| Anti-social Behaviour Bill
|
|
Matthew Green: We can sense some of the hon. Gentleman's frustration. I want to discuss the ''misuse'' of land, because the use of land is a planning term. Deliberately misusing it could be interpreted as deliberately not obeying the planning rules that pertain to it. That is my interpretation. There are a vast number of situations, not just those to which the hon. Gentleman alluded, in which people might deliberately not follow the planning use that has been laid down. Does the hon. Gentleman realise the implication of the proposal, in that people would face eviction and, possibly, imprisonment? Column Number: 426 Mr. Hawkins: I understand entirely the hon. Gentleman's point, but he will understand that the chief executives of local authorities will not use the powers in a draconian or silly way. Although one tries to ensure that the law has a sense of proportion, he will understand why there must be a measure to give the chief executive of a local authority the power to deal with a situation such as that in my constituency, otherwise how can it be dealt with? We cannot have a situation in which local residents have to put up with these problems for months because the courts will not use the current law and it will take the council a long time to take out and enforce compulsory purchase orders. The travellers will simply sit there, ignoring all the laws for as long as they can, as they do when they trespass. They wait until the last minute and move on only when the local council arrives with a massive police back up. We must give the chief executive of the local authority power to deal with the kind of flagrant abuse that there is in my constituency, and then rely on their good sense and judgment not to misuse that power when it is not appropriate. As my hon. Friend the Member for South-East Cambridgeshire said, the Bill is the appropriate vehicle for giving them such a power. No behaviour is more antisocial than the problems caused by travellers; it is about the worst thing that can happen to any community when travellers descend like a plague of locusts. I know that Labour members of the Committee have faced similar problems in their constituencies because it has been such a big problem in my constituency that I have had lots of cross-party conversations. I am talking about an extension of the usual problem of trespassers. The previous Conservative Government introduced tough laws, which have frequently been effective—albeit at the last minute when the police back up arrives—to deal with trespassers. The law is there and can be enforced. If something similar to the new clauses is not in the Bill, we shall not be able to deal with the new variant of the problem. If a loophole in the law exists, travellers will get through it. I hope that the Minister understands the importance of the problem. I have received more letters about the travellers on Pennypot lane than about the war on Iraq, not just from people in the village of Chobham, but from neighbouring villages too. I know that the same sort of thing is happening in other constituencies. The problem is growing and I hope that the Minister recognises that it must be dealt with. It should be dealt with in the Bill because that provides the opportunity to deal with antisocial behaviour. I hope that the Government will table their own similar clause if new clause 11 is not perfectly worded. Ms Dari Taylor (Stockton, South): I have tremendous sympathy for what has been said in relation to new clauses 5 and 11. The way in which they have been introduced by the hon. Members for South-East Cambridgeshire and for Surrey Heath has been to the point and valuable. I shall be interested to hear how the Minister responds to them. I see both Column Number: 427 new clauses defining a clear power to prevent unauthorised parking or camping.There is a serious problem in Thornaby in my constituency. Travellers come at least twice, sometimes three times, a year. They move on to any small, green spaces and cause an enormous nuisance. Those spaces, which are in a tight urban setting, are left in the most disgusting condition. I am not referring just to human waste, but to wheel ruts in the grass where children often have been playing football. They can no longer play there, as the grass and the land must be sorted out. The noise of not only humans, but of generators is also a problem. They make a formidable sound when they are next to one's garden fence. One has to hear it to believe it. Travellers are, on the whole, unprepared to be persuaded to move elsewhere. In my constituency, we have a travellers' park, but they will not use the site. They want to park wherever they feel it is convenient for them. I, therefore, have tremendous sympathy with both the proposed new clauses. The police and the local authority in my constituency are proactive and will use their muscle, as well as their personal commitment, to move people on. Even then, it takes two or three days to move them. I know elderly people who are virtually demented about the problem. They sit up all night Column Number: 428 because they are so frightened of these people, and it is true that crime rises considerably while they are around.The proposed new clauses are about despoiling and misusing land. I am not saying that the travellers have a way of life that we want to reduce in any way, but nor do we want them to reduce the quality of life of our constituents. I hope that the Minister takes the proposed new clauses on board and supports them. I am anxious to hear his response. Mr. Randall: I think that I may be interrupted during my speech, but never mind. I understand the frustration of my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath. In my dealings with the hon. Member for Stockton, South (Ms Taylor), she has always been professional and reasonable, so I am fortunate. Like everybody else, most of my constituents get fed up hearing excuses. My local authority and the police division in Hillingdon have, over the past year or so, been active. They have successfully reduced the incidence of antisocial behaviour, but unfortunately it is still going on. It being twenty-five minutes past Eleven o'clock, The Chairman adjourned the Committee without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order. Adjourned till this day at half-past Two o'clock.
The following Members attended the Committee:
|
| |
| Prepared 22 May 2003 | |
