Examination of Witnesses (Questions 360
- 379)
UESDAY 13 JULY 2004
RT HON
KEITH HILL
MP, MS DAWN
EASTMEAD AND
MR JOHN
STAMBOLLOUIAN
Q360 Chris Mole: Is it a silo by
any chance?
Keith Hill: It is a silo issue.
Yes, I suppose it is a silo issue but at least we passed it over
the Home Office.
Q361 Mr Betts: So your officials
have not had subsequent discussions then?
Keith Hill: Officials in OPDM
did indeed meet with ACPO as part of the overall review process.
Q362 Mr Betts: Has there been a specific
response to ACPO on this issue that you met them about?
Keith Hill: No, there has not.
Q363 Mr Betts: Will there be?
Keith Hill: I do not think so.
Q364 Mr Betts: From anybody?
Keith Hill: I would expect the
response to come from the Home Office.
Q365 Mr Cummings: What role do you
see for housing associations in the development of private sites?
Keith Hill: As you know, Mr Cummings,
housing associations already have powers to manage the sites but
we do intend to confer a new power on RSLs to build Gypsy and
Traveller sites.
Q366 Mr Cummings: Will you be encouraging
housing associations to take a more active role?
Keith Hill: I think that the Act
of conferring a new power—which, by the way, will be by
order, will be in itself an encouragement for RSLs to explore
that possibility.
Q367 Mr Cummings: Can you tell the
Committee what progress has been made on Yvette Cooper's suggestion
that Registered Social Landlords be permitted to provide and manage
sites with consequential access to housing corporation funds?
Keith Hill: If RSLs do have the
power to build sites conferred upon them then that would be a
legitimate call on housing corporation funding.
Q368 Mr Cummings: Do you think that
group housing, as pioneered in Ireland, should be piloted in England?
Keith Hill: On this occasion I
am going to pass you on to Dawn Eastmead because officials from
ODPM have recently visited Ireland and I think they found it to
be in very many respects an extremely enlightening experience
in fact. I was going to offer, if I may, to let the Committee
have a note which summarises some of the observations made by
my officials in the course of that visit, but on the specific
issue of group housing let me turn you over to Dawn.
Ms Eastmead: We visited a number
of different sorts of Gypsy and Traveller accommodation on our
trip to Ireland and group housing was one of the sorts of accommodation
that we saw. I think we would need to caveat this by saying that
the Irish are fairly far down the line in their thinking on Gypsies
and Travellers and have been working with Gypsies and Travellers
very closely on accommodation needs for some years. Their task
force report was launched in 1995 and the provision of group homes
has been an evolutionary process and I think the types of accommodation
provided in the 1990s tended to be towards permanent sites
and Gypsies and Travellers—like people in the settled community—have
different expectations now than they had maybe 10 years ago for
the sorts of accommodation that they would like. Certainly the
group housing that saw was really, really nice. It was a very
good standard of accommodation. It basically allowed for an extended
family to live together in a cul-de-sac. The accommodation was
provided very much in consultation with Gypsies and Travellers.
There was no feeling that Gypsies and Travellers were actually
being forced into this sort of accommodation. We spoke to a number
of Gypsies and Travellers who were living in the group homes,
who were living on permanent sites and who had expressed a preference
to move now into group houses and to Gypsies and Travellers living
on tolerated sites who were waiting for the group houses to be
built for them. The message that came across very clearly to us
was that this is an appropriate accommodation provision providing
it is what Gypsies and Travellers want. There is no use providing
this sort of accommodation if it is not what Gypsies and Travellers
want and the aspirations of Gypsies and Travellers vary.
Q369 Mr Betts: Do you believe such
an initiative would be resource intensive?
Ms Eastmead: It is a resource
intensive initiative. The actual plot of the group house tends
to be a larger plot than that found in social housing. I think
the differences between here and Ireland are quite marked in land
availability. Ireland is a much less densely populated country.
It does have a luxury of land use that we do not have and I think
that whilst group housing could be explored here it would be difficult
to provide the same sorts of accommodation as the Irish were providing.
If I could summarise, the units that we saw were detached bungalows
in little cul-de-sacs and I would find it difficult to imagine
that you would have the same luxury of provision for anybody accessing
social housing here.
Q370 Chris Mole: It appears that
a lot of the planning law that has been made around Gypsies and
Travellers has been done on a case by case basis where challenges
have been made and an agency, acting with legal aid, has been
shaping planning policy through case law. Are you happy that it
should happen this way?
Mr Stambollouian: There is a lot
of case law which has modified legislation and there are a number
of noticeable cases which are frequently cited. However, I think
possibly this is inevitable given the range of powers that there
are for local authorities to take enforcement action in respect
of planning breaches.
