to think that evicting hundreds of travellers from their site is unfair and immoral

[rocketty]

It's an illegal site. They didn't have planning permission. It's greenbelt...

but it used to be a car scrapyard (not rolling fields and thatched cottages then), they own the land and it's right next to a legal settlement.

They've obviously broken the law by settling here, but on balance, wouldn't it be more ethical to let them be? The children are settled at school and getting an education. Lots of people are prejudiced against gypsies and travellers but they've got to live somewhere.

I've seen the news articles about it. It makes me feel sad.

Interesting Curry, I lived near a very small village where we had a Traveller site built (we are talking 80's now) and the biggest issue was the nuisance caused by the protestors, the traveller site was fairly quiet (I used to collate the crime reports for my boss and rarely saw it mentioned) when complete.

not sad at all.illegally occupying site.cant just rock up and occupy a site and be left to it.the children can still access free nhs and schooling from any other site they occupy

Peachy There should be this; there should be that. Just like that. In the meantime the site remains and expands and invites others to do the same. I think not.

peachy - wasn't responding to you particularly (didn't see your posts until after i had typed) :)

It's not defunct land though - it is green belt. There are plenty of brownfield old insutrial sites out there that could be developed but this is green belt, and tbh they're either idiots or completely arrogant for buying green belt land and then thinking they could get away with building on it.

POncey i think it is something like that, it' actually quite ahrd to qualify for 'unintentional homeless' status. And even if you do, even many of the the emergency places have waiting lists these days.

How can the Traveller community supprt others? the legal sites are generally full. Everything they try and get permission for seems to be refused. I don't condone building without permission but if you can;t get anywhere to build with permissin, and you are not classed as homeless and you can't get a job / rental if anyone knows you are a traveller.....

I can imagine it feels rather like being trapped.

The only way to stop this happening is acknowledge the shortage of traveller sites and deal with that.

Do you eman grenbelt as official status? It was a scrapyard in relaity though wasn't it? So whilst holding that legal protection wasn;t exactly green or undeveloped.

In what sense are they traveller if they've been in the same ace fir a a decade?

more to the point though, a lot of UK law is precedent and case law. So they can't let a bunch of people - whoever they are - ignore the planning regulations because if they do countless othe much less photogenic or emotive developer type bastards will use that precedent to do what the hell they like. It's harsh on the poor children being move on, but it's just the way it is.

Well Andrew I think so.

So be it.

With no thought for solutions nothing changes and some children grow up homeless, with disrupted educations, pitifully poor life expectancies and stuff all chances to establish any societally preferable alternatives.

You and me both, worra.

There seems to be a distinct difference between true Romany Gypsies, to whom settling in any one place for more than a short period of ime is anathema, and 'travellers' who exploit and circumvent planning law to set up permanent homes en masse on green belt and agricultural land.

"People are prejudiced against gypsies and travellers but they have to live somewhere"

What's the point of defining yourself as a traveller if you want to stay in one place?

I agree that there is a deep underlying problem of a lack of traveller sites. I find it hard to fathom why there is so little sympathy and understanding for travellers and gypsies on MN. I look forward to the day when gypsy-bashing is as taboo as homophobia and religious and racial hatred.

Or indeed, disablism.

Given that being disabled is not a choice.

for all the people that are asking (worra, izzy, Wolef, ...) how they can be travellers if they don't travel:

voila

I have no sympathy at all. If you choose to live outside of society, then why should that same society bend over backwards to accommodate you? As far as I'm concerned, society does not owe travellers alternative sites - it's down to them to buy land and apply for planning permission like everyone else has to.

The state hasn't made these children homeless - their parents have. They knew right from the start that if they built on this site illegally, the time would come when they would be evicted. They took a chance on the council not following through, so it's on their own heads that this has happened.

I haven't bashed gypsies or travellers OP. Quite the opposite - I feel very sad too

I was trying to point out the impact that this site has had in realityon a very small local community as I see it from very close quarters

Don't be fooled by the fact that this has happened in Basildon council's jurisdiction, that it is in a urban, new town setting. It is a small rural community, several miles from the nearest small town (Wickford or Billericay) and has had a huge detrimental effect on the residents (the school in particular)

I can't just build in my back garden, build a massive extension without planning permission. I would be forced to take the building down. Whether you agree or not they are breaking the law.

90% of planning applications from Travellers are rejected - compared to 30-40% from anyone else.

It's not that easy for them to get permission.

So. They are no longer allowed to travel as there are no longer any places they are allowed to stop. They buy land - land that has been used industrially for many years - and try to live there. That's no good either.

What should they actually do?? Where should they go?

It was not "industrial" QOFE

I live in the town and know people who have worked in the formerly little village school. I have been abused in the supermarket and my children assaulted. Almost everyone i know has had problems of this sort and I live far away from the site.

Yes, it has had an impact.

I am paying council tax and receive f-all in the way of services for my disabled son. I do resent that, sorry.

Travellers have to live somewhere, yes. I suggest that those of you with spacious gardens and a lovely picturesque high-performing primary school should throw open your arms and your gates in welcome if you're going to call me bigoted. The NIMBY attitude pisses me right off.

Defend rights all you like. I'm all for rights. But with rights come responsibilities.

This is the village

Crays Hill

google map of the area

Does it look an industrial area to you?

Perhaps their applications are rejected because they are completely unsuitable for the areas where they want to build. Or perhaps they are applying for retrospective permission having built on a green field site. Perhaps the local residents don't want to deal with the problems travellers often bring with them.

Perhaps they should try to fit in with society rather than expect society to fit in with them.

queen - building a big settlement is completely different to building an extension on the back of an existing house. Your 90% vs 30-40% is only relevant if it is comparing like with like. I can well imagine that at least 90% of large settlements on green belt land are rejected. I would actually expect it to be more like 99%.

Travellers have moved into fields that they bought 5-10 years ago. The land was often half acre sites designated for agricultural use and used by people keeping a horse or two but no more than that.

What is unfair is that people who buy land with the intent to build on it, like my father, apply for planning permission before they erect a building. The travellers in the area put in mobile homes then insisted that the council supply services as people were living on the land. The council have not been able to charge council tax but must provide services.

Queen Rather than ask where should these people go is where did they come from? Can we not send them back? If not, why not? I don't remember there ever being so many travellers.

The planning process isn't easy for 'anyone else'. My father spent close to GBP100k on the planning process to knock a 3 bed farmhouse down and build a better, energy efficient, 4 bed plus office home with a garage. It has always been very difficult to build homes on agricultural land and a 10% approval rate seems rather high considering my Dad couldn't even get permission to put a barn up for cattle as the potential was there for the barn to be converted to housing after a certain number of years.