CONSERVATIVE GROUP RESPONSE TO THE POLICE & CRIME COMMISSIONERS PROPOSED SUMMIT ON UNLAWFUL ENCAMPMENTS
We welcome this opportunity to make a submission to the planned summit next year on Unauthorised Encampments. It would be most helpful if our views in this matter could be passed directly to the Police & Crime Commissioner for her further consideration.
- year, Bristol girds itself for the seasonal incursions and various problems associated with traveller trespass on public land. Many wards are affected by this nuisance, including Avonmouth & Kingsweston; Henbury & Brentry, Hengrove & Whitchurch Park; Stockwood and Stoke Bishop (most notably on Durdham Downs). Of course, in reality, any open space is vulnerable to such opportunist and impromptu illegal stop overs.
This year in Stockwood alone, there have been two major incidents despite the fact that Bristol City Council expensively maintains a transit camp - with vacant pitches - at KingsWeston Lane. Craydon Road fields were subject to large encampments in May and June. The anti-social behaviour surrounding this site was really quite appalling, with the families involved using the wooded area as a make-shift latrine and fly-tipping 25 tonnes of waste on the site following eviction. The second time caravans and vehicles were removed as a result of the Police using powers under S.61 of the Criminal Justice & Public Order Act 1994.
The Conservative Group has been vociferous in our support for action under this legislation. Of course, the police were able to do so in the latter case due to the fact that the trespassers had been shown to have used ‘threatening and abusive’ language/intimidating behaviour towards local residents.
We remain concerned over the repeated cost of obtaining possession orders, clearing and cleaning sites in the aftermath of arrivals, and the complicated, sometimes lengthy processes involved in removing these people from public and/or private land. A motion on this subject was tabled for the meeting of Full Council last July (copied below) but, unfortunately, did not get debated. This essentially sets out the group’s position quite succinctly:-
(1) Motion to be moved by Councillor Steve Jones
POLICING TRAVELLER TRESPASS
“Council remains concerned over the recent plethora of illegal traveller encampments set up around the city.
Whilst these transgressions are normally a seasonal phenomenon associated with the traditional travelling months beginning in the spring and running through to the Autumn, it is recognised that Bristol’s valued open and green spaces are vulnerable to such incursions all year round.
Council notes that whilst there are a range of effective statutory powers available to provide a quick remedy (eviction) regrettably, there is a shortage of equivalent provisions at the disposal of the private citizen. Instead, such persons are expected to seek repossession of their land through the civil law route. This can be a time-consuming and expensive process.
Consequently, Council calls on the Mayor to (i) lobby Central Government to issue new guidelines on the application of sections 61-62 of the Criminal Justice & Public Order Act 1994 to the effect that, operationally, there is to be a presumption in favour of the use of this police enforcement power and (ii) that he liaise with the Police & Crime Commissioner for Avon & Somerset Constabulary to change the local culture or approach taken by her Force in such matters to intervene and use these public order provisions in most cases of traveller trespass.”
Bristol residents, the settled community, are basically fed up with subsidising a minority alternative lifestyle. Our position on this issue is clearly at odds with that formally adopted by the Labour Party which in their last manifesto made the following commitment:-
“We will end racism and discrimination against Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities, and protect the right to lead a nomadic way of life.” (For the Many not the Few at page 112)
Instead, the Conservative stance is much more aligned to the majority of people’s reasonable expectations or beliefs. Whilst gypsies and travellers enjoy protected status interestingly, Irish travellers only officially got this recognition in Eire this year, they cannot be allowed to live outside the law. It doesn’t matter how many ‘myth’ busting booklets are published on this sub-culture or treatises written on public misconceptions if some of these families reinforce negative stereotypes as a result of flagrant criminality.
We recognise that the Government has gone a long way towards protecting green spaces from illegal campsites. There are indeed an extensive range of powers available to public bodies and the private individual which seek to deal with this problem. Here, perhaps there is some scope for some streamlining or simplifying available powers. Conservative Members also acknowledge the need for local agencies to plan and work together to identify vulnerable sites, and have clear processes in place for obtaining injunctions.
In the Craydon Road example given above, council officers have now constructed ‘Roman’ style fortifications (ditch & mound) defences to prevent any repetition of events at this location. It is hoped that these physical barriers will deter future trespass. However, this will not be a practical solution for every potential plot.
A recent report on the traveller phenomena in our region revealed the view of some professional civil enforcement officials that Councils were not rigorous enough in dealing with this issue. Often, local authorities prefer to use the County Court route to obtain a possession order instead of removals under S.78 of the Criminal Justice & Public Order Act 1994 through the Magistrates Court. Accordingly, it is important that this option is more fully explored.
It is our contention that there has to be a change in the approach of enforcement authorities if there is to be an effective policy on unlawful encampments. The group strongly believes the police should be prepared to take a more proactive stance on this and intervene at the earliest opportunity to prevent problems of traveller trespass quickly escalating. In addition, we believe orders to leave land need to cover an extensive geographical area – to prevent site-hopping – analogous to powers given to operate a 5 mile exclusion zone under s.65(2) Criminal Justice & Public Order Act 1994. The power to seize vehicles suspected of having been involved in the commission of offences under environmental protection legislation should also be far more frequently applied.
Signed on behalf of the Group