Q371 Chris Mole: What about the situation
where you have case law in England affecting Wales and vice versa?
Have you taken any steps to coordinate with colleagues in the
Assembly?
Mr Stambollouian: We do work very
closely with colleagues in the National Assembly for Wales and
we certainly coordinate together. There have been a couple of
recent cases in Wales which had the potential to affect England
as well and we have coordinated very closely with our colleagues
in the National Assembly on these.
Q372 Chris Mole: You were talking
earlier on about the role of regional or local structures and
regional spatial strategies. Where the do not have sufficient
allocation for land for Gypsy and Traveller sites, is the Government
going to jump in and challenge the inadequacy? Are you going to
be a brave minister I suppose is the question?
Keith Hill: In that regard as
well! I think, if I might say so, is a slightly premature question
and you will remember that Harold Wilson quite rightly always
used to say that he would never answer hypothetical questions,
but I will observe that it is open for the Secretary of State
to comment and react to a regional spatial strategy.
Q373 Christine Russell: Can I ask
you then whether you think size matters? I want to return you
to the provision of sites because some of the evidence we have
had has said that sites can be made acceptable and manageable
if they are small sites. You know as the Planning Minister that
an application for six houses is far more acceptable than 60 houses,
but there does seem to be some evidence that local authorities
are taking the easy way out, shall I say, and are therefore extending
existing sites rather than creating new ones. Does the Department
have a view on that and are there any findings coming out of your
review which may perhaps encourage smaller sites rather than larger
sites?
Keith Hill: I will pass you on
to John Stambollouian who has the detail on this, but one of the
things which has actually struck me as I have reflected on these
matters is that the Gypsy and Traveller community itself seems
not actually to be very enthusiastic about exceptionally large
sites. On the whole they communities prefer to travel and to co-exist
with people of what might be described as the extended family.
I think part of the rationality that one would like to see prevail
on this subject is to argue that you are not looking to the creation
of Cottenhams; Cottenham is an expression of failure rather than
success and therefore we do need to think on a relatively small
scale in terms of encouraging local authorities to think about
appropriate site provision. I will let John come in with the detail
on this now.
Mr Stambollouian: I agree with
what the Minister has said.
Keith Hill: I should hope so!
Mr Stambollouian: There is a question
about what the Gypsies and Travellers themselves prefer; there
is also a question about proportionality with the facilities available
in the communities alongside which these sites are located. I
think we will be seeking to give guidance in the Circular but
we do not want to hand down tablets of stone because one of the
key conclusions of Pat Niner's research was that the really important
thing is that the Gypsy and Traveller groups themselves should
be involved in this. In some cases larger sites may be appropriate
but generally we accept what you say.
Q374 Chairman: What was the point
in getting Pat Niner to do the work?
Keith Hill: Because she has informed
in a very serious way the Government's consideration of these
matters. If you look at the various Pat Niner recommendations
almost without exception the Government has included these recommendations
as part of the renew work—which is still not finalised as
you know—or has acted on the recommendations. We think that
it has been a valuable piece of work by Pat Niner and that we
have responded in a very constructive way to her work.
Q375 Chairman: But there are not
extra sites, are there?
Ms Eastmead: There are no extra
sites at the moment but I think one of the things we have admitted
is that there is an awful lot we do not know about Gypsies and
Travellers.
Q376 Chairman: There is an awful
lot we do know and there is a problem and we do not seem to be
making much progress.
Ms Eastmead: The Pat Niner research
was specifically commissioned to help inform the debate and I
think what Pat has done is that she has informed the debate and
opened a whole load more questions which we have to consider how
we are going to respond to.
Keith Hill: If I might put it
like this, Mr Chairman, it is true that for a number of years
little progress seems to have been made on these issues and it
is in acknowledgement of that lack of progress that the Government
is now looking very seriously at these issues via the review.
I can certainly give you the assurance that this is high on ministers'
agendas.
Q377 Chairman: You told us at the
beginning that the Caravan Count is going to be improved. Is that
right?
Keith Hill: Yes, it is.
Q378 Chairman: What about security
of tenure as far as Gypsies are concerned? Can you tell us anything
about that?
Ms Eastmead: You will know that
the European Parliament found against us in Conners versus UK
on security of tenure issues. The current security of tenure on
Gypsy and Traveller sites is not comparable with security of tenure
in social housing and it is not comparable with security of tenure
on park homes. We are considering our options. I have alluded
to the two main options that there might be and we need to respond
to the European Committee and let them know the direction that
we wish to take.
Q379 Chairman: When?
Ms Eastmead: We have a six month
deadline in which to respond to the Committee.
| 
