15 ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
191. We received many complaints from local authorities,
members of the settled community, landowners and Members of the
House of Commons about the behaviour of some Gypsies and Travellers.
Cottenham Residents Association, who recently issued a joint statement
with the Traveller Law Reform Coalition calling for re-introduction
of a statutory duty on local authorities to provide accommodation
for Gypsies and Travellers, told us that crime and disorder need
to be better managed. Without better management of anti-social
behaviour, few politicians and members of settled communities
will feel able to support increased site provision. Cottenham
Residents Association told us:
"It is a matter of public record, across
the country, that wherever Travellers reside there are instances
of all/some of the following being reported to the police:
- extreme littering and fly-tipping
- defecating and urinating on private and public
lands
- verbal abuse and intimidation
- various traffic offences including obstruction,
speeding, illegal parking, drunken and under-age driving
- general anti-social behaviour.
"It is simply not just" that:
- Travellers make no contribution to clean-up
cost
- non-Travellers, especially the aged, become
frightened to the point of not leaving their homes
- non-Travellers businesses suffer hardship as
customers avoid areas affected by unlawful occupation
- family and friends defer visits for fear of
own safety
- property prices are adversely affected, and
especially adjoining land values
- good policing is virtually impossible (rural
England is left unprotected by the "tick-box" strategy
of the Home Office and its dependence on the National Intelligence
Model) as reported 'incidents' are rarely followed up and are
thus able to be omitted from regional crime figures. Result: non-Travellers
are without protection from, and Travellers perceive themselves
as beyond, the law. There is reluctance to use the Police Reform
Act 2003 and powers of confiscation because the police have little/no
means to remove vehicles and private firms fear reprisal. The
Crime & Disorder Act 1998 seems to need co-operation between
police and local authorities, but same it seems is not forthcoming
as local authorities refuse to acknowledge any responsibility
under this Act. The Anti-Social Behaviour Legislation is, we are
told, cumbersome and unworkable failing, as it does, to allow
action against groups."[265]
192. However Charles Smith, Chair of the Gypsy Council
for Education, Culture, Welfare and Civil Rights, emphasised that
the behaviour of a minority of Gypsies and Travellers should not
be used as an excuse not to provide accommodation for Gypsies
and Travellers:
"Anti social behaviour is not used for the
provision or lack of provision for social housing, yet the behaviour
of some Gypsy and Traveller people is used as a reason for not
building sites. The Government is now talking about mentors and
help for families with social problems, so should not Gypsy and
Traveller families get this same support."[266]
193. Gypsies and Travellers themselves complain about
other Gypsies and Travellers who exhibit anti-social behaviour.
Gypsies and Travellers interviewed by Pat Niner for "The
Provision and Condition of Local Authority Gypsy/Traveller Sites
in England", complained about a small minority of "bad
families" who caused problems for other Gypsies and Travellers
as well as site managers and the settled community.[267]
Hughie Smith, President of the Gypsy Council (Romani Kris) told
us:
"I would point to the 41 sites (minimum
estimate) which we as an organisation have been forced to close
over the years because of the unruly and anti-social behaviour
exhibited by a certain element operating within the Gypsy community
[…]."[268]
194. However we have been told that authorities find
it difficult to pursue anti-social behaviour because members of
the Gypsy and Traveller community frequently refuse to act as
witnesses to alleged incidents. Gypsies and Travellers argue that
it is the responsibility of local authorities and the police to
pursue the individuals responsible, however authorities argue
this is impossible without cooperation from the travelling community
to identify them. The settled community frequently argue that
the police and local authorities are not doing enough to tackle
anti-social behaviour in the travelling community:
"It is not so much local authorities to
be given more powers; it is they should more readily enact those
that they already have. We would expect more support from the
police. We do not get it from either. I was not able in that evidence
to be specific about the village I am from so I have tried to
be as wide as I could. We have experienced it in Cottenham - and
we know it has been experienced in Billericay and in Runnymede
and parts of Sussex - where the unlawful occupation of the land
as it stands is automatically associated with dreadful behaviour.
