Draft letter to Minister of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma

DORCHESTER

Dorset

Dominic Raab MP

House of Commons

London, SW1A 0AA

Consultation: Powers for dealing with unauthorised development and encampments

Dear Mr Raab,

Yet again, a there seem to be proposals underway to make life ever more difficult for Gypsies and Travellers, and yet again, the consultation is entirely negative in terms of the impact it is having on community relations and the well-being of the Gypsy and Traveller communities.

We deplore the fact that the consultation is couched in such negative terms - “dealing with” is a term ill-suited to the need to tackle problems which successive Conservative Governments have created for some of the most vulnerable people in our country.

Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma strongly suggests that the questions which needs to be asked are:

• What aspects of current policy are creating conditions which impel people to continue travelling and to occupy unauthorised sites? (1994 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act and 2015 Planning policy guidance for Traveller sites to name but two)
• How could Gypsies and Travellers who wish to settle on designated sites be assisted to do so?
  
• What mixture of publicly provided and private sites do we need and how do we achieve this?
  
• What good practice is there which enables local authorities to create safe and harmonious conditions for travelling families and local communities? (Negotiated stopping, for example)
  
• How can the enormous prejudice which compromises the health, education and welfare of Gypsy and Traveller families be addressed?

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require clarification of any of the points made above. We are a national network of ordained and lay Christians from a variety of different denominations, committed to aiding understanding and acceptance of Gypsies, Travellers and Roma.

Yours sincerely,

Draft letter to Boston Standard

Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma

Hilfield Friary

Hilfield

DORCHESTER

Dorset

DT2 7BE

The Editor

Boston Standard

Morgan House

Gilbert Drive

BOSTON

Lincs

PE21 7TQ

“Illegal traveller encampments to face prison or £2k fine”

Dear Sir,

Your article;e of 4^th April was helpful in explaining the policy and proposals of the Borough Council, but we were concerned that, as only negative views of Gypsies and Travellers were quoted, the article lacked balance and context, and could consequently have an adverse effect on community relations locally. It is our view that tension and hostility is stoked up rather than ameliorated by policies and news stories couched in wholly negative terms. In our experience, this rebounds especially harshly on Gypsy and Traveller children resident in the area and seeking to gain an education there. Resident adults who are responsibly fulfilling their roles in your community will be less likely to self-identify as Gypsy or Traveller, with the consequence that positive experiences of interaction with these minorities will go unnoticed and unappreciated.

In order to achieve balance it would have been helpful to consult either a national organisation (Friends, Families and Travellers, or Traveller Movement or The Gypsy Council) or your local organisation, Lincolnshire Gypsy Liaison Group.

As regards context, it would have been relevant to note some or all of the following:

• since the removal of the duty for local authorities to provide sites in 1994, the national under-provision of sites where people can legally settle or stop has worsened markedly;
• the 2015 Planning policy guidance for Traveller sites required that Gypsies and Travellers should be able to prove that they had continued travelling in order to be even considered for planning permission. This very predictably has forced people to move from one unauthorised site to another, even if they wish to settle;
• it should be acknowledged that not all encampments result in litter or anti-social behaviour; as one editor commented to a Dorset group, “It’s not news when they leave a clean and tidy space behind”.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if yo have any queries about the points raised. We are a national network of ordained and lay Christians from a variety of different denominations, committed to aiding understanding and acceptance of Gypsies, Travellers and Roma.

Yours truly,

Draft letter to Boston Borough Council

Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma

Mr Michael Cooper

Municipal Buildings

West Street

Boston

Lincolnshire

Dear Mr Cooper,

“Illegal traveller encampments to face prison or £2k fine”

We note from an article in the Boston Standard on 4^th April that Boston Borough Council has experienced problems with unauthorised encampments of Gypsies and Travellers and has consequently sought and been granted powers to compel those involved in future to move on or face either prison or a fine.

We do appreciate, as do many in the Gypsy and Traveller communities, that nobody wants messy and anti-social neighbours. However, we would respectfully point out that not all encampments are so undesirable, and that the major problem with your policy is that those encamped may not have anywhere that they can move on to, owing to the widely acknowledged under-provision of sites throughout the country.

We suggest that consultation with the Lincolnshire Gypsy Liaison Group might in future enable you to come to agreed solutions without the need for a constant round of evictions, leading to increased community tensions. Where Gypsies and Travellers have been allowed to camp peacefully for short periods in areas known to us, good relations have been established with both local residents and the local authority, and people have moved on when the reason for their presence no longer prevails. In Romani, New Traveller and Irish Traveller cultures, there are recognised techniques for ensuring that an encampment does not scar the local landscape. There are also local authorities who have, by consulting with those arriving in this way, been able to ensure that rubbish and litter is avoided or kept to a minimum.

It is our view that tension and hostility is stoked up rather than ameliorated by policies and news stories couched in wholly negative terms. In our experience, this rebounds especially harshly on Gypsy and Traveller children resident in the area and seeking to gain an education there. Resident adults who are responsibly fulfilling their roles in your community will be less likely to self-identify as Gypsy or Traveller, with the consequence that positive experiences of interaction with these minorities will go unnoticed and unappreciated.

Should you wish for more information about any of the points raised here, please do not hesitate to contact us. We are a national network of ordained and lay Christians from a variety of different denominations, committed to aiding understanding and acceptance of Gypsies, Travellers and Roma.

Yours truly,

Travelling Home to Heaven

I am putting together a book called (for now) "Travelling Home to Heaven". If you are a Romani or a Pavee, it's a chance for you to share your faith, your experiences, your thoughts, your stories or stories of people who have inspired you. All contributors can have as many copies as they like at cost plus post and packing, and sell it for any price they like. But the point is not about making a profit. I am on my last days,(with an incurable illness) so before I go on my own road to heaven, I would like to create something to help Romani or Traveller people who wonder what faith is all about, and what it means in our lives, and also to make all the churches aware of the deep spirituality of our nomadic cultures, and how far away some of them are from speaking to it. Will you help? If so, please leave a message in "Comments" below, and I will send you my email address.. Likewise, if you can contribute a photo for the front cover or for a story.

