- Agreed that more sites are needed, but was critical of the present methodology used to allocate site numbers to Councils
- Argued Report was wrong to claim existing enforcement powers against illegal sites are sufficient, and provided examples
- Provided evidence showing the Report was biased in favour of travellers
- Aired experiences of local residents living next to Dale Farm (Crays Hill)
- Challenged MPs in the debate who argued travellers ought to be allowed to break planning regulations if they have nowhere else to go.
- Challenged Government over its refusal to back his cross-party Private Member’s Bill in 2003
Commenting afterwards, John said: “We urgently need more sites allocated, but the current methodology is corrupt because it confuses need with demand. To base need simply on the number of unauthorised caravans, when such caravans always gravitate towards authorised sites, discriminates against Councils such as Basildon who’ve done most to help travellers. This responsibility needs sharing more fairly.
“Contrary to the Reports findings, existing enforcement powers are clearly inadequate as they cannot stop travellers buying Green Belt land and then speedily and illegally developing it. Tougher policies are required. The only part of the Report I could agree with was when it criticised John Prescott for granting Dale Farm travellers a two-year extension back in 2003.
“The Report itself has a raw bias. Local residents were not members of the Group and were not visited by the Group, whilst Ministers were advised to meet only with travellers. Until the experiences of those living close to illegal sites such as Hovefields and Crays Hill are understood, this problem will not be resolved fairly and local residents will continue to be discriminated against.”
Some MPs suggest travellers should be allowed to break the law and stay on illegal sites such as Dale Farm. This would give a green light for travellers to concrete our Green Belt with impunity. We cannot have one law for travellers and another for local residents.”
The following is a summary of the speech by John Baron MP during a Parliamentary debate on 22nd. May
(1) More authorised Traveller sites are needed
There is currently an estimated shortfall of 4,000 sites nationally.
Well-managed authorised sites recognise the Traveller way of life and help to promote understanding between Travellers and the settled community
The problem of illegal sites will only be solved when more authorised sites have been provided. This is because (a) eviction is legally very difficult if Travellers have nowhere else to go and (b) even if eviction does take place, this often means moving a problem from one place to another.
(2) Existing policy confuses demand with need
In the meantime, ODPM circular 01/2006 has made clear that a significant number of unauthorised encampments or developments in an area shows a clear and immediate need which ought to be addressed.
However, to base need simply on the number of unauthorised caravans, when such caravans often gravitate towards authorised sites, discriminates against Councils such as Basildon who’ve done most to help travellers.
(3) A regional strategy
Traveller site provision does need to be addressed at a regional level and the current Regional Spatial Strategies are a good enough model for doing this. The problem is that a number of relevant factors are not taken fairly into account when site numbers are allocated down to local authorities. Such factors include: -
How many sites the local authority has already provided or recognised compared to its neighbours
The extent of Green Belt land in a local authority area, which restricts the availability of land for development, and the availability of brown-field land for development
Infrastructure considerations
(4) Existing enforcement powers are not sufficient
Appeals can put Enforcement Notices on hold for years, whilst illegal developments continues
Temporary Stop Notices only apply when the development is not a primary residence
Fines rarely work, because of identification problems or delaying tactics
Forced evictions are rare because of the HRA
(5) Conclusion
The solution is neither to argue that more authorised sites are the only change needed to make enforcement work (as Labour has done) nor to argue that enforcement is the only answer (as Conservatives have done).
As promoted in my Private Member’s Bill in 2003, a twin-track approach is needed to (a) require all local authorities fairly to share the duty for site provision on a regional basis and (b) give councils much stronger powers to tackle illegal developments quickly – with extra powers being conditional on addressing genuine need.
The report, "The Way Ahead" can be downloaded from http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/housing/Taskgroupreport
No comments:
Post a Comment