9 A DUTY TO PROVIDE?
124. A contributor to "The Provision and Condition
of Local Authority Gypsy and Traveller sites in England"
commented, "make site provision easier for elected members
to support than object to".[154]
The most obvious way to do this is to re-introduce a statutory
duty on local authorities to provide or enable the provision of
Gypsy and Traveller sites; and to provide funding from Government
towards provision. This is advocated by nearly all of the submissions
we received:
Angus Murdoch, Travellers' Advice Team, The Community
Law Partnership: "The first thing that needs to happen is
a return of the statutory duty to provide sites, together with
a grant to create those sites. Without that, I think it is simply
untenable to imagine that private provision is going to make good
the substantial shortfall that has existed for many generations.
I think there has to be a compulsion on local authorities to provide.
If they are not compelled to provide they will not provide."[155]
Pat Weale, Gypsy Services Manager for Worcestershire
County Council: "Without a statutory duty no local authority
in this country is going to have the backbone to provide Gypsy
sites in isolation, and I think that they would be very stupid
to try and do so."[156]
George Summers, Gypsy and Traveller Service Manager
for Hampshire County Council and Secretary of the National Association
of Gypsy and Traveller Liaison Officers: "[…] unless
we have a duty to provide sites it is very difficult to see how
any local authority will provide residential sites. […].
Without the duty, without being led centrally by Government, without
a regional policy on the number of sites you need and where they
should be located, and without a proper management structure this
will never work. Unless the Government gets to grips with it and
looks at it overall, which I am glad you are doing, then it will
never happen.[…]. You need a national duty that says that
local authorities have to provide because although authorities
recognise that there is a shortage, to get it through the planning
system and via the consultation process of local people there
is no incentive for local authorities to take this on and try
to find sites."[157]
Terry Holland, Gypsy Services Manager of Buckinghamshire
County Council: "[…]. If you take a look at actually
trying to find a place for a site the political problems in identifying
it are horrendous at local and indeed at national level. The only
justification that can be made which will satisfy the electorate
is that we have to do it because we have got a statutory duty
to do it. If that is not there then effectively the political
copout is the easy way out and probably the best way out."[158]
Alistair McWhirter, Chief Constable of Suffolk
and representative of the Association of Chief Police Officers:
"What I can say is that when there was a statutory duty the
problem was still there but it was less of a problem than perhaps
we have now […]. It [a statutory duty on local authorities]
might help, yes."[159]
Sarah Spencer, Deputy Chair, Commission for Racial
Equality: "I think the lack of sites is due to a combination
of reasons. First of all, there are pressures on local authorities
not to provide sites, pressure from public resistance to sites
and the other usual pressures, for instance the lack of resources.
That is coupled with the fact that they actually do not have a
statutory duty to do so, and we think that the answer to this,
first of all, has to lie in legislation with a statutory duty
to assess the need, a duty to provide and facilitate sites […]."[160]
125. During the course of our inquiry the Traveller
Law Reform Coalition and the Cottenham Residents Association issued
a joint statement, which among other things, emphasised the need
for the Government to reintroduce a statutory duty:
"[…] we join together in calling on
the Government to consider the accommodation needs of the Gypsy
and Traveller community. To assess their needs generally and to
provide for them in the fair and equitable way that it does for
the settled community. Central to such a plan, we believe, is
the need for a statutory obligation to be placed on all local
authorities to meet the accommodation needs of the Gypsy and Traveller
communities in a way that will respect their traditional way of
life. The provision of adequate sites both public and private,
residential and transit, by all local authorities and to the exclusion
of possible 'honey-pot' developments will, we believe, address
the current acute shortage of sites and will also bring about
an end to the illegal developments and unauthorised encampments
which have resulted in the frustration of the settled community
in the places where they have taken place."[161]
126. John Treble, Vice-President and Vice-Chair of
Somerset Association of Local Councils, told us that a duty would
not just make it easier for politicians to support provision of
sites, but would also act as re-assurance to members of the public
that the sites were under control of the local authority:
"It is possible you underestimate the problem
for the elected member at the local level and it will help him
to discharge his job (a) if he can show there is a statutory duty
and (b) that the site will be under some measure of public control
because that is what worries people. They get permission to put
this on and what happens next? We are all familiar with what developers
do by getting in with an inch and then taking a mile. The local
population is worried about that. They would be less worried if
they knew they were dealing with sites that had been provided
publicly - although they would not like the thought they would
have to pay for it - and would be supervised."[162]
127. However, many submissions have highlighted that
when a statutory duty was last imposed on councils by the Caravan
Sites Act 1968, it was not the panacea that had been hoped for.