A Joint Statement from the National Churches

The Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma notes with concern the distress caused to Gypsy and Traveller communities by the new Planning Policy for Traveller sites issued in August 2015..  As Churches we have a responsibility to affirm, welcome and celebrate the many diverse ethnicities and cultures and challenge all forms of social exclusion and marginalisation, and we share the concern of Gypsies and Travellers about the impact this policy will have on their lives. Of all the guidance in the Planning Policy for Traveller Sites, the part that has caused greatest anxiety is the definition of Gypsies and Travellers which effectively removes Gypsy or Traveller status for people who have settled permanently. This denies to people in “bricks and mortar” (houses) the aspiration to live within the customs of their culture.  To people on private or council-run Traveller sites it raises fears about the security of their tenure.  In particular, people with temporary planning permission for a Traveller site are fearful that their home will cease to attract planning permission when the period of the temporary permission has expired, and that they will then face eviction.

Travellers have seen this measure in the context of other guidance and legislation which has impacted on their way of life, and have expressed deep concern that there appears to be a political agenda of forced assimilation which would result in the loss of their culture and identity. That is why the demonstrators In Parliament Square on Saturday will meet under the theme of “Dosta Grinta” – “Enough is Enough”.

Yours truly,

Revd Martin Burrell, Chair, Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma
Yogi Sutton, Chair, Catholic Association for Racial Justice
Dr Elizabeth Henry, National Adviser, Council for Minority Ethnic Anglican Concerns
Revd. Wale Hudson-Roberts, Racial Justice Advisor, Baptist Union of Great Britain
Revd Dr Michael Jagessar, Racial Justice and Intercultural Ministry, United Reformed Church
Lt-Col Melvin Fincham, Secretary for Communications, Salvation Army

The Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma is a group of and for Christians of all denominations and for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma themselves.  Its primary aim is to work for harmony, understanding and co-operation between communities, churches and Gypsy, Traveller and Roma people.

Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma: Annual Report for 2015-16

Photographs by kind permission of Joe Windas, Mary Bird and Lee Hughes

The past year has been a very difficult one for all organisations working with Gypsies, Travellers and Roma. The government has been reluctant to consult with Gypsies, Travellers and Roma, or with their organisations even as we have seen a flood of legislation which directly or indirectly brings them huge disadvantages.  The cover pictures are a reminder of the Control of Horses Act, 2015, which is already having devastating effects on horse-drawn Travellers in some parts of the country. As a Dorset Traveller pointed out, “When they seize a man’s horse, they have no idea of the value of that animal to the owner.  His livelihood and all he possesses depends on that horse.”  This did not initially receive much publicity, until the “Countryfile” item which revealed that 80% of horses seized had been destroyed. Travellers have kindly provided the photographs on the front cover to represent their horses, and these images speak volumes about the deep bond that exists between them and their beautiful and beloved horses.

The bringing into force of the dreaded new Planning Policy Guidance for Traveller sites on 31^st August was remarked upon immediately by alert lawyers, and was dismayingly unaltered from the original disastrous proposals.  This flew in the face of many well-argued consultation responses which pointed out the possible consequences of making it virtually impossible for Gypsies and Travellers to provide their own sites, as they had been urged to do at the time of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. The sinister removal of Traveller status from people who had settled permanently for whatever reason has caused enormous dismay to all Gypsies and Travellers, who feel that their very existence as culturally distinct ethnic groups is threatened.

The Housing and Planning Bill introduced in Parliament in the autumn of 2015 included a clause which removed from local authorities the duty to assess the accommodation needs of Gypsies and Travellers. Again, this was noted quite quickly, but despite representations which pointed out the impact on these hugely disadvantaged and marginalised groups of people, the government has declined to remove this clause.

The Horse Passport Regulations 2009 already required horses to be microchipped when owners applied for a passport but the difficulty of complying when owners had no fixed abode appears not to have resulted in any guidance on how to proceed in such cases.  It was therefore not surprising that the Microchipping for Dogs (England) Regulations 2015 similarly overlooked this difficulty. Only in Wales, it seems, was this noted as an area that required further guidance, but guidance has not been forthcoming. For nomadic Travellers, their dogs are an important means of supplementing income by trading or breeding, so this apparently well-intentioned measure is also a further deprivation with, as yet, no remedy.

We note that organisations representing Gypsies and Travellers have now said “Dosta!” (Enough!) and have banded together under the leadership of the Traveller Movement to plan a march of protest in May. This will focus particularly on the Planning Policy Guidance as the most detrimental of all the measures introduced in the past year. This was also the strong feeling of the meeting we held in Marsden, Kent in September 2015, where Romani Gypsies were strongly represented.

For Eastern European Roma un the United Kingdom there is  also considerable anxiety as we approach the referendum about membership of the European Union. If we leave the EU, a host of questions will need to be addressed for which at the present there are no answers.   Although under the radar, the Eastern European Roma community in the UK is huge and still growing.   

The Churches Network seeks to ground all we do in the Gospel of liberation we share and seek to proclaim.   Our vision is of one people of God united through the cross in which we already have the victory.  We believe we have a crucial role to be bearers of hope to a people who have all but lost hope.  To achieve this we need to find a way to draw in the leaders of the GTR churches in the UK.   

As followers of Jesus Christ we accept his divine commission to the poor, the oppressed and the marginalised. Our hope is that we can so present what we believe to be God’s call to us that all the national churches will join us in speaking out to explain the harm that is being done to people already suffering severe disadvantages.

Progress since last year

 Last year’s Business Plan set the following targets:

·         Recruit more members from Gypsy, Traveller and Roma communities

·         Identify key social justice issues which Gypsies, Travellers and Roma need us to address.

·         Plan ways in which these can be tackled.

