Squatting under threat...
Anna Key | 17.02.2010 11:32 | Free Spaces
The Conservatives have today announced new plans to tackle widespread public concern about the exploitation of the planning system. A new policy blueprint will pledge to address the small minority of travellers who occupy illegal or unauthorised sites. The proposals will include plans to:
* Create a new criminal offence of intentional trespass, as already in place in the Republic Of Ireland. Trespassers who refuse to move after being asked to do so by a uniformed police officer will face arrest. At present, trespass (which does not involve criminal damage) is a civil offence - forcing the landowner to go to court. This will allow both squatters and travellers occupying property without permission of the landowner to be removed quickly.
* Curtail the ability to apply for retrospective planning permission. This will stop the practice of people laying down concrete on weekends or bank holidays and then putting in a planning application (currently, planning enforcement cannot commence whilst an application is pending).
* Scrap John Prescott’s unfair Whitehall planning rules, which are compelling councils to build traveller camps on the Green Belt and compulsory purchase people’s land to find sites.
* Give tougher ‘stop notice’ enforcement powers to councils with authorised sites, and support central funding for councils to build authorised sites â€" rather than it failing to local taxpayers.
* The Human Rights Act will be replaced with a British Bill of Rights to prevent 'human rights' lawyers sidestepping the planning system and demanding special treatment. The Bill of Rights will bring
greater clarity to the police and councils when taking decisions on planning and eviction.
Shadow Minister for Local Government and Planning, Bob Neill says:
“The British public want to see fair play for all, rather than special treatment being given to some. Labour’s changes have undermined community cohesion by creating a legitimate sense of injustice in the planning system. Law-abiding citizens understandably have to jump through many hoops to build in rural areas. Yet it’s wrong that certain groups have been given a green light to bypass those rules and concrete over the Green Belt when no-one’s looking.â€
Labour Ministers have given travellers special treatment and allowed them to flout planning laws. But law-abiding homeowners have to go through town hall bureaucracy if they want to build a new home or an extension. This perception of unfairness breeds causes tension in local communities.
Many travellers have been buying farmland to set up permanent encampments in breach of planning law. They only apply for planning permission retrospectively, if at all, and use the legal process and Labour’s Human Rights Act to sidestep planning rules. Court decisions, coupled with weak planning enforcement powers, have created precedents that give travellers the green light to establish encampments on greenfield land.
Whitehall planning guidance issued by John Prescott in 2006 has given the green light to development on the countryside, weakening Green Belt protection and forcing councils to consider using compulsory purchase powers to meet new top-down regional targets for traveller camps (ODPM, Circular 01/06: Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites, February 2006.). In the two years before that 2006 guidance, 68 per cent of planning appeals relating to traveller sites were dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate; in the two years afterwards, 65 of appeals were granted planning permission by the Inspectorate (DCLG, Progress Report on Gypsy and Traveller Policy, 16 July 2009, p.13).
Labour Ministers have issued a ‘diversity and equality’ planning guide. It calls for ‘positive action’ and tells planners to give minority groups like travellers special treatment in the planning process (Hansard, 9 February 2009, Col. 1700WA). Under Labour, promoting the ‘equality and diversity’ is now a material consideration in the planning process, but the effect on residents’ house prices from an illegal traveller camp is not (Hansard, 9 September 2009, Col. 2014WA).
Harriet Harman’s new Equality Bill will give travellers even more privileged treatment, because of new duties on local authorities which will distort planning applications and the provision of local services (Hansard, 5 October 2009, Col. 2295WA; Hansard, 5 October 2009, Col. 2295WA).
The Government claims that it has given new powers to councils to issue Temporary Stop Notices to tackle breaches of planning controls. Yet Whitehall guidance states that they cannot be used to stop an illegally erected building being occupied as a residence; and they can only prohibit the continued stationing of a caravan if there is a ‘compelling public interest’ and a ‘risk of harm’ - yet such stricts test will rarely apply (ODPM Circular 02/2005, Temporary Stop Notice, March 2005).
The Government has even admitted: ‘There has been a number of cases reported recently of developments of... traveller sites where planning applications have been submitted to the local authority just as it was closing, and too late for any action to be taken to prevent development taking place over the course of the weekend’ (DCLG, Progress Report on Gypsy and Traveller Policy, 16 July 2009, p.13).
Labour’s special treatment has led to more illegal traveller sites not fewer. The number of unauthorised traveller sites has soared since the introduction of the Human Rights Act. Many travellers are now buying cheap farmland and building on it without prior planning permission.