Local authorities had a duty to provide sites but many never did.
The Gypsy Council (Romani Kris) argues that no Secretary of State
was willing to enforce the Act:
"[…] successive Secretaries of State
themselves failed in their own statutory duties under section
9 of the [Caravan Sites] Act to make directional orders against
individual local authorities who - in their opinion - had either
failed to provide the necessary accommodation or who were 'dragging
their feet' so to speak, in so doing."[163]
Several other submissions of evidence also highlighted
this issue:
Dr Colm Power: "The Act was deeply flawed
on its demographic premise, the nature of the accommodation prescribed,
the absence of a holistic approach, and at an operational level.
With an unsatisfactory level of enforcement the Caravan Sites
Act (1968) was interpreted as loosely or inadequately as was deemed
appropriate according to the preoccupations and prejudices of
particular local authorities."[164]
John Treble, Vice-President and Vice-Chair, Somerset
Association of Local Councils:"[…] one must not be deceived
into thinking that a statutory duty in itself achieves anything.
There was a clear statutory duty in the 1968 Act and after 25
years of that Act only 35 per cent of the need had been catered
for. The reason was that that statutory duty needed to be reinforced
by ministerial direction and intervention, and a number of the
ministers of the time - including Mr Ridley who spoke more clearly
than many of them on this - were reluctant to intervene and exercise
their power and as a result, despite the fact that there was a
statutory duty, despite the fact that there was financial support
from the Government (Exchequer support as well), most local authorities
ignored their duty […]."[165]
128. However Mr Treble emphasises that other legislation,
such as the Homelessness Act 2002, can be used to challenge local
authorities who fail to make accommodation provision for Gypsies
and Travellers:
"[…] if I may move to another hobby
horse - they also have a statutory duty for dealing with these
people as homeless under the Housing Regulations. The definition
in the Housing Code is that if a person lives in a moveable structure
and there is nowhere where he may legally place it and reside
in it, he is, ipso facto, homeless."[166]
Lord Avebury agrees, his research revealed that of
152 local authorities studied, only 45 (30%) considered Travellers
as part of their homelessness strategies.
129. Race Relations legislation - which requires
local authorities to ensure the promotion of racial equality in
the delivery of their services - could be used to tackle local
authorities who fail to provide accommodation for Gypsies and
Travellers, as the Commission for Racial Equality acknowledge:
"We are trying to resolve this by securing
a planning and housing system that meets needs with a way of dealing
with its strategically rather than through individual enforcement
action, which is always a last resort but can nevertheless be
what one has to fall back on if there is no other method of securing
compliance. We would be more likely to do it using our own Race
Relations legislation under the failure to comply with the duty
to promote equality and good race relations, I think."[167]
130. Hughie Smith, President of the Gypsy Council
(Romani Kris), believes that local authorities should provide
for the accommodation needs of Gypsies and Travellers through
mainstream accommodation policies:
"I do not think there needs to be a statutory
responsibility. I think the district councils can take that onboard
with the housing accommodation, like the settled communities.
There is no reason for that. The worst thing that ever happened
to us in this country was the Caravan Sites Act."[168]
As does Charles Smith of the Gypsy Council for Education,
Culture, Welfare and Civil Rights:
"I think we need to stop calling it housing.
We need to start looking at accommodation. That takes in everything.
I mean, it is not only caravans, people live in boats and all
sorts of things, so we should start talking about accommodation
needs rather than just housing. Not everybody wants to live in
a house or chooses to live in a house. If we started looking at
a broader aspect of "accommodation for everybody", and
the so-called housing departments dealt with that, in a wider
spectrum, we would start looking at everybody's needs, instead
of just bricks and mortar and a roof over your head. I think that
is the problem, we have a closed mind to housing."[169]
131. The Centre for Urban and Regional Studies at
the University of Birmingham suggest that this approach could
be worth considering:
"Given the stability discovered on many
residential [Gypsy and Traveller] sites, it seems entirely appropriate
to see them as a form of specially adapted housing for Gypsies
and other Travellers. This could help in three ways:
- In land use planning, allocating land for Gypsy/Traveller
sites could be dealt with in the same way as housing with a mechanism
designed to ensure adequate allocations nationally, regionally
and locally.