·         Begin implementing plans

·         Continue programme of awareness raising events.

·         Plan ways of engaging each of the national churches represented, at both national and local level

·         Hold a meeting in Kent

·         Plan further meetings in different areas and contact Christian faiths in that area in order to invite their participation

·         Aim to encourage one-off road shows, ideally provided through regional structures.

Progress has been made as follows:

Ø   Membership

The email list now stands at 57 people, plus 2 contactable only by phone, which compares with 56 people last year.  Since the names of people whose emails always bounced back undelivered have been deleted, this represents more of a gain than first appears. We do not operate any ethnic monitoring, but it is probably fair to say that only one of the new people on the list is a Romani, and another is a Roma.  The facebook group membership is now 83, compared with 26 last year, and ethnic Travellers are probably better represented here.  In fact, the group is very useful for networking, with members providing the photographs on the cover, and volunteering to author articles for the CMEAC book of minority ethnic saints.

Nevertheless, our meeting in Kent demonstrated the willingness of Travellers to participate at a venue accessible to them, and with hosts whom they knew.  This suggests that we should consider progressing regional structures where possible.

Ø   Key social justice issues

The key social issue identified in Kent was the impact of the Policy Planning Guidance for Traveller sites which was issued on 31^st August.  This is also the issue which has brought Traveller organisations together to plan a protest.

Since then a demonstration in London has also protested against the clause in the Housing and Planning Bill which removed the local authorities’ duty to assess the accommodation needs of Gypsies and Travellers.

Traveller organisations and our own members appear not to have picked up the issue of the astonishing over-representation of Traveller children in custody, and the fact that they are significantly more likely to have bad experiences in custody than all other groups of children. (HM Inspector of Prisons, “Children in Custody, 2015) However, a CNGTR member brought this to the attention of the Bishop of Rochester, who holds a brief for prisons in the House of Lords.

Ø   Planning ways in which key issues can be tackled

Our main proposal at present is to issue a statement explaining why the Planning Policy for Traveller Sites is so disastrous for the communities we seek to serve. The hope is to bring in as many Christian denominations as possible, and thereby rise awareness within the churches as well as among the wider public.

Since any such statement will be at best ephemeral, we need to consider further ways of spreading the argument for a more helpful policy.

Implementation of this plan has begun by contacting all the major denominations at national level.

Ø   Programme of awareness raising events
There were no awareness raising events organised by the Network in 2015-16, although one member organised a major event in her home cathedral, and one diocese again sent Holocaust Memorial Day liturgy suggestions to all incumbents, including mention of the Roma and Sinti victims.

Ø    Planning ways of engaging each of the national churches, at both                                              national and local level

We have been delighted to welcome into the network representation from the Roman Catholic Church, the Baptist Church, the Salvation Army and the United Reformed Church. Some of these representatives are not often available in person, but their support is nevertheless greatly valued.

Ø        Meeting in Kent

We were very grateful to Olby and Gary Brazil and their families for generously hosting our September meeting free of charge in the South East Romany Museum. The Romany people of Kent were strongly represented at this meeting, which included worship and a bring-and-share lunch as well as a discussion of business.

Ø        Planning further meetings in other areas, inviting representatives of
      Christian faiths in that area.

A meeting in Essex has been proposed, and we will need to consider how to involve the local churches.

Ø        Encouraging one-off road shows

On 16^th June the Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham held a day conference and exhibition to raise awareness of Gypsy Traveller culture, history and lifestyle in the State Chamber of the Archbishop’s Palace in Southwell.  Two members were programmed to take part as key speakers. 

Financing the network

The Network started the financial year with £125 in the bank, and during the year received gits and membership contributions totalling £175. Payments of £30 and £19.24 were made for a senior railcard and an inkjet cartridge, both for the secretary, and the Network therefore ends the year with £250.76 in the bank.

This upward trajectory in the funding is due to the generosity of the Church of England, which makes our usual venue available free of charge as well as contributing financially, to Salisbury Diocese, which funds travel for three of our members and last but not least to our members, who contribute financially as well as bearing the cost of travel to meetings. We are enormously grateful to Olby and Gary Brazil for making us so welcome free of charge at the South East Romany Museum and regard this as a useful model for meetings outside of London.

It would be greatly appreciated if the secretary were also permitted to make claims for telephone calls, postage and stationery, and this should still leave us with a small but growing amount of funding, some of which we could use for our proposed “roadshow” events.

Conclusion

We give thanks to God for one another, for the wonderful Gospel we share and for his consistent assurance of his love for people of every tribe and language and people and nation. As we commit ourselves to showing that love especially to people who suffer discrimination, disadvantage and sometimes extreme prejudice, we give thanks especially that Jesus constantly renews our hope, even in the darkest days. As we seek to bring light where there is darkness, our business plan for 2016-17 needs to build on our successes of 2015-16, and address those parts of our aims which have yet to be met.  

Enough!

The past year has been a very difficult one for all organisations working with Gypsies, Travellers and Roma. The government has been reluctant to consult with Gypsies, Travellers and Roma, or with their organisations  even as we have seen a flood of legislation which directly or indirectly brings them huge disadvantages.  The cover pictures are a reminder of the Control of Horses Act, 2015, which is already having devastating effects on horse-drawn Travellers in some parts of the country. As a Dorset Traveller pointed out, “When they seize a man’s horse, they have no idea of the value of that animal to the owner.  His livelihood and all he possesses depends on that horse.”  This did not initially receive much publicity, until the “Countryfile” item which revealed that 80% of horses seized had been destroyed. Travellers have kindly provided the photographs above to represent their horses, and these images speak volumes about the deep bond that exists between them and their beautiful and beloved horses.

The bringing into force of the dreaded new Planning Policy Guidance for Traveller sites on 31^st August was remarked upon immediately by alert lawyers, and was dismayingly unaltered from the original disastrous proposals.  This flew in the face of many well-argued consultation responses which pointed out the possible consequences of making it virtually impossible for Gypsies and Travellers to provide their own sites, as they had been urged to do at the time of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. The sinister removal of Traveller status from people who had settled permanently for whatever reason has caused enormous dismay to all Gypsies and Travellers, who feel that their very existence as culturally distinct ethnic groups is threatened.

