Lies, damned lies and Gypsies
New figures from the government department responsible for Gypsy and Traveller accommodation reveal a small improvement to the lives of a small number of Gypsies and Travellers. But such good news is still seen as a plague on everyone’s houses by the media. Jake Bowers looks at some lies, damn lies and statistics.
In the dying days of 2008, the Department for Communities and Local Government released two sets of figures that should be welcomed by Gypsy and Traveller communities. The first showed that just under £21.6 million had been awarded to fund new and existing Gypsy and Traveller sites. The other shows a slow, but measurable increase in the number of “tolerated” Gypsy and Traveller sites across England and Wales. But before we look at what difference those figures really mean to Gypsy and Traveller communities, let’s jump for just a moment into the parallel universe where any news relating to Gypsies and Travellers is by definition bad news.
On January 4th, the Sunday Telegraph claimed that a “Rural revolt over £100m bid to expand permanent gipsy sites” was already underway. A day earlier, the Daily Mail claimed “Locals left powerless as Traveller Sites Soar”; raising the ancient fear that England’s green and pleasant was about to plundered by hordes of blood thirsty dirty Gypsies and our evil offspring. There’s no need to dispel the old myths that these articles recycle, because the figures themselves tell the real story.
On 18 December 2008 Iain Wright MP announced the successful bidders for funding from the Gypsy and Traveller sites grant. Despite newspaper claims that the £21.6 million will create 40 new sites, the details of exactly where the money will be going reveals that the vast majority of money is to spent on the maintenance of existing sites.
Of the 46 grants, only 6 will be going to create new Gypsy and Traveller sites. Among them is a £2.4 million scheme at East Howle, Co Durham; a £ 2 million project at Ghyll’s Bank, Carlisle; a £2 million plan at Swallow Park, Kingston upon Thames, south-west London; and a £1.8 million scheme at Fenny Lock in Milton Keynes.
At best the plans will result in secure homes for no more than 50 or 60 families – a universe away from the Sunday Telegraph’s claim that the government is planning to “house 25,000 gipsies and travellers on hundreds of new sites”. The majority of funding will actually go towards maintaining sites, making life just a little bit more tolerable on many run-down council Gypsy sites. £21.6 million is not exactly loose change, but in reality it will only buy a small change in a few lives.
But perhaps the most revealing figures were also released at the same time. Each July and January local councils across England and Wales go out and count Gypsies and Traveller caravans in the same way bird-watchers search for the nests of rare species. The results for July 2008 reveal only a small improvement in the living conditions of those Gypsies and Travellers that still live in caravans. They reveal that there are actually seven less pitches on council Gypsy sites than at the same time in 2006, but that 1268 more caravans are now on private land. The figures prove that Gypsies and Travellers are increasingly being allowed to provide for our own needs.
But what of those that have no permission to be where they are? The figures reveal that there are 260 more Gypsies and Traveller caravans being “tolerated” on land we own without planning permission, and that there are 136 more Gypsies and Traveller caravans being “tolerated” on land we don’t own without planning permission.
Some might argue that it’s high time our culture isn’t just “tolerated” but welcomed and celebrated, but it’s undeniably a step in the right direction, however small. But good news never did sell newspapers did it? And the final bit of good news? Those twitchers at your local county hall counted 1257 more Gypsy and Traveller caravans than they did two years ago. Imagine the headlines once the tabloid hacks discover that Gypsies and Travellers aren’t just surviving, but breeding?!