**PLEASE NOTE** Our comments on the other petition's posts and any from their supporters posts are correct at the time of writing - their information may or may not be changed which could impact on the relevance and accuracy of what we post but this is outwith our control - we do not have the capacity to keep checking their posts for changes
Hi all
Thankyou to everyone supporting us and the people we are fighting for!
It's only 6 days until councillors will discuss rules in cemeteries including dog rules we do have some concerns re this meeting which we will discuss below.
Remember you can have your say. Please see the end of this post for other ways to get involved.
You can email us at:
cemeteries4all@yahoo.com
This week we have been focusing on the evidence shared by the council (who run cemeteries) and wondering what councillors (who decide cemetery rules) will decide based on this evidence.
You can find the council update (evidence) and related graphs in the report pack for the meeting (it's easier if you search within the document for "cemetery" as it's a long document:
In this document the council state:
"...the majority of dog owners use cemetery spaces in a respectful
manner."
"Whilst there are some issues, there is an insufficient evidence base to conclude that it would be
proportionate to further tighten the rules. Further, to enforce a ‘no dog’ rule would require a
significant increase in officer resources."
As you can see the council have clearly stated there is no evidence to further tighten rules or indeed to have a ban. They also state to enforce a ban they would need a significant increase in funding - we've just had our Scottish budget cut and people are struggling to feed, clothe and house themselves and their families will councillors really prioritise enforcing cemetery rules over issues like these?
We would hope not, in our opinion if councillors were to go against the council's evidence and recommendations we feel as elected officials they would need to severely justify this and have good evidence to counter the evidence provided by the council service which runs and monitors behaviour in cemeteries. We do know some councillors state they will go by evidence, others we are not so sure of as we know a ban fits with their own personal beliefs but we hope they would be professionals and put these aside to go with evidence over personal belief and feelings.
So that's what the position is with the council service which runs cemeteries and councillors who decide on rules - so far.
What we haven't discussed is the meeting itself and concerns we have re this.
If you look at the webpage where meeting details are posted you will find the agenda for the meeting: https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=139&MId=7281
Agenda for the meeting: https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/documents/g7281/Agenda%20frontsheet%2008th-Aug-2024%2010.00%20Culture%20and%20Communities%20Committee.pdf?T=0&$LO$=1
If you look at the agenda rules in cemeteries are NOT apparent on the agenda.
We were concerned by this for many reasons:
- Why is this not an agenda item?
- Is it not going to be discussed?
- If we are able to give deputations why is this not an agenda item?
- Is it the plan for someone to add it to the agenda in the meeting as sometimes happens?
- Are they taking deputations just so people can feel they have had their say but are not actually going to dicuss the matter?
- Will the matter recieve full and thorough thought and discussion?
Is it just us who finds it strange that this is to be discussed but doesn't seem to be on the agenda?
As we do we sought clarification on this matter from our local councillor and chair of the comittee which discusses and decides such rules and they replied:
"There is an update on Cemetery Rules in the Business Bulletin and Councillors can raise questions and propose amendments. Deputations will have the opportunity to speak and I believe Committee Services have been in touch with you about the arrangements (our deputation and yes they have)."
So the discussion of cemetery rules is and isn't on the agenda. It's not on the agenda as an item in it's own right to be discussed but will be discussed as part of the buisness bulletin 6.1.
We can't seem to find a document calling itself the buisness bulletin, perhaps this is for councillors only as when somone tried to send us this is said we didn't have access.
We did find in the report pack this point and motion by Councillor and convener of the Board Val Walker and wonder if this is the information referred to:
"24. Dogs in Cemeteries – Motion by Councillor Walker
The following motion was submitted by Councillor Walker in terms of Standing Order
17:“Committee
• Notes the continuing public interest and concern over the behaviour of dogs in cemeteries
• Notes that two petitions have been circulated on this matter, one proposing banning all dogs in cemeteries, and a counter-petition in opposition to this
• Asks officers to update the Committee in one cycle on compliance and enforcement of the current rules
• Requests that the two groups organising the petitions be notified of the date and procedure.”