The Housing and Planning Bill introduced in Parliament in the autumn of 2015 included a clause which removed from local authorities the duty to assess the accommodation needs of Gypsies and Travellers. Again, this was noted quite quickly, but despite representations which pointed out the impact on these hugely disadvantaged and marginalised groups of people, the government has declined to remove this clause.

The Horse Passport Regulations 2009 already required horses to be microchipped when owners applied for a passport but the difficulty of complying when owners had no fixed abode appears not to have resulted in any guidance on how to proceed in such cases.  It was therefore not surprising that the Microchipping for Dogs (England) Regulations 2015 similarly overlooked this difficulty. Only in Wales, it seems, was this noted as an area that required further guidance, but guidance has not been forthcoming. For nomadic Travellers, their dogs are an important means of supplementing income by trading or breeding, so this apparently well-intentioned measure is also a further deprivation with, as yet, no remedy.

We note that organisations representing Gypsies and Travellers have now said “Dosta!” (Enough!) and have banded together under the leadership of the Traveller Movement to plan a march of protest in May. This will focus particularly on the Planning Policy Guidance as the most detrimental of all the measures introduced in the past year. This was also the strong feeling of the meeting we held in Marsden, Kent in September 2015, where Romani Gypsies were strongly represented.

As followers of Jesus Christ the Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma accepts his divine commission to the poor, the oppressed and the marginalised. Our hope is that we can so present what we believe to be God’s call to us that all the national churches will join us in speaking out to explain the harm that is being done to people already suffering severe disadvantages.

Photographs courtesy of Joe Windas, Mary Bird and Lee Hughes

For ALL the saints!

I wonder why the saints in our stained glass windows are often not just European-looking, but also excessively white?

Ethnic minority ordinands reportedly say that the theology taught in our training colleges and universities is also stiflingly Eurocentric.

These thoughts were suggested to me by the person who leads the Council for Minority Ethnic Anglican Concerns (CMEAC), Dr Elizabeth Henry. CMEAC is hoping to publish a book to mark its 30th anniversary, and it will be about the saints of minority ethnic groups.

As secretary of the Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma, I have been asked to find someone who is Romani to write a chapter about a Romani saint. If you are interested, please text message me on 0751 811 7798. Likewise if you are a Scottish, Irish or Welsh Traveller, willing to write about one of your saints.

Panto and Prejudice

I love village pantomimes. It's great to see the children taking part, and to hear all the young voices yelling out from the audience.  It's comical to see the pantomime dame trying hard to convey that he would never normally enjoy drag, even as he minces limp-wristed around the stage. It's awesome to see the talent that you'd never suspect producing wonderful performances and some truly excellent scenery and costumes.

So it was disappointing to come away from our local panto feeling uncomfortable and guilty.

You see, the baddie had an ally who was just as black-hearted as he was, and the villain was a Gypsy. Well, I'm all for equality - why not a Gypsy?  What made me feel uncomfortable was the racist stereotyping that all those happy young people might take away with them as possibly the only thing anyone had ever told them about Gypsies. The brewing up of poisons was one example.  The stealing of fair-haired children was another.

What would you have done?  What would Jesus have done?  I felt it was wrong to just be silent, but probably hugely counter-productive to make a fuss.

When the organist played "The Old Rugged Cross" in church this morning, I thought it was possibly a little nod towards the spirituality of the Romani people, and was momentarily comforted. But when I asked him, it was in fact a memory of a Billy Graham crusade.

So what do I do now?  All suggestions gratefully received. What God has to say about it was displayed in the cathedral when I got my Permission To Officiate.  God is on the side of freedom and justice. The reading this morning reinforced that. But just being FROG (fully reliant on God) feels a bit like just standing by. We can't just turn a blind eye. Can we?  Again?

A Sinti boxer in Nazi Germahy

The theme of this year's Holocaust Memorial Day is "Don't stand by".  This heart-breaking story of a talented young boxer in Nazi Germany is a good illustration of why we should not stand by.

"They're trying to legislate us off the face of the earth"

New Planning Policy Guidance, its context and its impact

Context

Caravan Sites Act 1968

            Created a duty for local authorities to provide caravan sites for Gypsies residing in or resorting to their area.  Never enforced, and never implemented by some authorities, it nevertheless resulted in a reduction in unauthorised encampments, and the provision of approximately 300 sites, providing about 5,000 pitches by the time the relevant sections of the Act were repealed.

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

            Removed the duty to provide sites, and resulted in an almost complete halt in the provision of local authority sites.

            The rationale was that Gypsies and Travellers should provide their own sites, which many attempted to do.  However, planning law and local prejudice have combined to create a severe limiting effect on new sites, and many who have won planning permission on appeal have only temporary planning permission.

            Created a criminal offence if anyone remained on land where they had parked up or returned to it, after being directed to move. (A police direction did not require a court order.  This was so draconian, and placed such stress on Travellers’ health, welfare and educational opportunities that many police forces have been sparing in the use of this power.) Local authorities and others had the option of obtaining a court order, which could also result in a criminal conviction, followed by prison, a substantial fine, and/or the seizing of living accommodation if not complied with. This power has been used so extensively, that families have suffered a constant cycle of evictions, with serious consequences for their well-being, access to health care, access to education, and opportunities for social inclusion. Many Travellers now find travelling impossible for these reasons.

Housing Act 2004

            Required local authorities to assess the accommodation needs of Gypsies and Travellers when drawing up their local plans.

The Housing and Planning Bill 2015/16

            Contains a clause (Section 5, clause 84) which removes the requirement for local authorities to carry out an accommodation needs assessment for Gypsies and Travellers.

