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.

Families are no longer sending their children to local primary schools if the population of traveller children becomes too large - what the tipping point is I don't know.

At dcs' school, traveller children are assimilated pretty well (although on reflection although invited, they don't reply to/attend birthday parties), but take a full part in the shows and other school events.

However, in the next village over, no local children attend the local school, it's entirely traveller now. The Ofsted report noted the traveller children do not attend school all year round, which is v disruptive to learning and friendships. Very few go on to secondary education. The PSHRE curriculum is now entirely geared to a traveller one. The report also noted the difficulty in recruiting and retaining staff.

In the nearest town, the LEA stepped in and provided a school on the large travellers' site after parents threatened a mass withdrawal, lawsuits and the press coverage was getting sensational. There were accusations of sexual assault against primary age girls, violence and intimidation, theft, parents squaring up in the playground, police having to attend every morning and afternoon...just horrendous. It's much much better now, but that is because it's a much more segregated community.

Interesting Perry... I may have surmised it because my Grandad's wife went ahead to England and left the children with her mother when they were older, nine and ten at least, not infants.

When my DD was little, my Dad would do things such as return her to me after "treating her" to their company for a couple of hours on a Sunday "afternoon", having had a McDonalds, him waving a Yorkie bar, packet of Maltesers and a huge Galaxy at nine at night when she was but two years old while I was expected to be grateful that he had bought her these marvellous things.

I put this odd behaviour down to him being a war-child who rarely had sweets.

It's strange but from lots of stories from those days things were so so tight that most talk about jealousy.
The money was still just terrible and often the mothers also went to England to get work as there was more in terms of factory work etc at the time.

Things become far more bitterly politicised in the North than the South as mostly we Irish are fair and peaceful community types My granny used to put a flag out on the 1st July for her family who were in the Somme.
Times have really really changed and we always seem to give out politics of today to those living then. Granny would say they couldn't afford principles.
Might be just us though!!

Might be, yes.

My grandmother had a job in a glue factory and then worked with asbestos. At her funeral lots of people attended and even my mother didn't know who they were but the priest said that she had helped clothe and feed people who arrived in the local area without regard to colour or creed from her own meagre incomings.

But to get back on topic I bet she paid the equivalent of council tax even if she was Irish and owned a pair of hooped earrings.

When my parents came here from Cork around 57yrs ago, there were signs up and down the A13 in the windows of the B&Bs saying "Vacancies. No Dogs, No Irish".

I think someone wrote a book about that if I remember rightly?

My mother's family were from Cork too, worra.

It was, "no blacks, no Irish" at one point, but at people from Ireland being discriminated against along with dogs!

Well back then, there weren't that many black people in Dagenham.

It was mostly Irish who travelled to the area to seek work in Fords...hence the B&B signs on the A13.

I just can't imagine it really, but my Dad got a job there and worked his way up to management...against the odds really because there were very few Irish doing anything more than manual labour.

He retired years ago but now oddly enough, my DH works there and has done for about 5yrs.

The travellers though...are they irish travellers or aligned with/ the same as the Roma peoples?
Still don't really understand that side of it if I'm honest as it seems to change depending on who you ask

Oh I meant to say, the night before his interview he slept in a phone box on the A13 because he couldn't get a B&B.

Sorry, took the thread a bit off topic there with a personal history lesson on the liberty family

It was so different though then. My GF spent some time working on the cattle boats and that was luck labour in most cases as it was chosen often with the cargo piecemeal. He could be away for weeks at the drop of a hat.

worraliberty Thu 01-Sep-11 00:44:27

When my parents came here from Cork around 57yrs ago, there were signs up and down the A13 in the windows of the B&Bs saying "Vacancies. No Dogs, No Irish".

I think someone wrote a book about that if I remember rightly?

"No Blacks or Irish" was the title of Johnny Rotten/Lydon's autobiography (parents were Irish) Pretty good read, if I remember correctly.

Haven't read all this thread and i know the issue of traveller's sites is an emotive one but has anyone commented on the double standards in Planning legislation. All too readily granted to build out of town supermarkets (which damage, even destroy villages' and small towns' livelihoods)

I think they need somewhere to live and shouldn't be forced to live in bricks and mortar.

to add to the tome of the WinterIscoming family history post , ah well...

better this than a huge argument. And I find local history fascinating.

"My GF spent some time working on the cattle boats and that was luck labour in most cases as it was chosen often with the cargo piecemeal"

This sort of thing for example.

More family history please

Tyr Villages and towns don't have livelihoods - people have livelihoods.

Planning applications go through a process; elected governments set guidelines and elected councils apply them. It's not perfect but it's better than This is my land and I will do what I like on it - which is what the travellers at Dale Farm are doing.

Suppose it depends on whether you think Travellers are granted PP fairly or not or whether fairly reasonable requests are often turned down as many places do not want them there.
Depends whether you think the lack of municiple sites are forcing travellers to behave in this way

Sorry. Perry, if I want to build an extension and the council says No it is not forcing me to build one illegally; it is performing the planning function.

One is about an extension to the place you live the other is about having a place to live

For many would-be extenders it is extend or move. But they still have to abode by the law.

YABU.... 'Unfair and immoral' is applying different rules to different groups. These people have had their say in court, lost the case, and have to abide by the same laws as everyone else. Special treatment would only create resentment and discrimination.

Sorry, haven't read the whole thread yet but tagging this on as it's an area in which I have some experience.

Once upon a time, Local Authorities had a responsibility to provide adequate and suitable sites to accommodate Travellers and Gypsies. In the early 90's, the then Tory government removed this responsibility with the result that LAs, in the main, stopped providing sites because they no longer had to.

Then legislation was introduced which basically made unauthorised encampments illegal. Police were given the power to enforce and remove encampments, impounding caravans and towing vehicles and imposing fines etc for failure to comply with an enforcement order.

Legislation + lack of permanent and transit (temporary stopping places) sites = huge number of Travellers and Gypsies with no 'base' to return to and unable to travel (in the way that they had done in the past) due to legislation and a lack of places to legally stop whilst travelling.

With a lack of other options, many Travellers and Gypsies sought their own accommodation solution by buying land that they could site their caravans on and live in their extended family groups. Then they couldn't get planning permission...hence today's situation.

And yes, in many instances Travellers pay council tax. If they live on a site where there is a liability to pay rent, then they will also be liable to pay council tax. 'Unauthorised' sites are more of a grey area (as there are different types of unauthorised encampments - some exist with the permission of the landowner but are still classed as 'unauthorised' as the landowner can revoke the permission at any time, or, as in the news, some are on land in the ownership of the occupants) but I know many do receive council services (bin collection etc) and will therefore be paying council tax.

yanbu

If a group of people are treated as if they are above the law it only serves to increase resentment against them from all those who do have to obey the law (and who soon get stamped on when they step out of line).

It is in the Travellers' best interests for people to think they are part of the same society and subject to the same rules as everyone else, otherwise the current perception of a two tier society will continue and anger and intolerance will grow.