Since the Human Rights Act came into force in 2000, there has been a four fold increase in unauthorised traveller camps on travellers’ own land which are ‘tolerated’ â€" indicating how travellers are treated with a ‘soft touch’ from some town halls. Similarly, there has been a near three-fold increase in traveller camps since 2008 on their own land which are ‘not tolerated’ (January 2000 to January 2009, cited in Hansard, 8 June 2009, Col. 757WA). As of January 2009, a massive 1,279 unauthorised travellers are ‘tolerated’ and a further 1,086 are not ‘tolerated’ on travellers’ own land. There are a further 1,315 unauthorised traveller camps on other people’s land (ibid.).
THE CONSERVATIVE POLICY PROPOSALS
“Conservatives believe in social responsibility. Different people, from different communities, should be free to lead their lives in different ways. But this freedom must come with a responsibility to the wider community. The vast majority of travellers accept this, but a very small minority do not.
Planning rules should ensure fairness between the settled and the traveller communities. Local authorities have a role to ensure the provision of suitable authorised sites to tackle genuine local need for their area in consultation with local communities. In addition, recent UK case law has clarified that councils need to provide authorised sites locally if they are to be able to take effective action against unauthorised sites, even though enforcement still remains a major problem.
Where, therefore, councils have made appropriate provision for authorised sites in their area, which reflect local need and historic demand, we will provide them with stronger enforcement powers to tackle unauthorised development and illegal trespass. In addition, we will introduce a new criminal offence of intentional trespass.
At the same time, it is important that settled council taxpayers do not foot the bill for the construction of new authorised sites. We will also therefore reform the system of traveller site funding to councils so that councils are properly compensated for new sites and require travellers to make a contribution to the appropriate cost of services on authorised sites.
The Human Rights Act affects all the planning, eviction and enforcement decisions made by all public authorities, including councils and the police. It has made it more difficult and expensive to evict trespassers from private and public property, and has overridden planning law by allowing travellers to go ahead with unauthorised development. We will replace Labour’s Human Rights Act with a new British Bill of Rights, which will help address these problems.
The Labour Government has used the regional planning system and top-down targets to force local planning authorities to build new traveller camps, often on Green Belt land and, if necessary, use their compulsory purchase powers to obtain land for these new traveller sites. Conservatives disagree with top-down building targets, be it for traveller camps or new houses.
As part of the abolition of regional planning and the Regional Spatial Strategies, targets for the provision of traveller camps will be scrapped. In addition we will also scrap John Prescott’s controversial guidance on travellers.
Our promise to limit the concept of retrospective planning permission will also ensure that another route by which the planning system has been abused by those seeking to use unauthorised sites will be curtailed.
As a result we will have introduced a legal framework, similar to that which exists in the Irish Republic, to enable councils to remove unauthorised dwellings. This will allow councils to tackle the problem of unauthorised sites including both those built on land which is owned by travellers and land which is not.â€
* Create a new criminal offence of intentional trespass, as already in place in the Republic Of Ireland. Trespassers who refuse to move after being asked to do so by a uniformed police officer will face arrest. At present, trespass (which does not involve criminal damage) is a civil offence - forcing the landowner to go to court. This will allow both squatters and travellers occupying property without permission of the landowner to be removed quickly.
* Curtail the ability to apply for retrospective planning permission. This will stop the practice of people laying down concrete on weekends or bank holidays and then putting in a planning application (currently, planning enforcement cannot commence whilst an application is pending).
* Scrap John Prescott’s unfair Whitehall planning rules, which are compelling councils to build traveller camps on the Green Belt and compulsory purchase people’s land to find sites.
* Give tougher ‘stop notice’ enforcement powers to councils with authorised sites, and support central funding for councils to build authorised sites â€" rather than it failing to local taxpayers.
* The Human Rights Act will be replaced with a British Bill of Rights to prevent 'human rights' lawyers sidestepping the planning system and demanding special treatment. The Bill of Rights will bring
greater clarity to the police and councils when taking decisions on planning and eviction.
Shadow Minister for Local Government and Planning, Bob Neill says:
“The British public want to see fair play for all, rather than special treatment being given to some. Labour’s changes have undermined community cohesion by creating a legitimate sense of injustice in the planning system. Law-abiding citizens understandably have to jump through many hoops to build in rural areas. Yet it’s wrong that certain groups have been given a green light to bypass those rules and concrete over the Green Belt when no-one’s looking.â€
Labour Ministers have given travellers special treatment and allowed them to flout planning laws. But law-abiding homeowners have to go through town hall bureaucracy if they want to build a new home or an extension. This perception of unfairness breeds causes tension in local communities.
Many travellers have been buying farmland to set up permanent encampments in breach of planning law. They only apply for planning permission retrospectively, if at all, and use the legal process and Labour’s Human Rights Act to sidestep planning rules. Court decisions, coupled with weak planning enforcement powers, have created precedents that give travellers the green light to establish encampments on greenfield land.