Planning Policy for Traveller Sites 2015

Ø      Defines Gypsy or Traveller to exclude people who have settled permanently.

Ø      Makes planning permission for sites on Green Belt land almost impossible.  Exceptional needs such as disability, ill health or old age will no longer be considered to “outweigh the harm to the Green Belt”. The government acknowledge that this will particularly impact single women with children, whose opportunities for mobile occupations are much fewer than those of men, but chose to include this part of the policy regardless of the  vulnerable families who would be affected.

Ø      Local authorities are required to “strictly limit development in open countryside.”

Ø      Having stopped on land before seeking planning permission will count against applicants.

Impact (quoted from Johnson, Ruston and Willers, 2015)

from: http://travellerstimes.org.uk/Blogs--Features/Defining-Travellers-out-of-existence.aspxhttp://travellerstimes.org.uk/Blogs--Features/Defining-Travellers-out-of-existence.aspx

“Faced with relentless enforcement action taken against unauthorised encampments many Gypsies and Travellers will decide that it is no longer possible to continue travelling and will seek planning permission for a site. Yet in order to stand some chance of getting planning permission they will have to show that are still travelling! It’s a classic vicious circle of the Government’s own making!

“The position of those Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople who are too old or too ill to continue travelling is even more problematic. They will no longer fall within the planning definition of “gypsies and travellers” and “travelling showpeople” and will stand no real chance of obtaining planning permission for a caravan site despite the fact that they may be in greater need of a site than younger and more mobile members of their respective communities!

“We believe that these policy changes may be challengeable on grounds that they are discriminatory and violate the rights of Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople which are protected by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. We hope that those people most affected will take action to force the Government to reverse these policy changes and that this blog will encourage them to do so.”

Expressions of concern from the Traveller communities

Of most concern has been the issue of people’s ethnic identity being denied. 

“If I’m not a Gypsy, what am I?”

The future for younger members of the community appears especially problematic. If they have grown up on a settled site, it seems their ethnic identity will not be recognised, and they could be denied the right to even apply for planning permission for a site, or for a place on an existing site. “What’s going to happen?” said one young mother. “Are they going to tell us we aren’t Travellers any more, and bulldoze the site?”

Where authorities have accepted that they have a resident local population of ethnic Travellers, some quiet settled Traveller sites have been “tolerated”, rather than given planning permission. “I’ve been on a tolerated site for over thirty years now,” said one old age pensioner.  “We just don’t know what’s going to happen to us.”

Other Traveller sites have experienced a stressful series of time-limited planning permissions.  If the residents of these sites have made the effort to settle, and quietly pursued their local occupations, it seems they could be penalised by being re-defined as not-Travellers, and denied a renewal of their planning permission. “They’re trying to legislate us off the face of the earth,” said one such person.

Free me Lord, by Kelly Sarah Ltn

Free me lord 

For I feel so trapped 
Living in a house 
When I sooner be back 
Where the wild winds flow free 
Where the birds sing 
From Swaying trees 
Where nature is my only home outside the trailer 
That's where I belong .
I miss the open fields 
And the open skies
So blue 
I miss the earthy
Smells and the morning
Sweet dew 
And the chavvies smiles
Running about 
Not a care to be had
Those are the days 
I wish we still had 
Where mummy and me 
Would sit outside 
And could hear the waves 
Turning of the Crashing tides
Where family would meet 
And gather at night 
Sing many songs 
With star filled nights
Oh my father let this 
Be Our family 
Go back To the land and the free xxxx
Klee x

Travellers Tackle Prejudice

Did you realise that we've just passed the 30th anniversary of the Battle of the Beanfield?

Kushti Bok issued this press release today:

Travellers Tackle Prejudice

Thirty years on from the Battle of the Beanfield, Gypsies and Travellers still face huge levels of hostility and prejudice according to Kushti Bok, the Dorset charity that aims to provide a voice for Gypsies and Travellers.  On Tuesday, 2^nd June, Kushti Bok hosted an inter-agency meeting that pledged to address negative stereotypes and to work for improved community relationships.

“As a group of agencies working together, we can be much more effective,” explained Councillor Andrew Kerby of North Dorset District Council whose portfolio includes Gypsy and Traveller Liaison.

 “All of us need to be reminded of our duties under the Equalities Act, 2010,” said Kelly Haggett, Dorset County Council’s Officer for Equality and Diversity.“Not only do we have a legal duty to protect our Gypsy and Traveller communities, more importantly we have a moral duty, not only to protect but to celebrate the contribution of Gypsy and Traveller communities in Dorset.”

Those present and agreeing to a multi-agency approach to tackling prejudice and negative stereotypes included (left to right)

Daniel Biggs, of Borough of Poole

Nathalie Sherring of Dorset Race Equality Council

Councillor Andrew Kerby of North Dorset District Council

Kelly Haggett of Dorset County Council and the Dorset Forum for Equality and Diversity

Revd Roger Redding of the Diocesan Support Group for the Gypsy and Traveller Chaplain

Betty Smith-Billington of GTR Media

Emma Scott of West Dorset District Council and the South West Multi-Cultural Network

Councillor Pauline Batstone of Dorset County Council and North Dorset District Council, also a member of the Chaplain’s Support Group

Kim Creswell of Kushti Bok

The photographer was Jenny Galuschka of Kushti Bok.

                                                ENDS

Note to editors:

Ø      The so-called “Battle of the Beanfield took place over several hours on 1^st June 1985, and was covered by journalists who were utterly shocked by the level of violence displayed by the Police.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHyDaAXw8Ck

Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma: Annual Report 2014 - 2015

Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers and Roma

Annual Report for March 2014 – May 2015

Introduction

The past year has seen some very positive changes, such as the very much appreciated opportunity to hold meetings in Church House, and the very valuable participation of Dr Elizabeth Henry of CMEAC and of Gary and Olby Brazil of the South East Romany Museum.

There have also been very welcome links with organisations who are effective and friendly allies in fighting injustice and promoting positive messages about the Gypsy Roma and Traveller communities.