It is the behaviour side which creates tremendous fear in local
communities, especially when there are large numbers involved."[269]
195. The police told us that some Gypsies and Travellers
try to make sites "no-go" areas for authorities:
"I think there is a tactic that is used
by some Travellers - and I would say it is a small minority of
Travellers - to make many of their sites no-go areas for council
officials, for police and for people from any agency. I think
there is a reluctance on the part of some agencies to move into
areas where there are Travellers' sites. Police officers on the
whole have no difficulty moving onto some of the smaller Travellers'
sites or indeed, the big ones; we do not have no-go areas, we
try not to create those sorts of areas and we will go in and enforce
the law. I can give you an example of this from only last week
in my own police area where we went onto sites and arrested people
early in the morning for offences that had been committed. We
do take action and we will not allow no-go areas."[270]
196. Some anti-social behaviour is caused by incompatibility
between Gypsies and Travellers both on unauthorised encampments
and official sites. Many Gypsies and Travellers do not travel
regularly, if at all, but are settled on a site for long periods
of time, often years. Sites are often stable and accepted or ignored
by the local community, but if a site suddenly expands, due to
an influx of Gypsies or Travellers, the local community starts
to feel under pressure. Sites themselves frequently do not have
the pitches or services to meet the increased demand. Several
submissions from local authorities and one from the Cottenham
Residents' Association, highlighted that problems between the
settled and travelling communities only develop when the local
Gypsy/Traveller community suddenly expands. One witness who has
worked with Gypsies and Travellers told us that:
"A serious problem with some unauthorised
sites is that one family with only five to twenty caravans may
not be causing any problems, especially if the Council is providing
facilities (portaloos, rubbish collection and if possible a water
tap). If however the site is visible from the road and has any
space on it, other Travellers sometimes settle on it, and overcrowding,
litter and bad behaviour can be the result. Too often nothing
is done to stop this until the situation is so bad that all the
Travellers are evicted, which is unjust to the ones who did keep
the rules. This can be prevented in various ways, by asking the
first caravans to agree to having locked height or width barriers
so only cars can enter and at once removing any caravans that
break in either by using section 61 or 77/78 of the 1994 Act."[271]
Many witnesses have told us that Irish Travellers
tend to travel more, and in large groups and can take over existing
sites leading to conflict with the settled community:
"I can understand exactly why Travellers
buy a bit of ground and go on it and take their hard core on,
et cetera. To be perfectly honest with you, we do not have a problem
with that. It is when it happens in numbers and it tends to be
and I hate to be called racist for this with the Irish Travellers
who influx on a mob basis and there is something of a mob rule
which accompanies them. By using this mob rule you have to have
some respect for them because what they have done is they have
actually protected their culture through the centuries, but the
fact of the matter is when it hits a local village or any community
it is basically intolerable. I live right opposite the camp and
I am very visible to the Irish Travellers now and, quite frankly,
we are on nodding terms, as it were, but there are a good many
older folk in the village who will not leave their homes even
now. Relatives down the fen will not visit except at certain times
of the day. It is just not the sort of situation that people like."[272]
197. Frequently Gypsies and Travellers resident on
sites do not want the newcomers and conflicts can develop. In
their submission ACPO explained that some sites are taken over
by individual family groups, and disputes/power struggles then
arise between residents over "possession" of the site.
