Gypsy/Traveller Sites (Hansard, 30 October 2002)

§ Lord Avebury
asked Her Majesty's Government:
What steps they intend to take to implement the report from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister on the provision and condition of local authority gypsy/traveller sites in England.

§ The Minister of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Lord Rooker)
My Lords, the research on the provision and condition of local authority gypsy/traveller sites in England was only recently published. Therefore, Ministers will need some time to consider the implications of the sites research and how it will inform future policy development, and the planning for the Government's 2003 spending review. Local authorities will certainly be involved in the consultation process, as their day-to-day knowledge on the ground will be crucial if our policies are to have any chance of success.

§ Lord Avebury
My Lords, does the Minister agree that at this stage we can at least decide that a mistake was made in 1994, when Parliament left it entirely to private owners to provide all the necessary gypsy accommodation? Does he further agree that the research proves that the combined resources of local authorities, social landlords, the housing corporations and the private sector will be needed if we are to deal with the impending crisis in terms of shortage of accommodation? Does the Minister accept the estimate by his researchers that at least 1,000 new pitches will be needed over the next five years? If that is correct, will not local authorities in the areas where gypsies habitually reside have to take specific account of the needs of gypsies in their homelessness strategies?

§ Lord Rooker
My Lords, to risk an accusation of being pedantic, I am not going to agree with any aspect of the research. The report was made to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister—it was not "from" the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister as stated in the Question. So there is no timetable; there is no money; and Ministers are considering this report, which was provided to the department.

§ Lord Rea
My Lords, the report referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, suggests the need for an expenditure of £16.78 million over the next five years to bring sites up to standard, including those that have been closed. That level of spending cannot be met from site income. Are the Government giving serious consideration to how the money will be raised—preferably from central government rather than entirely from the budgets of local authorities, which might have to raise their council tax in order to meet it?

§ Lord Rooker
My Lords, there has already been a government programme for refurbishing the sites which is coming to the end of its third year. We must look at the 2003 spending review. I accept that there 198 are differences in sites. Private and county council sites have caused problems for some residents, as opposed to district council sites, if only because of the way in which rent officers become involved. It is a valuable piece of research that has been produced for the department. It raises many serious issues about the lack of pitches. It is right to say that it highlights a shortage of some 2,000 pitches. It is much easier to cope with the disturbances that occur in urban areas as a result of some the travellers' anti-social behaviour if legitimate sites are available. That is clearly identified in the research.

§ Lord Condon
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the challenge of dealing with traveller trespass and associated criminal damage is a major point of friction between police and the public in a number of counties? Does he further agree that any clarification of designated sites is to be welcomed as it will encourage a more consistent police response and enhance police-public relations in those counties with the most severe challenge?

§ Lord Rooker
My Lords, I certainly agree with the right reverend Prelate. The police in some areas have made it clear that they will not move people on if there are no sites for them to be moved to. That is a responsibility of the local authorities. He is quite right: there are major issues. So that no one runs away with the wrong idea, I should say that the report deals only with sites and numbers. It does not deal with management or with anti-social behaviour. That is another issue altogether.

§ The Lord Bishop of Portsmouth
My Lords, the right reverend Prelates on these Benches appreciate and support the sentiments expressed by Members of this House on the occasion of the final appearance in this House of the Archbishop of Canterbury in his role as Archbishop. We should not like the Government to adopt a national policy of any kind on travelling Archbishops! But do the Government realise that there is a crying need for a national policy that can be applied as regards the entire Roma community in these islands?

§ Lord Rooker
My Lords, first, perhaps I may apologise to the noble Lord, Lord Condon, for seeing him only out of the corner of my eye.

§ Lord Condon
My Lords, the apology is accepted!

§ Lord Rooker
My Lords, there needs to be a policy. There will always be travellers and nomads, in whatever country. It is right that provision is made in a civilised fashion so that they are part of an inclusive society as much as they want to be. That requires education and support from government and local government. It is right that we do that, and that we review the position from time to time. I cannot say that it would be a good idea to impose the conditions that have applied in the past as regards site requirements. 199 I am not in any position to do so. The report will be considered and we shall have consultation with local authorities on the best way forward.

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, will the Minister give an assurance that, when consideration of the report is complete, the Government will continue, as previous governments have, to support local authorities which apply the planning regulations equally to all people, whether travellers or non-travellers?

§ Lord Rooker
My Lords, the Government will support all local authorities which apply the planning regulations in accordance with the law.

§ Lord Mackie of Benshie
My Lords, has this country had an influx of gypsies from eastern Europe, where in some countries they have been very badly treated? If so, are they adopting the traditional way of life of our gypsy population?

§ Lord Rooker
My Lords, I do not know. All I can say is that most people in this country would not be able to obtain their fruit and vegetables were it not for an "influx" of people from eastern Europe to pick them. There is a big shortage of such workers. This is a seasonal issue. People come to this country in their thousands to carry out this activity, and they return home during the winter. This is not an "influx" in the way that the noble Lord put it in his question.