- Gypsy/Traveller site provision (and management)
could be explicitly considered within housing investment programmes
and strategies.
- Housing associations could become involved in site
provision and management, and the Housing Corporation could provide
social housing grant as for other general and special needs housing."[170]
Ken Livingstone is also in favour of mainstreaming
accommodation for Gypsies and Travellers:
"The issue of site provision for Gypsies
and Travellers is basically one of accommodation and should be
addressed on a par with the housing of the rest of the population,
on the basis of people's rights and responsibilities. The provision
of Travellers' sites should be addressed as one aspect within
mainstream housing needs assessment."[171]
John Battle MP made this point in an adjournment
debate, although suggested a statutory duty was also required
:
"The Government have a responsibility not
to push the problem on to local councils, which then push conflict
into the surrounding neighbourhoods, while hoping that it is somehow
magically resolved. We need to come up with a solution from which
both Travellers and local residents benefit. We need to give Travellers
accommodation, which means proper sites, with the same status
as housing, so that it is assessed and delivered in the same way.
That could be twin-tracked with a statutory duty to provide and
facilitate more site provision. There should be a proper obligation
on local authorities to provide and facilitate sites, and we should
allow Housing Corporation money to be used for the purpose of
constructing new sites […]."[172]
132. Yvette Cooper, Parliamentary Under-Secretary
of State at the ODPM appears to be supportive of these proposals:
"We are keen for Gypsy and Traveller accommodation
needs to be tackled alongside of everybody else. It should be
part of mainstream consideration of accommodation and housing
need in every local area. For the first time, therefore we expect
local authorities to consider and tackle the need for accommodation
for Gypsies and Travellers in their assessment of local accommodation
needs. We shall issue revised guidance next year on how to do
that. Housing and site need assessments will feed into the regional
spatial strategies and the regional planning system. We are considering
in more detail exactly how that should work and whether other
measures are required to overcome some of the unnecessary barriers
to site provision."
As is the Rt. Hon Keith Hill, Minister of
State for Housing and Planning, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
who has concerns about the re-introduction of a statutory duty:
"The Government is, of course, considering
all options, including the introduction of the duty. However,
I am very clear that a duty would have significant spending implications
- that has already been referred to in this morning's exchanges
- which central Government would, as you know, have to fund under
the new burdens policy. I am also conscious that a duty would
put Gypsies and Travellers arguably in an advantageous position
by comparison with other local residents with housing needs. On
the whole I have to say that I am inclined to think that the introduction
of the duty does not really sit comfortably with our policy of
expanding areas of choice, discretion and decision making amongst
local authorities. We have done some research into barriers to
site provision and it appears that rather less than half local
authorities see the absence of a duty as a barrier to site provision."[173]
The Local Government Association dispute Keith Hill's
research. In a supplementary note sent to the Committee, Councillor
Susie Kemp of West Berkshire Council and Chairman of the Local
Government Association Planning Executive told us:
"In Keith Hill's oral submission to the
Committee, he stated that research undertaken by ODPM indicates
that "less than half local authorities see the absence of
a duty as a barrier to site provision". This is definitely
not the message we are getting from local authorities. Indeed,
we have held a number of consultation and roundtable meetings
with authorities on this issue which have all repeatedly highlighted
the need to re-instate the duty supported by a central subsidy.
We believe this is fundamental to improving site provision in
the longer-term by helping to tackle resistance from settled communities
and to overcoming political barriers to provision. We will be
asking ODPM to share further details about their "research"
on this issue."[174]
Responsibility for Provision
133. Although in favour of a re-introduction of a
duty, the Local Government Association do not believe the duty
should be imposed on all local authorities:
"I think we make very clear in our evidence
that it is not every council that will need to provide sites because
clearly Travellers do not want to be in every part of our country.