This tension can overspill into the local settled community. Gypsies
and Travellers may complain privately about being intimidated
but will rarely make their complaint official or go to the police
as Alistair McWhirter, Chief Constable of Suffolk and representative
of the Association of Chief Police Officers told us:
"When I speak to Gypsy groups privately
rather than at public meetings, they will often say to me that
they wish they could eradicate some of the people who cause the
most difficulties. There are difficulties in a number of areas;
it is not just anti-social behaviour in its broader sense, sometimes
it is family disputes and domestic disputes which spill over into
the wider community and those can often cause significant problems
where you have a group on perhaps an authorised site and another
group on an unauthorised site and there are tensions between the
two groups locally."[273]
Chief Constable McWhirter explained that solving
inter-family conflict in any community is not easy:
"[…] dealing with internal family
matters is a difficult thing for the police and very often we
only deal with the outward manifestation when people commit criminal
offences - i.e. when there is violence or threats that are made
- and then we have to deal with it. What we often have then is
conflicting views about what happened, who said what and to whom
and what threats were made. With the Gypsy and Traveller community
that is made even more difficult because very often they will
not speak to us, they will not tell us what is going on and we
will get reports, for example, of someone with a shotgun in the
street and we will go and deal with what is essentially a firearms
incident and find that we are dealing with a domestic dispute."[274]
198. On each of our visits the importance of compatibility
was emphasised by site managers, Gypsy and Traveller Liaison Officers,
and site residents. We were told that most site managers consider
the compatibility of residents before any other factor. Dr Home
explained:
"[…]Another factor which differentiates
caravan sites from housing is that much more of the life is in
the outside. So you have to look at family compatibility and compatible
ethnic minorities within the Gypsy community, which you would
not be able to do in council housing, for example, or association
housing."[275]
Officials from South Dublin County told us that smaller
sites, ideally the size of an extended family group (5-10 individual
family units) minimised conflict.
199. Historically the Gypsy and Traveller community
has protected itself in the face of racism. The relationship between
the police and the travelling community has not always been easy,
however tackling anti-social behaviour within the Gypsy and Traveller
community will require building of trust between these groups
and improved communication. On our visit to the Appleby horsefair
we were told that the Gypsy organisers, council and police had
established an excellent working relationship. We hope such good
practice can be replicated. Gypsies and Travellers must accept
some of the responsibility for eradicating the anti-social element
from their communities. Without support from the travelling community,
the police are unable to clamp down on the unruly and disruptive.
Witnesses to incidents must be prepared to come forward and testify.
The situation would be further helped if there was one overseeing
body for Gypsies and Travellers, such as the Showmen's Guild for
that part of the travelling community. Representative groups must
set an example to the community, and must not allow historic grievances
to divide the community they purport to lead and undermine the
leadership they are placed to offer.
Environmental Crimes
200. Many submissions have suggested that land is
left in a disgusting state when Gypsies and Travellers leave illegal
encampments. Local authorities and the Environment Agency have
been criticised for failing to tackle the problem:
"Other local authorities might be better
but it took our district eight months the first time to take any
action. The second go round took a further five months and on
each occasion it took about a week to clear one particular area
of fen from the rubbish that had been tipped there. […].There
is absolutely no anti social behaviour unit. The problems we experienced
simply went unresolved for eight months and they would have continued
beyond that but there was an unfortunate incident in the village.
As regards the agencies, I personally feel the Environment Agency
did not want to know anything about the fly tipping issues and
they passed it back to the district. If you talk to the district
council you tend to go through the planning department."[276]
"Local communities are having the peaceful
enjoyment of local facilities regularly spoilt by Travellers who
take over local fields or recreational areas and very often, but
not always, litter and foul the land and leave large areas with
dumped materials." [277]
201. Gypsies and Travellers argue that they are often
blamed for rubbish which is dumped by members of the settled community:
"Every bit of rubbish up and down the road
that's fly-tipped, the first ones that's done it is the Gypsies,
we get blamed of it - it's not the Gypsies."[278]
Problems on and around sites cannot be seen in isolation
from national trends, for example, low scrap metal prices, clean
air and pollution controls (which prevent burning of waste) and
the costs and bureaucracy associated with authorised commercial
waste disposal.
202. Fly-tipped rubbish is unsightly and unhealthy,
particularly if it becomes infested with rats or other vermin.
It is costly for local authorities to remove, and potentially
dangerous. Both the Environment Agency and local authorities have
powers to tackle fly-tipping and other forms of waste crime. The
Local Government Association and Environment Agency have agreed
a protocol that sets out the division of responsibilities between
them to ensure effective working without duplication of effort.
In general, the Environment Agency deal with large-scale illegal
dumping of waste (more than a 20 tonne lorry load), illegal waste
activities involving organised crime, and the illegal dumping
of drums or containers of hazardous waste with a capacity greater
than 75 litres. Local authorities, in general, focus their efforts
on smaller-scale fly-tipping and littering. On non-publicly owned
land, the occupier or owner has responsibility to remove the waste.[279]
203. The Environment Agency received almost 5,400
reports of fly-tipped wastes in 2003.[280]
Some of the most dangerous items reported to be dumped are used
gas cylinders. There is no evidence that Gypsies and Travellers
are solely responsible for dumping such items, but on our visit
to Hampshire we were told about an illegal site which had to be
cleared of 500 gas cylinders after a group of Travellers left.
In order to comply with health and safety legislation, local authorities
have to lock these cylinders in wire cages until they can arrange
safe disposal. When empty the canisters are particularly dangerous
because they are volatile. It was suggested to us that increased
deposits on the cylinders would solve this problem, although manufacturers
argue that increased deposits would make them more attractive
to thieves. Manufacturers also told us that they will arrange
removal of cylinders, if there are a sufficient number. However
local authorities argue that they still have the problem of storing
them until a sufficient number are collected. The Environment
Agency told us:
"In line with the Agency-Local Government
Association protocol, the dumping of gas cylinders would normally
be dealt with by the local authority. The Agency does not collect
data on the number of incidents reported to it that involve gas
cylinders. In general gas cylinders are disposed of when they
are emptied although the cylinder itself can in some circumstances
be re-used. We have anecdotal evidence that in some cases the
cylinders that are dumped may have been stolen. It used to be
the case, as with beer kegs, that the cylinder was a valued item
that could be returned to the initial owner (e.g. the gas supplier),
as they can be re-used, and a take back scheme was in place. This
even extended to the removal of fly-tipped gas cylinders. More
recently it has become increasingly difficult to get the cylinders
removed this way. It is not clear why this is the case, but perhaps
the cost of transport relative to the value of the cylinder(s)
is a factor. The storage of any significant quantity of gas cylinders
has essential safety requirements as the cylinders are never completely
empty and present a fire risk. Storage should be in accordance
with guidance issued by the health and Safety Executive in HSG
51/71. As with green waste, there is difficulty in proving the
identity of the person that dumped the cylinder or even who had
been using the cylinder prior to dumping."[281]
204. Local authorities tell us that green waste is
often found on unauthorised encampments. Many Gypsies and Travellers
work as labourers or gardeners and may undertake tree pollarding
or landscaping. It is suggested that much of this waste is then
fly-tipped, removing the cost of legitimate disposal:
"[…] we see Travellers diversifying
into all sorts of new occupations. One of the things that has
made a huge difference is the introduction of the mobile telephone
which has resulted in many travellers advertising businesses through
Yellow Pages and running what appear to be legitimate businesses
in the sense of having premises and so on, and Travellers then
come and do the work and they have none of the overheads that
regular businesses have including tax or national insurance or
any of the safety issues that other businesses have to pay."[282]
Members of the settled community should be aware
that when they employ such contractors, it may be waste from their
gardens which will be fly-tipped on local land. In 2003 the Environment
Agency received 248 reports of fly-tipped green waste. On our
visit to Ireland we were told that if fly-tipped waste can be
traced to a household, action is taken against the householder,
even if they employed a contractor to remove the waste. Because
the pollution risk from fly-tipped green waste is low, the Environment
Agency do not class reports of such waste as serious incidents,
thus do not attend or take action. It is hard to identify the
source of such waste without a witness or CCTV evidence; this
makes it difficult for enforcement authorities to take action.
205. In July 2004 the Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs launched a 'Clean Neighbourhoods Consultation
Document' that could provide greater clarity over tackling environmental
crimes through Crime and Disorder Reduction Strategies. The Environment
Agency and Local Authorities are also reviewing their protocol
that sets out the sorts of fly-tipping incidents that they each
respond to. In addition the Environment Agency and Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs are exploring changes
to the system of registration of waste carriers which could help
tackle fly-tipping. For example, those who produce and take away
green wastes would be required to be registered, and householders
would be encouraged to adopt a responsible approach to having
their waste removed, i.e. not by an unknown "man with a van".[283]
206. The Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 gave local
authorities powers, with the assistance of a police officer, to
stop, search and seize vehicles suspected of being used for fly-tipping,
and to investigate incidents to help track down and prosecute
people responsible for dumping waste. Tottenham and Eling Town
Council suggest that the Government should also consider introduction
of on the spot fines for fly-tipping to prevent those with no
fixed abode disappearing before action can be taken.
207. Gypsies and Travellers are not responsible
for all waste crime and fly-tipping, and may be an easy target.
However, there are some members of the travelling community who
are responsible for such crimes. Gypsies and Travellers have a
duty to dispose of waste appropriately, and to help local authorities
tackle environmental anti-social behaviour by reporting waste
crimes. We accept that increased site provision would reduce the
number of unauthorised encampments, and by association the amount
of fly-tipped waste. We welcome the steps being taken by the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and the Environment Agency
to develop more effective ways to tackle fly-tipping and waste
crime. Fly-tipping is dangerous, unhealthy and an eyesore, however,
householders must adopt a more responsible attitude towards having
their waste removed. It is unlikely that a "man with a van"
and a mobile phone is a responsible contractor who will dispose
of waste appropriately. We recommend that the Government seeks
Parliamentary approval for a tighter system of registration for
waste carriers in order to clamp down on irresponsible contractors
who undermine legitimate, responsible businesses. Local authorities
should consider using CCTV systems on vulnerable land in order
to try and secure convictions for fly-tipping. The courts must
award stringent penalties for convictions in such cases.
265 Ev 29 [Cottenham Residents Association] Back
266
HC 63-III, Ev 90, [The Gypsy Council for Education, Culture, Welfare
and Civil Rights ] Back
267
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 29 Back
268
HC 63-iii, Ev 67, [Hughie Smith, President of the Gypsy Council
(Romani Kris)] Back
269
Q 180 [Rick Bristow, Chairman, Cottenham Residents Association] Back
270
Q 270 [Alistair McWhirter, Chief Constable of Suffolk and representative
of the Association of Chief Police Officers] Back
271
HC 63-III, Ev 105 [Ann Dean] Back
272
Q 190 [Rick Bristow, Chairman, Cottenham Residents Association] Back
273
Q 271 [Alistair McWhirter, Chief Constable of Suffolk and representative
of the Association of Chief Police Officers] Back
274
Q 286 [Alistair McWhirter, Chief Constable of Suffolk and representative
of the Association of Chief Police Officers] Back
275
Q 23 Back
276
Q 187-8 [Rick Bristow, Chairman, Cottenham Residents Association] Back
277
Totton and Eling Town Council, Views and Responses in respect
of Travellers, 14th July 2004, Press Release Back
278
Centre for Urban and Regional Studies at the University of Birmingham,
The Provision and Condition of Local Authority Gypsy/Traveller
Sites in England, 2002, Gypsy interview pg 34 Back
279
HC 63-III, Ev 99 [The Environment Agency] Back
280
HC 63-III, Ev 99 [The Environment Agency] Back
281
HC 63-III, Ev 99 [The Environment Agency] Back
282
Q 263 [Alistair McWhirter, Chief Constable of Suffolk and representative
of the Association of Chief Police Officers] Back
283
HC 63-III, Ev 99 [The Environment Agency] Back
|
