Travellers Advice Team at Community Law Partnership

Workshop on the Government’s Consultation on Travellers and Planning

Monday 6th October 2014

Present:

Chris Johnson (Community Law Partnership) Jenny Galuschka Alison Heine (Heine Planning) Gill Brown (APPG for Gypsy Roma Travellers) Simon Ruston (Planning Consultant) Angus Murdoch (Planning Consultant) Tony Thomson (Travellers Aid Trust) Jo Gregson (South West Law) Win Lawlor (Irish Community Care Merseyside) Keith Coughtrie (Lester Morrill incorporating Davies Gore Lomax) Adrian Jones (National Federation of Gypsy Liaison Groups) Ilinca Diaconuscu (London Gypsy and Traveller Unit) Tom McCready (Derbyshire Gypsy Liaison Group) Peter Baines (Herefordshire Travellers Support Group) Michael Hargreaves (Planning Consultant) Jessica Wheeler Mark Watson (Association of Chief Police Officers) James Rattigan (The Traveller Movement) Mike Doherty (The Traveller Movement)

Apologies: Siobhan Spencer (Derbyshire Gypsy Liaison Group)

Definition – Removal of ‘Gypsy Status’ from those who have permanently ceased travelling / making the ‘Housing Act’ definition the same

Key points

 Current definition is far from perfect but there has been a significant drop in the number of court cases regarding status since it was introduced in Circular 01/06, suggesting it is reasonably functional.

 There is no harm using our consultation responses to set out what we would like the definition to be – it may be tactical to go for the left-field position in the hope of ending up in the middle ground.  Para 2.8 consultation document – decision takers would have to “give close scrutiny to whether applicants are in fact living a nomadic lifestyle.” The Planning Officers’ Society has agreed it will be difficult to apply the proposed definition. How do you know whether someone has ceased travelling temporarily or permanently?

 What will happen to people who are no longer travelling but are living on sites with a Gypsy/Traveller occupancy condition? Will they have to leave?

 In reality, planning officers may take a pragmatic view with existing sites; it’s applicants for new sites that will be subject to the most scrutiny.

 Fewer permissions being granted may mean more roadside encampments – something that will be unpopular with the settled community and which is unsustainable.

 This also looks like an attempt to push all Gypsies and Travellers into bricks and mortar. Doing so will only add to the housing crisis.

 As the Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) acknowledges, those who will be worst affected will be people who are ill, single mothers and children with special educational needs.

 The current Housing Act definition ensures Gypsies and Travellers who have stopped travelling and/or live in bricks and mortar are taken into account.

 The situation for Gypsies and Travellers is comparable to agricultural / forestry worker conditions. They can retire but remain in their property; why can’t Gypsies and Travellers?

 Difficulty is that judges in homelessness cases don’t agree that Gypsies and Travellers can’t live in bricks and mortar – it takes strong medical evidence.

 Don’t want to pander to notion that people are Gypsies because they travel; that’s not how we define ourselves. It is not viable to travel now – you can’t conduct your business, pay taxes etc. We define people by the area they live in – which location their family is from. Don’t want that taken away.

 Changing the Housing Act definition requires parliamentary approval whereas changing the ‘planning’ definition does not. We can argue that, if both definitions are going to be identical, it is logical for the ‘housing’ definition to be properly scrutinised in parliament before the ‘planning’ definition is amended.

Actions  Mike Doherty has met the Equalities and Human Rights Commission about this; they are considering whether to make a submission.

 The Traveller Movement are going to write to every Local Planning Authority before the end of the consultation. They will liaise with Alison Heine on this.

 If the Housing Act amendment goes to parliament Gill Brown can assist with obtaining advice on the best strategy for putting the case to the Lords.

Green Belt

Key points

 The inclusion of designated areas such as those covered by the Birds and Habitats Directive etc is a red herring – they already apply.

 Stopping the lack of a 5 year supply being a significant material consideration for Green Belt sites is like telling LPAs they don’t have to bother finding a supply.

 It is the LPAs’ failure to provide sites that is the cause of the problem.

 Wales is an interesting comparator as the duty to meet needs is contained in the Housing (Wales) Act 2014 but it is too early for useful statistics. Interesting to note though that Wales has taken this approach; English government is ignoring the evidence.

 We need to emphasise that this has implications for adjoining authorities.

 Consultation paper says the policy will apply to the settled community too but there is no indication how. This is picking on Gypsies and Travellers.

 There is a strong public perception of bias towards Gypsies and Travellers in planning matters and the government is playing on this.

 Non-Travellers who are homeless: 1%; Travellers who are homeless (according to Caravan Count): around 18%

 The Traveller Movement are researching the number of pitches that fail at application stage; TM think the figure is around 90%.

 Evidence on the difference in treatment of housing vs Gypsy and Traveller Sites:  Campaign to Protect Rural England research on Greenfield sites.  Statistics from FOI request (Appendix 7 of the handout; Parminder’s witness statement)  Report on bricks and mortar Green Belt development, August 2014: http://www.glenigan.com/construction-market-analysis/news/green-belt- under-development

 Need statistics to demonstrate that appeal outcomes are disproportionately worse for Gypsies and Travellers.

