A real solution to the ‘blight’ of unauthorised Traveller sites

Originally published in The Guardian and LSE Politics and Policy Blog

Eric Pickles call for councils to tackle the ‘blight’ of unauthorised Traveller sites was met with outcry recently, with community leaders claiming the Communities Secretary’s words fanned the flames of anti-Traveller prejudice. But in a way, Pickles has a point. The dire shortage of legal Traveller sites in England is a blight on our society, fuelling social-exclusion and contributing to appalling health and educational outcomes for Gypsy and Traveller communities. Sky high rates of infant mortality, low life expectancy and high illiteracy are direct results of the cycles of eviction and homelessness which leave many Travellers unable to access basic services.

The overwhelming majority of Travellers in the UK want to live on authorised sites that are subject to the same council tax as house dwellers and provided with the same services. They are prevented from realising this basic aspiration by a planning system which relentlessly mitigates against the community.

In a marvellous piece of double speak, Pickles recently announced he was revoking the 2005 ‘Equality and Diversity in Planning’ guidance in order to ensure ‘fair play’ and stop ‘special treatment’ for Travellers. This is a staggering statement in a context where 90% of planning applications submitted by Gypsies and Travellers are rejected, compared to only 20% of applications from the general population.

The majority of these applications fail due to local opposition at the consultation stage, which often boils down to media-fuelled cultural misunderstanding and prejudice. Most private and council run sites in the UK are well managed and pose no problems to the wider community; indeed, local residents are often completely unaware of authorised Traveller sites in their area. Examples of Travellers living in harmony with the settled community are abundant but rarely make headlines. Meanwhile, at the first hint of a planning application for a new Traveller site local newspapers stoke up fears of anti-social behaviour and falling house prices.

A 2012 Ministerial Working Group report, tackling inequalities experienced by Gypsies and Travellers - chaired by none other than Pickles himself – acknowledged the problem of local opposition to legal sites and made a commitment to showcase existing, well run Traveller sites, to counteract the fears and misconceptions of the settled community. The government also promised to produce ‘a case study document which local authorities and councillors, potential site residents and the general public could use’ to support the case for local site provision.

Eighteen months on and the government has failed to deliver on even these very modest pledges. Instead, we got ‘Dealing with illegal and unauthorised encampments’; the Department for Communities and Local Government guidance document which warranted the recent press release and TV spots. Why this document needed any press at all is puzzling, given the fact that it turned out to be a ten page copy-and-paste job, rehashing the existing legislation on unauthorised Traveller sites. This seems to have little to do with policy and everything to do with dog-whistle, minority-bashing politics.

Cheering on evictions might be a cheap Tory vote winner, but in the real world they are not a solution. When homeless Traveller families are moved on from one place they don’t just vanish into thin air; rather the problem is shifted to another county or borough. This is costly to us all; both in terms of the expense of repeat evictions and in the huge social costs attached to banishing a community to the margins of our society.

If we want to solve the ‘blight’ of unauthorised Traveller sites there is only one solution; adequate authorised sites. The scale of this solution is achievable even within the current economic context. Four thousand additional pitches are required; less than one square mile across the whole country. But to achieve this proactive policy strong leadership is needed in the face of lowest common denominator anti-Traveller NIMBYism.

Statutory services can support Travellers through more effective monitoring

Article originally published on the Guardian website

In 2011 Gypsies and Irish Travellers were for the first time recognised as an ethnic group on the UK census, under the code "W3". In the wake of the census, many statutory services are following suit and including a "Gypsy or Irish Traveller" category in their own ethnic monitoring procedures.

This recognition is undoubtedly a step in the right direction for a marginalised community with acute needs in terms of housing, healthcare, education and social care.

Gypsies and Irish Travellers are "the most excluded ethnic minority groups in British society today". Life expectancy is 10-12 years below the national average and 18% of Gypsy and Traveller mothers have experienced the death of a child, compared to less than 1% of the general population. In addition, 25% of Gypsy and Traveller children are not enrolled in education and, for those that do attend, educational attainment is lower than for any other ethnic group.

Research into the social care needs of Gypsies and Travellers has found that a culture of self-reliance means that people often tend to "make do" and not complain rather than seeking support from social services.

Service providers will not necessarily realise that a client comes from a Travelling background and may consequently neglect to consider issues such as low literacy or accommodation difficulties.

In this context it is of great concern that innovative community social work projects such as theHaringey travelling people's team, which engages Gypsy and Traveller families before crises occur, are falling victim to local government cuts.

In April 2012 the Department for Communities and Local Government published 28 cross-departmental commitments to improve outcomes for Gypsies and Travellers. Key points included tasking the NHS and local governments with identifying ways to include the needs of Gypsies and Travellers in the commissioning of health services and ensuring that the needs of Gypsies and Travellers are reflected in joint strategic needs assessments.

Gypsies and Travellers are also to be specifically highlighted as a vulnerable group in the revisedOfsted framework and will be included in the Department of Work and Pensions' monitoring system when universal credit is introduced later this year.

But tickboxes on forms can achieve little unless staff are pro-active in their approach to monitoring. This has been demonstrated in the case of the prison service, where a huge disparity exists between two distinct monitoring regimes: prisons themselves have a W3 category on their "P-Nomis" system but it is up to Traveller prisoners to volunteer this information at reception.

Currently only 219 prisoners in England and Wales are registered as W3; 0.2% of the prison population. In contrast, the prison inspectorate makes a point of asking every prisoner surveyed: "Do you consider yourself to be Gypsy/Romany/Traveller?; 5% of prisoners in local prisons responded "yes" to this question.

Effective monitoring can give services more of an insight into their Gypsy and Traveller user group and allow them to reflect on how organisational practices meet the needs of this community.

Being counted is a vital first step to making a community feel like it counts. The kind of pro-active monitoring exemplified by the prison inspectorate is a vital tool for addressing the extreme marginalisation of Gypsy and Traveller communities in the UK.

It is the start of a dialogue with a user group who often feel ignored and unwanted.