Whitehall planning guidance issued by John Prescott in 2006 has given the green light to development on the countryside, weakening Green Belt protection and forcing councils to consider using compulsory purchase powers to meet new top-down regional targets for traveller camps (ODPM, Circular 01/06: Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Caravan Sites, February 2006.). In the two years before that 2006 guidance, 68 per cent of planning appeals relating to traveller sites were dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate; in the two years afterwards, 65 of appeals were granted planning permission by the Inspectorate (DCLG, Progress Report on Gypsy and Traveller Policy, 16 July 2009, p.13).
Labour Ministers have issued a ‘diversity and equality’ planning guide. It calls for ‘positive action’ and tells planners to give minority groups like travellers special treatment in the planning process (Hansard, 9 February 2009, Col. 1700WA). Under Labour, promoting the ‘equality and diversity’ is now a material consideration in the planning process, but the effect on residents’ house prices from an illegal traveller camp is not (Hansard, 9 September 2009, Col. 2014WA).
Harriet Harman’s new Equality Bill will give travellers even more privileged treatment, because of new duties on local authorities which will distort planning applications and the provision of local services (Hansard, 5 October 2009, Col. 2295WA; Hansard, 5 October 2009, Col. 2295WA).
The Government claims that it has given new powers to councils to issue Temporary Stop Notices to tackle breaches of planning controls. Yet Whitehall guidance states that they cannot be used to stop an illegally erected building being occupied as a residence; and they can only prohibit the continued stationing of a caravan if there is a ‘compelling public interest’ and a ‘risk of harm’ - yet such stricts test will rarely apply (ODPM Circular 02/2005, Temporary Stop Notice, March 2005).
The Government has even admitted: ‘There has been a number of cases reported recently of developments of... traveller sites where planning applications have been submitted to the local authority just as it was closing, and too late for any action to be taken to prevent development taking place over the course of the weekend’ (DCLG, Progress Report on Gypsy and Traveller Policy, 16 July 2009, p.13).
Labour’s special treatment has led to more illegal traveller sites not fewer. The number of unauthorised traveller sites has soared since the introduction of the Human Rights Act. Many travellers are now buying cheap farmland and building on it without prior planning permission.
Since the Human Rights Act came into force in 2000, there has been a four fold increase in unauthorised traveller camps on travellers’ own land which are ‘tolerated’ â€" indicating how travellers are treated with a ‘soft touch’ from some town halls. Similarly, there has been a near three-fold increase in traveller camps since 2008 on their own land which are ‘not tolerated’ (January 2000 to January 2009, cited in Hansard, 8 June 2009, Col. 757WA). As of January 2009, a massive 1,279 unauthorised travellers are ‘tolerated’ and a further 1,086 are not ‘tolerated’ on travellers’ own land. There are a further 1,315 unauthorised traveller camps on other people’s land (ibid.).
THE CONSERVATIVE POLICY PROPOSALS
“Conservatives believe in social responsibility. Different people, from different communities, should be free to lead their lives in different ways. But this freedom must come with a responsibility to the wider community. The vast majority of travellers accept this, but a very small minority do not.
Planning rules should ensure fairness between the settled and the traveller communities. Local authorities have a role to ensure the provision of suitable authorised sites to tackle genuine local need for their area in consultation with local communities. In addition, recent UK case law has clarified that councils need to provide authorised sites locally if they are to be able to take effective action against unauthorised sites, even though enforcement still remains a major problem.
Where, therefore, councils have made appropriate provision for authorised sites in their area, which reflect local need and historic demand, we will provide them with stronger enforcement powers to tackle unauthorised development and illegal trespass. In addition, we will introduce a new criminal offence of intentional trespass.
At the same time, it is important that settled council taxpayers do not foot the bill for the construction of new authorised sites. We will also therefore reform the system of traveller site funding to councils so that councils are properly compensated for new sites and require travellers to make a contribution to the appropriate cost of services on authorised sites.
The Human Rights Act affects all the planning, eviction and enforcement decisions made by all public authorities, including councils and the police. It has made it more difficult and expensive to evict trespassers from private and public property, and has overridden planning law by allowing travellers to go ahead with unauthorised development. We will replace Labour’s Human Rights Act with a new British Bill of Rights, which will help address these problems.
The Labour Government has used the regional planning system and top-down targets to force local planning authorities to build new traveller camps, often on Green Belt land and, if necessary, use their compulsory purchase powers to obtain land for these new traveller sites. Conservatives disagree with top-down building targets, be it for traveller camps or new houses.
As part of the abolition of regional planning and the Regional Spatial Strategies, targets for the provision of traveller camps will be scrapped. In addition we will also scrap John Prescott’s controversial guidance on travellers.
