Objectors to official traveller sites encounter fewer problems than feared

A unique study supported by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation reveals that former objectors to three traveller sites in central Scotland have encountered far fewer problems than they expected. Researcher Tom Duncan of The Planning Exchange, Glasgow spoke to neighbours and nearby farms and businesses between one and five years after they had lost their fight to stop local sites being opened. He found that:

• Contrary to earlier worries about traffic safety, crime and swamping of local facilities, most people interviewed said the site had very little impact at all on their lives. Many had based their fears on experience of illegal or unauthorised encampments, rather than official sites.
• Most residents had no specific complaints about the sites and acknowledged that their previous opposition had proved groundless.
• Primary schools in the area had been able to cope with increased numbers and felt that traveller children had integrated well with other pupils. Education authorities had, in most cases, provided extra resources, including a specialist part-time teacher.
• Police welcomed the contribution that official sites had made to accommodating traveller families and reported no attributable increase in crime.

Evidence regarding the sites' effect on property prices was inconclusive. Some claims were made that house prices had been affected, but these proved hard to establish. A new home being built within 50 metres of the boundary of one site suggested the impact on the local housing market had been minimal.

The main exception to a generally positive picture came from a small number of farms and businesses who reported incidents relating to site residents including trespass, damage to crops, and livestock being worried by dogs. Other problems related to petty theft, alleged harassment and parking of lorries and other vehicles on private land.

The research suggests that even these remaining difficulties might have been avoided if spending on security and other measures that were discussed at the time of creating the site had been implemented. Work that had been abandoned on grounds of cost included a security fence, a lorry parking area and a children's play area.

Tom Duncan said: "The three official sites in this study had far less impact on their neighbours than the community had feared. Objections based on the supposed lawlessness and anti-social behaviour of travelling people and their children have proved to be unjustified in these cases.

"Furthermore, it appears that for the price of a modest amount of additional spending, some of the remaining problems experienced by farms and businesses might have been prevented. Government guidance to local authorities on creating permanent sites for travelling people - including the cost per pitch - may need to be revised."