Resticted Gypsy and Traveller definition would face human rights challenges, lawyer says

From Inside Housing

A proposed new definition of Gypsy and Traveller communities which only includes those who ‘actually travel’ would be hit by human rights challenges, a barrister has said.

Local government minister Brandon Lewis proposed the change in planning law last week, after expressing concern about the impact of Gypsy and Traveller sites on the green belt.

Currently planning law requires Gypsy and Traveller communities to show they are travelling for work, unless they are temporarily stopping to educate children or because of ill-health or age, in order to be able to more easily obtain permission for sites.

Further tightening this definition would open the door to challenges under human rights legislation, Marc Willers, a barrister specialising in Gypsy and Traveller cases at Garden Court Chambers in London said.

He said: ‘We would argue forcefully that a requirement to show [Gypsies and Travellers] are continually travelling when there are no stopping sites available and draconian measures in place to force them to move on is a wholly disproportionate breach of their rights.’

Mr Lewis said a consultation would be launched ‘in due course’ proposing changing the definition.

Helen Jones, chief executive of Gypsy and Traveller charity Leeds Gate, described the announcement as ‘dog whistle politics’.

‘It makes it sound as if there is room to do something more punitive, when the punitive thing has already been done,’ she said.

Mr Lewis confirmed applications for Gypsy and Traveller sites on the green belt will continue to be called in for direct determination by ministers, as has been the case since July last year.

Mr Willers said this has led to ‘significant delays’ in determining planning decisions, and questioned why the minister ‘did not trust’ his officials to apply government policy.