I think what we are saying is that collectively councils should
now have a duty to provide Traveller sites and clearly we need
to do that within a plan. One of the things we want to make sure
is that we are working with Traveller groups to ensure that these
sites are going to be used and we feel there is no point in providing
sites if Gypsies and Travellers are not going to use them. I think
that is why we feel it is quite important to have a plan, to have
it done on a regional or national basis and to have councillors
doing it collectively, but clearly the end game must be that these
sites are used properly and legitimately as your previous speaker
indicated. […] Gypsies and Travellers do not want to be in
every part of the country and there will be some councils that
will provide sites and nobody will ever come. I think we are trying
to be sensible about it and say that clearly there are areas in
our country where Gypsies and Travellers want to be."[175]
Some evidence we received argued that a duty must
be imposed on all local authorities to prevent the creation of
"honeypots". Lee Searles, Programme Manager for Planning
and Transport at the Local Government Association, suggests that
a duty should be imposed on every local authority, but within
a regional framework to establish need and level of provision:
"Local authorities themselves brought this
issue to the LGA and said that since the statutory duty was deleted
they have found that it has not worked because many local authorities
make the effort to plan and provide sites but unfortunately many
do not. This has led to some authorities feeling that they have
become a honey pot for Travellers whilst their neighbours have
not made any provision at all. In debating this issue within the
LGA and running a few round-tables with stakeholder groups, it
was felt that a statutory duty needs to be reinstated but clearly
- going back to the debate that led to the statutory duty being
deleted in the first place - the requirement to provide a site
in every single authority does not seem to make sense because
what is needed is a more intelligent approach, one which actually
knows what the flows of Gypsies and Travellers are through regions
and through localities; ones which actually identify the overall
aggregate need in terms of numbers. With the advent of the new
Planning Act and regional spatial strategies we felt that there
should be a statutory duty on every local authority but whether
each local authority would need to provide it or not would be
dependent on some kind of regional framework which set out the
need and would then lead to a requirement for provision in identified
locations. All that would be based on flows and on numbers."[176]
In South Dublin County, each ward is responsible
for the provision of at least one Gypsy and Traveller site, thus
spreading provision across the whole County.
134. We received mixed evidence as to whether a statutory
duty should be imposed at county or district level in tiered authorities.
Pat Weale, Gypsy Services Manager for Worcestershire County Council,
argues it should be at county level:
"if you put it on districts you end up with
district boundaries. No Traveller likes to be told they do not
belong here and they cannot go on the waiting list because they
are not from a certain district. That is what we found in the
past. When the Act was repealed we found because we owned the
land, that the district was charged with building and managing
those sites. There was no incentive there to actually manage them
properly or to work with people so if there was a problem some
districts would just evict them on to the roadside and if there
were rent arrears it did not matter because we picked up the deficit.
On a countywide basis we can utilise the sites across that
county so that instead of leaving a site because you do not get
on very well with your neighbours you can ask for a transfer and
transfer immediately to another site which is outside that particular
district, so the management for the Gypsies is much better."[177]
George Summers, Gypsy and Traveller Service Manager
for Hampshire County Council and Secretary of the National Association
of Gypsy and Traveller Liaison Officers agrees:
"It is all a question of the management
of resources. Generally at county level there are probably more
resources, taking an overview of the county or taking a regional
look really, because you need a spread of locations across a county.
If you come down to the district level quite often they might
have one site, possibly two sites, and they do not have the infrastructure
management available to run the sites so that is probably why
it is better having it at county level - there is a wider spread,
you have economies of scale and people can take an overview of
the county and locations."[178]
135. Michael Green, Policy and Parliamentary Affairs
Manager for the National Association of Local Councils believes
the principal planning authority should be responsible, although
emphasises the need for cooperation:
"[…] it would seem to me that in terms
of unitaries it is clear but in terms of where it is counties
and districts whichever is the major planning authority with responsibility
for good use of land perhaps they should take the responsibility.
[…]. In an age where counties and districts and two-tiers
are asked to justify themselves, perhaps a bit of cooperation
between them on this issue would not go amiss."[179]
Terry Holland, Gypsy Services Manager of Buckinghamshire
County Council, thinks that counties should have responsibility
within a regional framework:
"The important thing is that there is at
least regional planning which identifies what is needed where
and splits it down between the counties and then if necessary
between the counties and districts. However, it has to be done
as part of a structured national and regional framework so the
onus must come at least from the region and then work down. There
is nothing stopping counties agreeing with the districts how the
allocation should be made within that area any more than there
is to stop the region agreeing with the counties."[180]
Given the indications from the Minister on the role
of regional planning, this approach would seem to be the most
logical suggestion.