- moved by Councillor Walker, seconded by Councillor Lezley Marion Cameron
Decision
To approve the motion by Councillor Walker."
We have never been involved in councils meeting before so don't understand their procedures - perhaps this is totally normal and, if so, we accept that.
In meetings we normally attend the agenda is clear and items for discussion are on it and not usually part of something else so we are puzzled but we are sure councillors know what they are doing.
We do wonder why it is not a main agenda item given the public attention it has recieved and hope that it still recieves due attention in the agenda position it has been given - as we've said we are sure councillors know what they are doing.
We feel it especially important that the issue receives due attention partly for the reason Councillor Hal Olsen stated in ome of the quotes shared by the other petition today:
"...it is a very difficult process to consistently go over this again, and , and again, it is very painful”
As mourners who wish to visit our loved ones in peace with our dog for very valid reasons yes it is painful to go over this again and again and possibly have this removed from us.
We hope for a full discussion of the evidence and rules on the 8th so that we and others like us do not have to have the same discussions and threat of something important to us being taken away time and time again.
Whilst we appreciate Paul can't move his son's grave neither can we move our loved ones graves or suddenly magic away the reasons we need our dog with us - nor can people suddenly magic away their reasons for visiting a cemetery with their well behaved on lead dogs some of whom may do for reasons of safety or reasons related to medical conditions.
Like the other petition, we also like Councillor Hal Olsen as although they do not come across as impartial when quoted by the other petition when you view other information relating to them they do actually seem very fair and impartial and are willing to make decisions based on evidence rather than personal feelings - a true Councillor in our opinion.
So that's our main discussion for this week:
- Sharing with you the council's evidence and recommendations for cemetery rules
- Sharing the process of how cemetery rules are devised (councillors devise rules, council services advise on, evidence behaviours and enforce these rules)
- Informing you that some councillors have stated they will be lead by evidence not feeling
- Sharing what the agenda for the meeting actually is and our concerns re cemetery rules not being an agenda item in it's own right
- Sharing clarification from the chair of the comittee stating which segment of the meeting cemetery rules will be discussed
We hope all these points have been informing and helpful - feel free to send us feedback at:
cemeteries4all@yahoo.com
Meanwhile the other petition still hasn't addressed the council report om their petition updates. They are still not acknowledging or apologising for misleading people re trial rules, falsely accusing people of breaking rules or posting photos of innocent people stating they have broken rules. They have not apologised for hiding information from the public and their supporters and just yesterday they repeated old ground and yet again appearred to attempt to mislead/manipulate people/information whilst today they have again posted information from 2 years ago which cannot be used alone as evidence of current cemetery rules.
There is one interesting idea from their update today. A sub group to discuss issues and concerns in cemeteries, we would totally sign up to that as people with loved one's in cemeteries and concerns about many issues in cemeteries (not just relating to a minority of dog rule breakers).
We do wonder how it would work though given members may have such differing opinions and that some focus more on one issue than all issues but we'd be willing to work something out as essentially we want the same thing. However, we do wonder if the other petition would be prepared to work with us on shared concerns considering we understand they have declined to do so in the past.
Yesterday's post from the other petiton used a partial quote from us in it's title and continued to use partial quotes throughout their update.
Was this deliberately misleading their readers? Was this deliberate misuse of information to sully our reputation and the counter-petition? Only they can answer that but it's interesting with so few days to go until the committe meeting that this as a focus for their once a day update.
We personally are not sure of the point of the post as it doesn't seem to add anything as to whether current rules need to be changed or inform on what decisions might be may; what it may do is highlight that previous rules were inadvertently not followed by people who respect such rules.
