic.
Raga suggested advertising along the lines "Piss Artists not Welcome"
Arthur said there was firstly a public order issue, the 200 troublemakers had to be dealt with.
Paul stressed how important it was for police or other authorities to inform the public of what they were doing and why they were taking this action, he spoke of a "mental passage through the crowd".
Rowena noted how the appearance of uniforms could be a problem, a lot might be achieved by volunteers, we needed better procedures involving voluntary peace stewards.
George said he was queasy about a responsible majority being punished because of an irresponsible minority. We did not want to return to the days of "collective guilt". Solstice 2001 was very peaceful and the peace stewards had not had much to do. He understood the liason radios had not worked, otherwise voluntary stewards might have helped the police. He thought it was important to deal early with troublemakers.
Duncan responded saying peace stewards were fine but situations arose requiring an immediate response, for example if a fight broke out. They wore tabards, not full uniforms.
Roy interjected to say he thought we needed many more peace stewards.
Duncan continued to say that once security saw there was a problem, they became responsible and liable. It was a matter of public safety, for instance if there was a serious incident involving firearms it would be necessary to clear people from the site.
Brian said that a request not to bring alcohol, would come across as acceptable. There was no doubt Stonehenge would experience increasing numbers, bringing in different people, including skinheads, and peace stewards should keep an eye on them. He thought the police had become impatient and this was counterproductive.
Jerry agreed he'd probably become impatient with drunks who just wouldn't listen.
Brian concluded police needed to call for help from the voluntary stewards.
Tim said the build up of numbers at the search points looking for alcohol would be a problem, then people would go over fences, the ban would become unenforceable, more troublemakers would be drawn in. The Terms and Conditions could feature wording about troublemakers.
Raga mentioned a gathering in Mexico that attracted a million people. We might learn how they do that. What she saw was there had to be a sense of respect, the sacred could be more effectively communicated, she was working on designing a badge.
Arthur noted the role of alcohol in pagan rites.
George asked if people had been carried from the stones at the end last year? (dragged he was told) He noted how his colleague at the last TRC had said if there was a ban, she'd suddenly discover the need as a priestess of the Goddess to dedicate a chalice of mead. A request not to bring alcohol had some mileage however. Much better stewarding would include people befriending skinheads.

A collection was taken amounting to �15.79. This paid for the Hall and the Secretary's mailing.

Jerry now outlined what was called the "Half Way" plan which was that 2002 was a probationary year, if the problem was not contained, the year after the ban would be on. He also stressed that if there was an incident, such as injury, death, a crowd crush, this could involve the authorities in criminal negligence, but also local pressure would come down, and the access might no longer be possible.
Tim said closer liaison was needed including mixed teams of police, security and peace stewards.
Jerry basically agreed with this approach.
George said the next full TRC meeting would be on April 17th at the same venue, starting 2PM. This would have an open agenda.

The authorities took their leave and there was then a comfort break.

The discussion resumed.

What had happened? Some blind stupid drunks had started punching each other, people had been following Jerry around and winding him up, and disrespecting him, there were groups of brewed-up people. None of us seemed to have seen them. Andy pointed out that as late as 3AM police had said there were no arrests and no trouble.

What to do? We should be allowed a tent near the press said Nora.
Engage the Hemp community said Raga something ceremonial could be done.
We would spread information about the behaviour problem by word of mouth and on websites.
We will support the police in dealing with trouble said Arthur.
Set a community standard agreed Brian.
Police should move on the people who were watching the confrontation said Roy.

Where should the Peace Stewards have their secret camp asked George? This involved three nights, but one the Solstice night, we'd not be there, we'd be at the stones. Discussion on this to continue.
Experienced stewards could recruit and bring a small team suggested Andy, using a self- training package, Thomas Daffern had written a good leaflet.
Perhaps our target should be to have 100 Peace Stewards and work on improving liaison with authorities.

There might be special duties, did we need a presence at the car park? To be following English Heritage Security or police or groups of skinheads? There was a discussion about how closely to work with the authorities, this would have to be unobtrusive, because it could affect on the image and independence of the stewards.

At the Round Table (21st March)
Individuals with shaven heads, tatooed arms, sleeveless black leather jackets, very aggrsssive. Nick and Duncan had to break up a fight. They harrassed police on the path after dawn

If community control methods do not work, and an alcohol ban proves to be "unenforceable" as claimed by some, that might be the end of the Open Access, warned Clews. Jerry said policing would be "robust" in 2002 and all violent and aggressive behaviour would be dealt with.

At the Stonehenge Campaign talking stick circle (24th March)
Willy claimed the individuals concerned were in fact children from the beanfield, and he knew some of them. He wanted police to hold back from action unless the incident was very serious, and let the community deal with it
Generally people agreed that everybody in the community had to to take responsibility for intervening to calm situations, before it was necessary for police to do so.

Proposition
There is still a gap in expectations between potential "robust policing" and the laissez faire attitude amongst some of the community. More publicity and discussion on this issue is required, and much informal and volunteer peace stewarding is needed on the day, to communicate across that gap, in view of the long term need to make the access arrangement sustainable.

.