 Plea from Gill Brown that after the end of the consultation, a coordinated approach is taken to media relations. We need to get the message out in the most effective way. Perhaps a key group to take the lead?

Actions

 Should we organise a key group to deal with media relations? Would anyone be willing to take the lead on this?

Open Countryside

Key points

 Discussion about meaning of para 23 Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (PPFTS)– strictly limiting new sites in the countryside. Some felt this is about distance to services; others that it is about the impact on nearby settled communities.

 Wording is vague – how do you define ‘strictly limit’? What is open countryside?

 Also may need clarification on para 3.11 (living ‘off site’ rather than ‘on site’) – does this refer to unauthorised occupation?

 This proposal has less detail than the rest of the consultation; it may be red herring that is not intended to go into the final paper.

 The Traveller Movement’s ‘A Place to Call Home’ has good examples.

 Some Travellers may wish to be in more urban locations, others in the countryside. Sites are often needed in the countryside because of local opposition (which is referred to in Annex 1 to the consultation). All options should be available.

 Inequality – it is becoming easier to build houses in the countryside but they are making it harder to build sites.  Need to stress that this will make things even harder for LPAs, who can’t even find enough land for housing in urban areas.

 Chapman v UK is about facilitating the Gypsy way of life, which includes caravan living.

 A key point for consultation responses is the best interests of the children. Cases like ZH (Tanzania); Moore; Eastwood v Surrey are all helpful.

 A related issues is that local authorities try to place children in ethnically appropriate foster placements. By making the Gypsy way of life inherently more unstable, they’re affecting the likelihood of placements with Gypsy families.

Actions

 As many groups as possible to request oral hearing sessions.

Unauthorised occupation of land

Key points

 Is it intentional if you have nowhere to go? Difference between non-Travellers squatting vs people being hounded from pillar to post. E.G. Moore v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Court of Appeal) – had a housing association tenancy but lived in caravan on the drive way. Council threatened to evict. Moved on to her own land. Is that intentional?

 It’s not intentional; it’s a failure of policy. Failure to provide sites means it’s numerically inevitable that Travellers will be on unauthorised sites, either the roadside or their own land.

 The biggest problem is the delay in getting decisions from the Secretary of State – angers local residents.

Large scale unauthorised sites

Key points

 This seems to specifically target a very small number of large unauthorised sites: Bulkington( some years ago), Smithy Fen (though now only 1 to 3 unauthorised pitches left), Dale Farm, Top Park (though now has temporary permission).  Need to stress that this isn’t sound policy making because it is not based on evidence. See para 4.13 of consultation document: ‘small minority of LPAs bearing the burden’. You can’t make a national policy based on a couple of examples.

 The response should be: if you want a fair distribution of need, you should go back to Regional Spatial Strategies.

 Unauthorised encampments go down as authorised provision goes up – The Traveller Movement are producing a report on this, based on the caravan counts.

 Experience shows that people are having to move to bricks and mortar where they can’t get an authorised site.

Accommodation Needs Assessment Guidance

Key points

 Current needs assessments are ignoring the existing government guidance.

 The slimmed down guidance will not lead to a robust evidence base. This will lead to more problems at local plan stage and hold up the development plan process.

 Two positive points:  The proposed guidance does require LPAs to take account of the different types of Gypsies and Travellers.  It requires an assessment of the ‘quality’ of accommodation needed.

 The recommended sources of data include the Caravan Counts but the 2007 Niner Report says they are unreliable. South Cambridgeshire’s and Cornwall’s recent GTAAs are based on Caravan Count data and they are appalling.

 This is not guidance. LPAs don’t know how to do research. The current guidance references local Gypsy and Traveller communities. The proposed guidance does not even mention them.

 Still asking the fox to count the chickens, but at least with the old guidance, the chickens were involved!

Actions

 Simon Ruston is preparing a case study on Leeds GTAA which, having worked with Leeds GATE, is now really good. Will circulate when ready.

 Ilinca Disconuscu will share LGTU’s paper on the situation in London.  The London Assembly is scrutinizing the London-wide needs assessment (2008). Findings will either be a report in the New Year, or a letter to the Mayor with recommendations sooner than that. Ilinca will ask whether they will provide copies of the submissions they received.

 LGTU are thinking about doing a postcard campaign.

Key points on responding to the consultation

 Individuals/organisations to prepare their own responses and circulate for others’ information.

 Best way to ensure responses are properly recorded is to answer the questions but also include narrative about our views and don’t feel constrained by the questions.

 Can also criticise:

 The Equalities Impact Assessment (ignores a lot of the obvious inequalities – deprivation, link between homelessness and poor health etc).

 The method of consultation. It is not accessible. They’re not engaging with organisations – the timescale makes that impossible. Point out their duties under the Equality Act etc.

 Take up the offer of meeting them. The more organisations that do it, the better. In addition to getting our views across, it may delay the consultation or at least strengthen our argument about inadequate consultation if they have to turn down meetings.

 Need to work our contacts – tell as many people as possible about the consultation, e.g. General Medical Council, social services etc.

 On another note, the No Mad Laws campaign is aimed at highlighting the effects on Gypsies and Travellers of reforms to judicial review and legal aid. We have a website: www.nomadlaws.co.uk, and a petition: https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/no-mad-laws - please sign and spread the word!