Perhaps as stated above it is just to throw doubt on ourselves and our counter peition, the partial quotes they use do look bad:
"I don't see the problem apart from possibly going against rules".
Yes we did actually say that, in the context of:
"He (our grandad) purchased his parents plot and was mourning for them and if he wanted to take his granddaughter and on lead dog and no one ever told him otherwise or complained then I don't see the problem apart from possibly going against rules - as it was something important to him as a mourner which your own petition agrees with I am unsure what the issue is especially when your own petition appears to break current rules."
As you can see when you have the full context the meaning is vastly changed.
The other petition also did acknowledge that we apologised that we may have inadvertently broken rules but dismissed our reasons (not excuses) as to why this may have been. Reasons which it may actually help to know when trying to ensure people follow cemetery rules.
We stand by this we are sorry we inadvertently broke the rules, we do respect rules and would not break rules deliberately or if we did without just cause.
If some sort of dog ban is put in place we will essentially be forced to either go against rules or not visit our loved ones - what sort of choice is that?
You can see our full discussion of this in our update from the 26th July:
https://www.change.org/p/halt-the-petitioned-ban-on-dogs-in-edinburgh-cemeteries/u/32778150
Or you can view the main Nextdoor conversation where their supporter asked us the initial question in relation to our petition statement which has remained unchanged since we posted it 6 months ago:
As you can see we always try to be open and honest with you all (even when it make us look bad) and we acknowledge our mistakes and apologise for them.
We do this partly as it's our nature but also because we believe it is important to do so as a sign of respect to the people you are communicating with and it allows these people to have factual information to make their own decisions in matters.
If you want a petition you can trust to be honest and who wants to improve behaviours in our council cemeteries please feel free to support us.
We advocate for respectful, responsible cemetery use by all and education for the minority not following rules. Below are some of our concerns in relation to a ban on dogs (with or without exemptions).
- Mourners who may be disadvantaged by any form of ban on dogs and not able to grieve as is helpful to them.
- The deceased resting in our cemeteries who may have loved dogs in life and like to see them in death
- There are many socially accepted reasons one might visit a cemetery why should somone miss out on this because they have a well behaved dog on lead causing no issues
- Women and vunerable groups state they feel safer with a dog in a cemetery - should be take away their safety net? Remember they may be a mourner
- People with dogs can and do help in cemeteries
- The footfall of dogs may offer cemetery inhabitants and visitors protection from unwanted or illegal behaviour
- The no dogs rule pre covid was not enforced or adhered to in at least 2 cemeteries (all if you believe some council officials) - what would this rule actually to do improve the behaviours of the minority of rule breakers?
- If a ban was brought in but not enforced by the coincil would this lead to individuals self policing cemeteries possibly incorrectly and inappropriately?
- Is it porportionate and just to remove a rule abiding majority for a minority of rule breakers in a minority of cemeteries
- The list of aspects could go on but we feel that is enough to demonstrate how complicated this matter truely is.
Let's keep cemetries4all responsible, respectful people!
Official current cemetery rules:
https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/33467/cemetery-management-rules
Other ways to get involved and share your view:
Write to your local councillor - List of your local Councillors:
https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?FN=WARD&VW=LIST&PIC=0
Write to committe members who will discuss and decide on cemetery rules - List of who is due to be at the committee meeting including committee members:
https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/mgMeetingAttendance.aspx?ID=7281
Consider giving a written or verbal deputation - Website where further information will be posted in relation to the meetings, we understand around a week before the meeting:
https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=139&MId=7281
Vote on the Scotsman's article where you can place your vote (it is not binding in any way):
https://www.scotsman.com/news/environment/why-council-will-vote-on-a-ban-dogs-from-all-edinburgh-cemeteries-4679251?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1jiu0nmOB5KkeddVY_d0oDN6U2gt09cUrdWgBgQNW9Nr0N14p8EnUv3gs_aem_n3NYnWSu9Bpe_wP_x0twLw#disqus-comment-section