Our promise to limit the concept of retrospective planning permission will also ensure that another route by which the planning system has been abused by those seeking to use unauthorised sites will be curtailed.
As a result we will have introduced a legal framework, similar to that which exists in the Irish Republic, to enable councils to remove unauthorised dwellings. This will allow councils to tackle the problem of unauthorised sites including both those built on land which is owned by travellers and land which is not.â€
Anna Key
Comments
Hide the following 14 comments
Can we have a link?
17.02.2010 12:12
Jim
link
17.02.2010 12:45
This will effect far more than just travellers and squatters, people who go and play football on school fields, skateboarders/bmxers/etc using industrial parks after hours, setting up ramps in empty buildings or building jumps on woodland/fields. Basically anyone using space that is not their own.
anon
Some clarifcation
17.02.2010 15:46
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2002/en/act/pub/0009/sec0024.html#partiii-sec24
which makes it an offence to "enter and occupy any land where such entry or occupation is likely to prevent persons entitled to use the land from making reasonable use of the land or substantially interfere with the land, any amenity in respect of the land, the lawful use of the land or any amenity in respect of the land.” (paraphrased and condensed)
The Irish law says that if you don’t leave when the pigs tell you, you can be nicked and face up to a month imprisonment and up to a £3000 fine.
So, pretty serious if the tories get elected and pass this. Past attempts to criminalize trespass have only been fought off with squatters getting organized and banding together with other groups to at least mitigate the legislation. As the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities are the direct target, we need to be building better links with them. The recent criminalization of squatting in the Netherlands shows how precarious the laws on squatting can be.
Travellers’ Times article:
http://travellerstimes.remotenewmedia.co.uk/list.aspx?c=00619ef1-21e2-40aa-8d5e-f7c38586d32f&n=13444717-30ae-46a1-bd69-fde19bbe214b
torygraph article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/7220134/Tories-plan-crackdown-on-travellers.html
Sam
organise now!
17.02.2010 15:54
I'll talk to a few of my fellow bristol squatters - and come up with a more solid proposal - lets use this threat to unite some currently disperate groups.
squatter
implications (other)
17.02.2010 22:17
"Trespassers who refuse to move after being asked to do so by a uniformed police officer will face arrest."
sab
noted
18.02.2010 03:24
get in touch anyone who wants to make links.
notts squatters
e-mail: morewilderness@riseup.net
Homepage: http://www.squatlobster.org.uk
Labour same ?
18.02.2010 10:18
Sometimes I think we are better off with the Conservative's..
EG...At least you know where you stand with Conservitive..They say what they intend to do..
where as Labour say they wont do this and that then Do it..
Cold Stomper
@ same
18.02.2010 11:21
whilst they are all lying murdering bastards. vote yoda, every god damn time!
vote yoda
Meet
18.02.2010 13:12
another squatter
Meet
18.02.2010 18:47
Biff
National/Regional Meetings
18.02.2010 19:32
Dont panic organize
Ivor Had-Enough.com
organise time for a new freedom network
19.02.2010 17:51
london squatters and travellers up for some resistance.
lets have a national meeting. Criminal justice act stylee, build bridges and networks to other groups.
find a place and a date,notts up for it or london will. Time for big reclaim land and eco village offensive.2010
actions on tory racist policy makers.when they came for the travellers ,gypsies and squatters what did u do it will be your group next.
trespass laws further privatising the land ,diggers stand up now dig in for victory.
Link up with election meltdown, for a hung parliament may 1st converge on parliament square from 4 directions, peoples assemblies forming, global peoples assemblies across the world in june called for by international networks.
System change not climate change.
keep networking
fire man
The Conservative Party stands for freedom with responsibility
22.02.2010 19:36
Squatter in London here. Don't think personally another 'gathering' or meet-up will achieve anything - i'd rather see number of social demands made that will generally include workers in poverty rather than elevate squatters into a group of their own; this way we can start a campaign that includes people outside of the subculture (those who self identify as squatters and/or recognise this symbol: http://pad3.whstatic.com/images/thumb/0/08/Squatter-symbol.jpg/180px-Squatter-symbol.jpg)
bill stickers
Only just seen this article
28.03.2010 02:23
(Just a note to Sam's comment, I wouldn't trust them that this is just a swipe at travelers that conveniently just happens to have wider effects. I'd say this is a swipe at the lot (they know how annoying not having this law tied up is for a whole magnitude of reasons) but will just use the newspaper (all and not just tabloids, at that) generated hate of travelers as an easy excuse to get this law in.
This could go two ways though... be the spark for a massive movement to ignite or just piss away what dregs were left
Thimble