Our own progress has included

Ø      opening a bank account

Ø      making a beginning on a business plan

Ø      agreeing a constitution

Ø      making representations in response to the consultation on Traveller sites policy

Ø      establishing a facebook group which now has 26 members, most of whom were previously not in contact with CNGTR.

Constitution

The constitution sets out the aims and management of the Network, and who is eligible to join. This probably needs regular review to ensure that it is sufficiently clear about objectives and enables us to approach possible funders.

Links with allied organisations

The Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Police Association held its inaugural AGM on 27^th March, 2014, and was welcomed by the Network on 31^st March. 

The Brazil family of the South East Romany Museum expressed their willingness to host a re-launch event for the Network, and this is still under consideration at the time of writing.  This contact led to further involvement with Kent Romanies Moses Smith, Pashey Smith, Gary, Esther and Olby Brazil, and their friend Miranda Thompson, who have since attended some meetings, and sought our help in establishing a non-exclusive non-sectarian Christian fellowship. This challenge has been taken up by Wesley and Clare Sargent of the Congregational Church, who feel led to proceed on the basis of growing relationships rather than structures.

The All-Party Parliamentary Group for Gypsies, Roma and Travellers  alerted us to the consultation document from the Department for Communities and Local Government, which proposed, in the words of the  APPG chairman to “re-define Travellers out of existence”.  In response to this, The Community Law Partnership published a discussion document and hosted an event in Birmingham to draw together ideas for responses.  This was attended by the Co-ordinator, and led to a response from the Network which now appears on the Community Law Partnership’s web site. (http://www.communitylawpartnership.co.uk/noticeboard/campaigns-and-consultations)

The Travellers Aid Trust held two national meetings which discussed this among other issues facing the GRT communities, and these were attended by the Chairman and the Co-ordinator, with Roger giving a presentation at the second.

The London Gypsy Traveller Unit  responded with an excellent video and with a postcard response campaign, “weSTILLcount”, which we supported by posting on facebook and distributing postcards.

The Irish Traveller Movement Launched “Operation Traveller Vote” to encourage Travellers to register to vote, and to use their vote.  This led to many people expressing the need to have the different parties explained to them, and members may feel that the empowerment and enabling of an informed voice and vote for all Roma and Travellers is something that the Network could support in future.

In the event, Eric Pickles’ proposed guidelines were blocked by David Laws, who has since lost his seat, so the future is uncertain.

Membership

The network had an e-mailing list of 63 members as at March last year, and this now stands at 56.  The leavers have said that they are no longer involved with Gypsy Traveller and Roma issues, or that they are too busy to participate in the Network.  Two of the e-mail addresses are not functional, and three are new contacts, one from the Evangelical Alliance, one from a pastor working with Roma, and one from an Anglican in the Exeter Diocese.

The facebook page has a membership of 26, of whom only two are on the e-mailing list.

We need to increase the size and representativeness of the active membership.

Bank account

The bank account was opened with £25 donated at a meeting, and augmented by an individual gift of £100 since then.  £30 is due to come out of that to pay for a Rail Card for the Co-ordinator.

Conclusion

The coming years will be very challenging for all  minority ethnic groups, as Human Rights legislation is potentially reduced, and the growth in number of Traveller sites probably further slowed.  It is foreseeable that both of these will be accompanied by public rhetoric tending to xenophobia. As an organisation whose active membership is very small, the Network needs to plan its aims and strategy carefully in order to be effective.

#weSTILLcount

#weSTILLcount is the name the London Gypsy and Traveller Unit has given to its postcard campaign opposing the Government's proposals for planning policy guidance about Traveller sites.  If you would like a quick and easy way to give a useful response, do contact them.  They are very good at sending out postcards which people can just fill in with their name address and signature and then post off. E-mail is:
lgtuplanning@yahoo.co.uk

An organisation that I belong to, the Churches Network for Gypsies, Travellers
 and Roma has prepared a more detailed response.  Here it is in full.

Response to Consultation: planning and travellers

Please note that this response will need to be read in conjunction with the Consultation paper at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/355840/current_con_doc_in_publication_format_140917.pdf

Q1 – Do you agree that the planning definition of travellers should be amended to remove the words or permanently to limit it to those who have a nomadic habit of life? If not, why not?

No.

It is no use talking about planning permission for people who are travelling (“have a nomadic habit of life”) if it is impossible to travel.

It is at present so difficult to follow a nomadic way of life that most Gypsies and Travellers are unable to do so.  There are no stopping places, few transit sites, no emergency sites and families on the roadside face constant eviction.

(See, for example, Hargreaves and Brindley, 2011, “Planning for Gypsies and Travellers: The Impact of Localism”, Irish Traveller Movement). Families have therefore been forced into housing because here aren’t enough sites.  Those who are on sites cannot easily travel due to the risk of losing their pitch. Nevertheless, the vast majority of people who call themselves Gypsies or Travellers are referring to an ethnic identity which is very meaningful to them, and looking forward to the possibility that their children will be able to live a way of life that respects their caravan-dwelling culture. One impact of this proposed change will be that families will have to move onto unauthorised encampments so that they are counted as needing a pitch. 

This will increase the social exclusion which has been demonstrated by many studies of health and educational standards.

Cemlyn at al. reported in 2009 that:

“Niner (2004a) found that in the absence of culturally-specific accommodation

(predominantly residential Gypsy and Traveller sites), the shortfall in accommodation is met by unauthorised encampments which often fail to provide even remotely adequate living standards for Gypsies and Travellers, and which perpetuate social exclusion through a lack of access to education and health care. In an influential report from the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), Crawley (2004) emphasised the appalling inequalities experienced by Gypsies and Travellers in relation to health and education, and called for the development of a high-level unit, advised by a Traveller Task Force, to oversee the delivery of adequate sites (specifically through local development frameworks) within the new planning regime which was coming into force at that time.”

