Select Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Minutes of Evidence


Memorandum by Liverpool City Council (TF 41)

  I am writing further to your letter of 10 February in respect of Travelling Funfairs and have appended below information in respect of and in the same order as the five points raised in the Press Notice.

1.  THE CONTINUED VALUE OF HISTORIC TRAVELLING FUNFAIRS;

  Liverpool City Council hosts 12 travelling funfairs each year and that number if likely to rise next year.

  Funfairs remain a popular attraction in the City whether they are sited in the City Centre or in parks. Funfairs in the main "stand alone" but on a number of occasions are used to enhance major events including the annual Fireworks Displays on 5 November.

  Visits by the funfairs are in the main of four days duration the reason for this is to keep disruption to local residents to a minimum.

  The funfairs are of varying size and the income derived is part of the Directorate's budgeted income that supports the annual sports and cultural events programme.

  A large funfair with big rides such as a big wheel and or a roller coaster does require longer visits due to the cost and effort required in building the ride.

  In the main the funfairs attract a family attendance although in some areas of the city in the hours after dark young people are the main users of the funfairs.

2.  THE PROVISION OF SITES FOR TRAVELLING FUNFAIRS;

  Liverpool has traditionally based funfairs in parks but in recent years there has been a demand for funfairs in the city centre and these take place on hard standing.

  A number of new sites have been identified in recent years and it is these sites which have created local difficulties. In one or two instances local residents have complained and have had Council decisions overturned to prevent funfairs being sited in parks near their homes.

  In terms of volumes of complaints there were in 1999 some five letters of complaint and approximately eight telephone complaints received in respect of the funfairs.

  Sites are chosen which are distant from houses but it is becoming increasingly difficult as public open space is disposed of to find appropriate sites.

  The legal agreement between the City Council and the funfair proprietor ensures that the cost of any reinstatement to land that may be needed as a result of the visit of a funfair may be claimed from the funfair proprietor.

3.  THE PARTICULAR NEEDS OF TRAVELLING SHOW PEOPLE;

  The site should have an adequate water supply. Temporary barrier fencing for funfairs has been introduced to great effect in the City and has resulted in very little incidence of disorder. There are primarily two funfair proprietors who operate in the City and the number of incidents in terms of public behaviour and safety issues are few.

4.  THE EFFECTIVENESS OF EXISTING PLANNING GUIDANCE ON THE PROVISION OF QUARTERS FOR TRAVELLING SHOW PEOPLE;

  On all sites in Liverpool the living quarters of travelling show people are situated in close proximity to the funfair.

  I am in this instance drawing a distinction between travelling show people and travellers in general.

5.  IS ANY ACTION NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT APPROPRIATE REGARD IS HAD TO THE NEEDS OF TRAVELLING SHOW PEOPLE WITHIN THE PLANNING SYSTEM?

  I am not aware of any special needs within the planning system with regard to the needs of travelling show people.

  The evidence is that in our view the living quarters of show people concerned with up to 50 rides and 20 stalls may be accommodated without special provision being made.

  I trust this information is useful, the only other point I would wish to add is that the Health and Safety Executive and the emergency services particularly Merseyside Police are informed of the funfair programme and are involved in the planning process.

Judith Feather
Events Manager


 
previous page contents

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries

© Parliamentary copyright 2000
Prepared 2 March 2000