| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
2.20 am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. Nick Raynsford): I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Mr. Pickthall) on securing this debate on unauthorised camping. At the same time, I commiserate with him about the fact that we are having this debate at such a late hour. The issue that he has raised is of major concern in his constituency, particularly to the business premises in Skelmersdale to which he referred.
We do not underestimate what an appalling nuisance such encampments can be and the real costs that can be incurred both by local authorities and businesses in trying to cope with the kind of behaviour that my hon. Friend described graphically to the House. I hope that my hon. Friend and his constituents will be reassured that the Government take this issue very seriously and that we are determined to ensure that local authorities and the police have effective, joint policies in place to deal with the problems created by unauthorised camping by people who behave in a disgraceful and anti-social manner.
It is precisely because of concern expressed by local authorities about how they deal with encampments that my Department, working with the Home Office, produced joint good practice guidance for local authorities and the police to manage unauthorised camping. The good practice--to which my hon. Friend kindly referred--is based largely on research carried out for my Department by the university of Birmingham. It draws on the real and often hard-won experience of local authorities and police forces in managing such issues.
We published the good practice in October last year, after consulting a wide range of interested groups. The good practice has been welcomed as a positive and innovative step in managing what can be a highly emotive issue locally. I hope that my hon. Friend recognises that, in several parts of the country, there is clear evidence that implementation of the good practice guidance is resulting in more successful policies and practices on the ground to deal with the problems as they arise.
My hon. Friend the Minister of State, Home Office is hosting a series of regional seminars for local authorities and the police aimed at promoting better joint working between those agencies in managing unauthorised camping, particularly when criminal or anti-social behaviour is associated with the encampment. Three such seminars have already been held and, as a speaker at the most recent one in Great Yarmouth, I can vouch for the fact that they have been both well attended and well received. I understand that my hon. Friend hopes to hold a seminar in the north-west in the autumn and I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister of State will be able to attend, if it is convenient.
My hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire considers that local authorities need stronger powers to deal with unauthorised camping. I understand that, at present, West Lancashire district council does not use the powers available to local authorities in sections 77 to 79 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 to deal with unauthorised camping. The council uses instead civil powers under order 113 of the High Court when dealing with encampments on its land that it believes cannot be tolerated. Civil powers cannot, of course, be used by the council to evict campers from land not in its ownership.
The police also have powers--to which my hon. Friend referred--under section 61 of the 1994 Act to remove people who are trespassing with the intent to take up residence and have been asked to leave by the landowner. The Home Office has policy responsibility for those powers, and Home Office Ministers have made it clear, both when speaking at the recent regional seminars and in writing, that section 61 should be used at an early stage if necessary when the statutory conditions are met.
I stress that point because my hon. Friend expressed concern that the powers were not necessarily used at an early stage. That is not a reflection of any policy guidance
from Ministers. My colleagues in the Home Office have made it quite clear that those powers should be used at an early stage where appropriate. They take the view that those powers should be used particularly when there are problems of crime, disorder or disruption to the life of the community. It is also vital that the police work in partnership with other local agencies to ensure that the problems caused by unauthorised encampments are dealt with effectively. Operational guidelines issued by the Association of Chief Police Officers of England, Wales and Northern Ireland have recently been reviewed and strengthened to take account of those views. The revised guidance should lead to greater consistency in the approach adopted by police forces in different parts of the country.
We have considered carefully whether we should amend the existing local authority powers in the 1994 Act, but have concluded that that is not the right way forward. There are no obvious, easy solutions to unauthorised camping, and no short cuts. If there were, they would have been found long before now. Recent case law has confirmed that local authorities must balance the nuisance being caused by an encampment against the needs of the campers. Neither the circular, nor the guidance that we have issued, states that local authorities must have regard to those considerations. The decisions were made by the courts and would stand even if we revised the guidance. Local authorities that do not adopt such an approach are likely to find their actions challenged successfully in the courts. That would create even more difficulty for them.
Strengthening the powers could be counter-productive, in that it might make it more difficult for local authorities to prove to the courts that they were acting reasonably when seeking eviction. To make unauthorised camping a criminal offence in itself would also be contrary to our view that people should, in an inclusive society, be free to adopt a travelling life style if they so want. The right to adopt such a life style does, of course, bring with it responsibilities towards the settled community; we are very aware that on some occasions, for example when travellers choose patently unsuitable sites such as public car parks, local authorities will feel justified in seeking eviction.