136. Development of Gypsy and Traveller sites must
be well-planned, as Sasha Barton, Senior Policy Officer for Gypsies
and Travellers at the Commission for Racial Equality, explained:
"[…] one of the points that we make
in the Republic of Ireland which has come out very clearly through
their experience is that one of the problems in getting the Traveller
accommodation programme working is that while Travellers are waiting
to move on to sites which are being provided by the authorities,
at the same time they are being evicted so the failure to link
those powers of eviction to the provision is not meeting the need
that the accommodation programme is intended to."[181]
Grants
137. If a statutory duty is to be re-introduced,
the Local Government Association highlight that grants will be
needed to aid site development:
"We will hope and expect some grants, both
capital grants and revenue grants to help fund. I must just come
back and put the point of view that I experience at first hand
from residents who pay their taxes - the gentleman speaking before
was talking about Inland Revenue taxes and what have you - and
we would also hope that there would be some revenue coming from
the travelling community themselves through housing rents or however
it is done. I think local authorities would find it very difficult
to provide sites and a dedicated Travellers' Liaison Officer -
which again we support - without some funding coming from somewhere."
138. In our report on the draft Housing Bill,
published in July 2003, we recommended that within two years the
Government should re-introduce a statutory duty on local authorities
to make or facilitate provision of sites for Gypsies and Travellers.
In their response in November 2003 the Government stated, "it
is actively considering the most effective mechanism for the provision
of such sites to ensure that the accommodation needs to travellers
are met."
We are not satisfied
that sufficient progress has been made by the Government since
our report. There are a number of mechanisms that should have
generated greater provision of sites, including the Gypsy Sites
Refurbishment Grant programme. The data available suggests that
over 3500 Gypsies and Travellers still have no legal place to
stop and unauthorised encampments continue to cause disruption
and frustration in many parts of the country. This situation is
unlikely to change without some form of Government intervention.
The evidence we have received points to the need for the Government
to re-introduce a statutory requirement for local authorities
to provide accommodation for Gypsies and Travellers resorting
to or residing in their areas. There must be a national response
with a duty imposed on all local authorities based on assessment
of need at regional level to avoid a situation where some authorities
meet the needs of all the Gypsy and Traveller community. The Government
should establish a Gypsy and Traveller Taskforce to ensure site
vacancies are co-ordinated across the region and throughout the
country. The Minister has outlined his hopes that regional spatial
strategies and regional plans will be used to assess and provide
for the needs of the travelling community. We recommend he goes
one step further and places a requirement on local authorities
to meet that need. The Government must provide a statutory framework,
political leadership and capital funding. We recommend that a
capital grant is provided to ensure local authorities are able
to develop new sites which are consistent with revised design
guidelines. Local authorities who make adequate provision for
Gypsies and Travellers in their areas should be rewarded with
additional non ring-fenced funding. Consideration might also be
given to encouraging motorway contractors and other employers
of large groups of Gypsies and Travellers who may have land available,
to provide additional sites for the duration of their employment.
154 Centre for Urban and Regional Studies at the University
of Birmingham, The Provision and Condition of Local Authority
Gypsy/Traveller Sites in England, 2002 , pg 51 Back
155
Q 209 Back
156
Q 233 Back
157
Q 236 and 237 Back
158
Q 237 Back
159
Q 264-5 Back
160
Q 149 Back
161
Joint statement Back
162
Q 305 Back
163
HC 63-iii, Ev 67, [Hughie Smith, President of the Gypsy Council
(Romani Kris)] Back
164
Dr Colm Power, Room to Roam, England's Irish Travellers, June
2004, pg 9 Back
165
Q 304 Back
166
Q 304 Back
167
Q 304 Back
168
Q 103 Back
169
Q 60 [Charles Smith, Chair of the Gypsy Council for Education,
Culture, Welfare and Civil Rights] Back
170
Centre for Urban and Regional Studies at the University of Birmingham,
The Provision and Condition of Local Authority Gypsy/Traveller
Sites in England, 2002 , pg 52 Back
171
HC 63-III, Ev 97 [Greater London Authority, Mayor's Office] Back
172
HC deb, 19 May 2004, col 1070 Back
173
Q 321 Back
174
HC 63-III, Ev 115 [Local Government Association] Back
175
Q 290-1 Back
176
Q 292 [Lee Searles, Programme Manager for Planning and Transport
at the Local Government Association] Back
177
Q 242 Back
178
Q 242 [Michael Green, Policy and Parliamentary Affairs Manager
for the National Association of Local Councils] Back
179
Q 303-4 Back
180
Q 242 Back
181
Q 158 Back
|