(Cemlyn, S. et al., 2009, Inequalities experienced by Gypsy and Traveller communities: a review, University of Bristol, Buckinghamshire New University, Friends, Families and Travellers

That the situation has not improved is demonstrated by recent reports:

·         Ryder, Cemlyn and Acton, 2014, Hearing the Voices of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Communities: Inclusive Community Development, Bristol: Policy Press

·         Lane, Spencer and Jones, , 2014, Gypsy, Traveller and Roma: Experts by Experience, Anglia Ruskin University and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation

·         British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly, 2014, Travellers, Gypsies and Roma: access to public services and community relations

·         Ryder and Cemlyn, 2014,Civil Society Monitoring: on the Implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategies Decade of Roma Inclusion Secretariat Foundation,

To quote the National Federation of Gypsy Liaison Groups, “The NFGLG found that mainstream polices in the areas of discrimination, accommodation, education, employment and health have consistently failed Gypsies and Travellers in the past and are continuing to fail these communities today”. 

Ryder and Cemlyn moreover identified a worsening of the situation as a result of policies being implemented by the coalition government which increase the likelihood of exclusion.

The proposed change will make it even less likely that the historic undersupply of sites which is mentioned in paragraph 1.1. of your Introduction will be successfully addressed.

Another impact will be that a planning system which is already heavily biased against Gypsies and Travellers will become even more unjust.  The 2009 report explained that: “Over 90 per cent of planning applications for private (usually self- or family-owned) Gypsy sites are refused at first hearing, often following orchestrated campaigns by aggrieved (sedentary) local residents, though permission is overwhelmingly granted on appeal

(CRE, 2006a; Williams, 1999).” The figure of 90 per cent is supported by recent research carried out by the National Federation of Gypsy Liaison Groups.

Applying a definition that depends on nomadic lifestyle can and does lead to the ridiculous situation that a parent may qualify but, if their planning application is successful, their children will not. ( Traveller Movement, 2014, “A Place to Call Home” : Case study, page 12) This will mean that Gypsy and Traveller children will have no future as Gypsies and Travellers. As both caravan dwelling and communal living within strong extended family bonds are both integral to Gypsy and Traveller culture, this is discriminatory.

Q2 – Are there any additional measures which would support those travellers who maintain a nomadic habit of life to have their needs met? If so, what are they?

Yes.

Provide sufficient secure stopping-places.

An Independent Task Group set up by the Department for Communities and Local Government, and reporting in 2007 concluded that:

“real improvements cannot be made while the provision of authorised sites remains woefully inadequate for the needs of Gypsies and Travellers.”

This remains the case, and there has been some incentive for local authorities to respond.  The proposals in this proposed Planning Policy Guidance remove what few incentives there were, and fail to propose monitoring of local authorities’ provision for Gypsies and Travellers to ensure that those limited duties that do remain are fulfilled.

Some local planning authorities, such as for example those in Essex, have begun to put into their local development plans forward planning for Gypsy and caravan site provision.  It is important not to curtail these positive developments.

We urge the Government to reconsider its proposals, which will significantly worsen an already very difficult and stressful environment for both Gypsies and Travellers and Local Authorities who seek to fulfil their public sector equality duty under S149 of the Equality Act 2010 as well as upholding and enforcing planning policy.

Relevant to the current duty to foster good relations, the Independent Task Group pointed to the myths and misinformation that fuel local opposition to the provision of sites:
“The most significant stumbling block is opposition from members of the settled community, fuelled by negative perceptions of living near to a Gypsy and Traveller site.

“A key challenge, then, must be to address those fears. This may be a difficult task, but it is not a hopeless one. Work undertaken by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation on the experience of neighbours of three newly established Gypsy and Traveller sites showed that, a year after the development had been completed, members of the settled community said that most of their concerns had been entirely groundless. These are the stories that need to be told, and developers – whether local authorities, Registered Social Landlords or Gypsies and Travellers themselves – must be ready to tell them.”

Relevant to the upholding and enforcement of planning policy the ITG wrote:

“At the heart of the issue lies the  provision of adequate, decent quality

accommodation to meet the needs of Gypsies and Travellers. During the lifespan  of the Task Group, we met with several local authorities with differing policies on enforcement. It became obvious that  those authorities that had already made progress on site provision had better results than those that resorted only to enforcement action. To take perhaps the clearest example, Bristol City Council saw enforcement costs fall from around £200,000 to less than £5,000 per year following the provision of a transit site costing £450,000. With the Commission for Race Equality citing estimates of around £18m spent on enforcement action every year, new sites in many areas will effectively pay for themselves in the short to medium term.

“Conversely, even the most effective enforcement team will only be able to apply a sticking plaster to a gaping wound if site provision is inadequate.”

Q3 – Do you consider that
a) we should amend the 2006 regulations to bring the definition of “gypsies and travellers” into line with the proposed definition of “travellers” for planning purposes, and

 b) we should also amend primary legislation to ensure that those who have given up travelling permanently have their needs assessed? If not, why not?

a) No

We believe that to change the definition would be to abandon the principle that local authorities should carry out their functions in a way that serves everyone in their area, since it will prevent them from considering the needs of ethnic Travellers who live in bricks and mortar, however unwillingly.

Furthermore, taken together with the proposed change to planning policy guidance, this in our view amounts to the planned destruction of a culture, and the forced assimilation of ethnic minority groups. Therefore the Government would then be in contravention of Article 5 of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, which states:

1. The Parties undertake to promote the conditions necessary for persons belonging to national minorities to maintain and develop their culture, and to preserve the essential elements of their identity, namely their religion, language, traditions and cultural heritage.

2. Without prejudice to measures taken in pursuance of their general integration policy, the Parties shall refrain from policies or practices aimed at assimilation of persons belonging to national minorities against their will and shall protect these persons from any action aimed at such assimilation.

Additionally, this proposal could also be in breach of article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states:
“In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language.”

b) No

No meaningful assessment of need could possibly take place in a context where, by refusing to acknowledge people’s ethnicity, the Government prevented needs from being met.