My hon. Friend referred to toleration. The concept of toleration has caused some controversy; it has wrongly been interpreted as meaning that the Government want local authorities to tolerate the anti-social or criminal behaviour that can accompany some unauthorised encampments. I want to make it clear to the House and to my hon. Friend that that is emphatically not what we mean by toleration; nor is toleration something that we invented for our good practice guidance.
For many years, Government advice to local authorities has advocated that gypsies who are camped on council land, and who are not causing a nuisance, should be tolerated wherever possible; the provision of basic facilities such as skips, drinking water and toilets can obviously minimise nuisance. On the other hand, forced eviction can result in campers moving to a more unsuitable site. That is especially true in those areas where there is no authorised site provision, and thus nowhere that gypsies can camp with permission. I understand that that is true at present in the West Lancashire district.
Our good practice guidance simply reflects what has been found to make good sense, through a detailed examination of the way in which local authorities deal with unauthorised camping. Toleration can be a pragmatic option for dealing with a short-term encampment, especially where the level of nuisance is low, or non-existent. I accept that the circumstances described by my hon. Friend are clearly not ones in which toleration would be appropriate. If there is anti-social or criminal behaviour, it is inconceivable that that should be tolerated.
Gypsies and travellers who indulge in anti-social or criminal behaviour--for example those who remove barriers to gain access to a site--are not above the law. They are subject to exactly the same penalties as anyone in the settled community. The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 requires local authorities and the police to develop local crime and disorder reduction partnerships, and to work together to reduce particular problems of crime and disorder in their area. If anti-social or criminal behaviour associated with unauthorised encampments has been identified, we would expect local crime and disorder reduction strategies to encompass measures to deal with it.
The Government are most concerned about anti-social behaviour generally and have included a number of new measures in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 aimed at tackling it wherever it occurs. Anti-social behaviour orders are now available to be used against any individual who persists in anti-social behaviour that causes harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not in the same household. It is for the police and local authorities, working in partnership to reduce crime and disorder as required by the 1998 Act, to decide whether the use of anti-social behaviour orders would be appropriate in any particular circumstance, including on unauthorised encampments.
Regular liaison between the police and local authorities on managing unauthorised camping, and the development of joint protocols clearly setting out respective roles and responsibilities, are important messages in our joint good practice guidance. The police are key stakeholders in any local strategy for managing unauthorised camping, because of their role in the prevention and detection of crime and in maintaining public order. Therefore, it is vital that local authorities and the police each have a clear idea of the other's roles and responsibilities and that they work together to find a solution that suits the circumstances of each encampment. That avoids the potential for confusion, frustration and delay, which cause immense irritation to local residents, who can feel that nothing is being done.
In many areas, local authorities and police forces are already working well together on this difficult issue, enabling them to respond swiftly to incidents of unauthorised camping where there is nuisance or anti-social and criminal behaviour. A recent example is an encampment in south Norfolk, which was causing a nuisance to the local community and which was evicted quickly by the police and the local authority working in partnership, throughout the process. I urge those authorities that have not yet embraced the principle of joint working and the development of protocols to do so quickly.
I understand that, in West Lancashire, a meeting has recently taken place between the local authority, the police and local business representatives in Skelmersdale to try to thrash out a workable solution to handling the
encampments; and that, as a result of that meeting, the local authority and the police have resolved to work more closely together on the issue. That can only be good news, and I am sure that the business community will appreciate the opportunity to participate in constructive discussions about the way forward on an issue of great concern.
Eviction of a large number of travellers inevitably raises the question of where they will go when they are evicted. I have considerable sympathy with local authorities that are faced with such large encampments, which can cause awful problems for local businesses and residents. It would clearly be unrealistic to expect local authorities to be able to offer suitable authorised accommodation to so many people on a long-term basis, although we encourage local authorities in our joint good practice to be receptive to the idea of providing sites in appropriate circumstances. Those may be temporary or permanent, depending upon the accommodation needs of those travellers who visit the area regularly. One of the key messages of the good practice guidance is that local authorities should get to know the travelling patterns in their area and develop policies accordingly. Such sites will usually be on council land where that is feasible and
in accordance with local needs. As I said earlier, site provision should be part and parcel of a local authority's overall strategy for managing unauthorised camping.
I appreciate that the provision of sites for travellers is a difficult issue for local authorities to deal with, and that it requires a tremendous level of local political will to get proposals agreed. However, it can often be a more cost-effective option for local authorities than a constant round of evictions and clear-up costs.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |