Memorandum by the Country Land and Business
Association (CLA) (GTS 35)
The Country Land and Business Association (CLA)
has around 40,000 members who between them own or manage over
half the rural land in England and Wales. Many of our members
have been faced with the problems that can arise with traveller
sites, as for example is presently the case in Cottenham, and
we are actively involved in advising our members on the options
available to them and on lobbying for changes in law and policy
on their behalf.
As such we believe we are well placed to comment
on a number of the issues raised and are grateful for the opportunity
to respond.
CURRENT PROVISION
AND LOCATION
OF SITES
Under section 24 of the Caravan Sites and Control
of Development Act 1960 local authorities have the power to provide
sites for the accommodation of gypsies together with working space
and other facilities.
We believe this should remain the law and are
highly sceptical of the benefits of reintroducing any express
duty for local authorities to provide traveller sites.
Our concerns are in part ones of principle and
in part ones of practical experience.
Authorities are under no duty to provide housing
generally, there is no "right to a home", and we do
not see any justification for there being any "right to place
a caravan" in the case of travellers. Local Authorities should
be free to determine their own spending and policy priorities,
as the Government has done so much to encourage, and be held to
account by their electorate if they get it wrong.
Moreover, it offends against the whole notion
of local democracy if the views of local communities can be ignored
and a traveller site imposed against their will, though of course,
using their money. In saying this we also note that it is rare
for travellers to pay, or even be required to pay, tax.
On a practical level we have difficulty in seeing
how a "predict and provide" type approach to traveller
sites can ever work. A particular problem with travellers is their
propensity to descend on a particular site in large numbers and
without prior notice. A local authority is never going to be able
to anticipate such events and allow for them in the local plan.
If land is designated in the plan as suitable
for a traveller site, the land around it will inevitably be blighted
in the sense that the range of uses any one will want to put it
to will be significantly reduced. The chances of anyone wanting
to develop housing in such a location, for example, will be negligible.
There will also be an effect on land values in the immediate area
generally.
In our view it is far more useful for the local
planning authorities to retain the more reactive approach to the
planning aspects as set out in Circular 1/94. If the requirements
are properly complied with and the authority develops a series
of criteria based policies it will have a high degree of preparedness
should a group of travellers arrive and submit an application
for permission, but will not cause unnecessary worry if they do
not.
We have further concerns about the propensity
of local authorities and more frequently the planning inspectorate
to, in effect, create sites by refusing to enforce established
planning policies on rather spurious human rights type grounds.
Whilst we, of course, recognise that the human rights of travellers
are important, as indeed are those of the settled population,
we do not believe that the courts regard the rights as being as
extensive as is sometimes suggested. On our reading of the case
law human rights considerations can result in the timing of an
eviction being delayed. But they should not result in their being
no eviction. We believe it would be useful for whatever guidance
is given to the planning inspectorate on this issue to be reconsidered.
In any event, if travellers have chosen to occupy
the land without planning permission and without the consent of
the landowner it would be wrong to afford them any significant
degree of protection.
DEMAND FOR
AND USE
OF SITES
No comment.
EXISTING FUNDING
ARRANGEMENTS
No comment.
THE GYPSY
SITE REFURBISHMENT
SCHEME
No comment.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
AND THE
FACILITIES PROVIDED
No comment.
MANAGEMENT OF
UNAUTHORISED CAMPING
In our view the recent ODPM publication Guidance
on Managing Unauthorised Camping is very much to be welcomed.
It provides sensible advice on all the key issues. We hope that
all those for whom it is intended, including landowners, will
follow its recommendations.
If it is, we would anticipate that many of our
concerns about the present situation as set out below, will disappear,
or at least significantly reduce.
At present if the unauthorised camping takes
the form of a trespass on privately owned land, particularly if
it is secluded, we find the landowner is very much left to his
own resources to deal with the problem. He is unlikely to get
much support from either the police or the local authority. "We
are not here to act as the landowner's bailiffs" is a common
reaction. Accordingly the landowner is generally expected to bring
possession proceedings himself. This can be both intimidating
and expensive; there is little possibility of him recovering his
legal costs.
It is generally prohibitively expensive for
a private landowner in the countryside to construct effective
barriers to prevent travellers entering his land. In some cases
we have heard of gate posts being dug up by travellers to facilitate
easier access for larger vehicles.
When, as is increasingly the case, the travellers
have purchased the land they occupy, generally from a farmer who
was entirely unaware of the nature of his purchaser, there is
a greater involvement by the various agencies. However, it is
unusual for it to be dealt with efficiently. No one agency can
deal with all the problems that follow on from the creation of
an unauthorised site. The planning and environmental departments
of the local authority, the police and potentially the Environment
Agency, the Inland Revenue, Customs and Excise, Trading Standards,
the vehicle licensing authorities and the RSPCA all have a role
to play.
Unfortunately, the level of joint working between
the various agencies which need to be involved is in our experience
poor. However, as noted, we have high hopes that compliance with
the new Guidance will do much to remedy this problem.
Further problems result from both the inadequacy
of the powers available to the various agencies and a lack of
understanding of the extent of those powers which they do have.
Whilst the powers under sections 77 and 78 of
the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 appear fine on
paper, in practice the extreme reluctance of magistrates to convict
anyone for failing to comply with a direction to leave the site
seems to make them fairly useless.
The section 61 police power seems to be equally
unhelpful in practice. The need to satisfy one of the three conditions;
causing damage to land or property, using abusive or threatening
behaviour or having six or more vehicles frequently seems to be
a barrier to making use of the power.
In any event there is no real consistency of
approach. In the past the CLA has spoken to ACPO in the past about
the apparent arbitrary use of the power, but without any obvious
improvement in the consistency of its use. The decision in R
v Chief Constable of Dorset Police ex p Fuller (2001)
also appears to have hindered the effective use of section 61.
In general, the attitude of both the local authority
and the police towards deploying resources as at early stages
of a trespass when it has caused minimum damage and maximum alarm
varies wildly and some times from one individual officer to another.
We are aware of the new powers introduced by
the Anti Social Behaviour Act 2003 but have no direct experience
of their use or efficacy and so are unable to comment on them
at present.
An example of the failure to use existing powers
also arises with local authorities and the planning system. In
particular there is a significant lack of appreciation that stop
notices and planning injunctions have a useful role to play. This
is not withstanding the clear guidance on the point. Again, though,
we hope that the new Guidance will do much to improve matters
in this regard.
ODPM STATISTICAL
INFORMATION ON
CARAVAN SITES
AND FAMILIES
No comment.
| 