Gypsy and Traveller communities have stressed to us the high importance that they place on being able to live in closely-knit communities in caravans or mobile homes.  One family, for example, told us that when they first moved into a house, their father predicted that it would kill him, and, in their words, “It did.”  In no circumstances will this family ever agree to live in a house again.

Q4 – Do you agree that Planning Policy for Traveller Sites be amended to reflect the provisions in the National Planning Policy Framework that provide protection to these sensitive sites? If not, why not?

No

Some of the designations mentioned already have sufficiently strong protection.

It is inequitable that developers should be allowed to build huge new developments on the Green Belt (5,600 dwellings approved last year, according to Glenigan Construction Insight) while the small-scale and low impact sites proposed by individual Gypsy families are specially targeted in this planning policy guidance. This is discriminatory.

It is noted that the lack of a 5 year planned supply of sites/pitches is currently one of the most significant material considerations for approval of sites in the Green Belt. If sufficient sites were provided, the problem would not arise. Removing this policy without  first ensuring that need is met by supply will worsen homelessness among Travellers, which is already disproportionately higher than that of non-Travellers.

Q5 – Do you agree that paragraph 23 of Planning Policy for Traveller Sites should be amended to “local authorities should very strictly limit new traveller sites in the open countryside”? If not, why not?

No

A site in the countryside may be the only land that is both available and affordable for most Travellers, and such a setting is also consistent with their tradition and culture. 

Q6 – Do you agree that the absence of an up-to-date five year supply of deliverable sites should be removed from Planning Policy for Traveller Sites as a significant material consideration in the grant of temporary permission for traveller sites in the areas mentioned above? If not, why not?

No

Everyone needs to live somewhere, and if local authorities are not providing sufficient sites, Gypsy and Traveller families are left with little choice if they seek to educate their children and care for those with health and social care needs.

Q7 – Do you agree with the policy proposal that, subject to the best interests of the child, unmet need and personal circumstances are unlikely to outweigh harm to the Green Belt and any other harm so as to establish very special circumstances? If not, why not?

No.

The statement about the best interests of the child  at 3.11 is unhelpful, since it could be taken to imply the forced removal of children from their parents and family.

If the best interests of children were to be fully considered, policy should encourage the approval of small-scale family sites, in order that there might be more security for Gypsy and Traveller Families, and any children needing foster parents able to care for them and adequately respect their ethnicity might be found placements within the Gypsy and Traveller community.

We would further point out that, when a Traveller site is established on a derelict site within the Green Belt, there may be a planning gain as opposed to harm to the Green Belt. Roman Road, Mountnessing on the site of a previous eyesore dump is an example.

Q8 – Do you agree that intentional unauthorised occupation should be regarded by decision takers as a material consideration that weighs against the grant of permission? If not, why not?

No

This proposed planning policy guidance would create a situation in which a family could under no circumstances remain within the law and also plan to provide their own site.  In order to qualify for planning permission for a Traveller site, they would need to be nomadic, which would make any employment insecure, and would militate against the education, health and well-being of their children, as well as leading to unauthorised encampments and constant evictions.  If the family nevertheless managed to save sufficient funds to purchase their own land and settled on it, in order to meet their basic survival needs, as well as following their traditional way of life, they would become ineligible for planning permission.  This is a perverse situation.

It should also be noted that “unauthorised” does not mean “illegal.”  If it is open to the settled population to apply for retrospective planning permission or a certificate of lawful use, this opportunity should also be available to Travellers.

Q9 – Do you agree that unauthorised occupation causes harm to the planning system and community relations? If not, why not?

No.

It is a symptom of the planning system’s failure to meet Travellers’ needs.  As described in the response to question 2, it is poor community relations that lead to unauthorised occupation, not the other way round.

Q10 – Do you have evidence of the impact of harm caused by intentional

unauthorised occupation? (And if so, could you submit them with your response.)

No

On the contrary, we are aware of a number of peaceful occupations which, although unauthorised, have led to acceptance and support by the local community, and enabled Traveller children to settle and flourish in school.

Q11 – Would amending Planning Policy for Traveller Sites in line with the proposal set out in paragraph 4.16 above help that small number of local authorities in these exceptional circumstances? If not, why not? What other measures can Government take to help local authorities in this situation?

This proposal does not cite any evidence, and would create a perverse incentive to local authorities to argue that their case was exceptional, and they should therefore be able to evade their responsibilities.  We consider that adequate enforcement powers already exist.

Q12 – Are there any other points that you wish to make in response to this consultation, in particular to inform the Government’s consideration of the potential impacts that the proposals in this paper may have on either the traveller community or the settled community?

This proposed policy change would have adverse impacts on disabled and chronically ill people, older people, single women who are carers  and children, particularly children with disabilities. It would also impact disproportionately on women, who are less likely to be able to engage in employment suited to a nomadic lifestyle.

Even more families will be pushed into housing and denied their ethnic culture and way of life.

For the Gypsy and Traveller communities the impact will be that they will need to move onto unauthorised encampments in order to be counted as needing a pitch.  This is likely to have an adverse effect on community relations.  In times when community relations are poor – or poorer than usual – large encampments become more likely, in order to provide protection from perceived external threats. This is likely to further escalate tensions.

For the settled community, the housing crisis will become even more acute, as the settled community seeks to accommodate in bricks and mortar a group of people for whom it is a punishment, rather than a dream, as well as those families who genuinely want to be housed.

Furthermore, we believe this proposed guidance undermines the Government’s own Localism policy, by restricting the discretion of local planning authorities to use local knowledge in creating practical solutions.

Q13 – Do you have any comments on the draft planning guidance for travellers (see Annex A)?

It is our view that the guidance will not to address the historic and severe under-provision of Traveller sites, but will make a difficult situation worse.

The way in which the questions in this consultation have been framed indicates to us a denial of the human rights of Travellers.