Consultation on Police Powers re: Travellers Ending Soon

[Farfrae]

Apologies if this has been posted before (but I haven't seen it). However, time is short.

On 5 November 2019, the Government launched a consultation to strengthen police powers against roadside Travellers; the consultation ends soon on the 4th March.

The home office online consultation is here

The travelling community seem to have got themselves organised and the link below to their website is popping up on a lot of left wing Facebook pages etc. (I'm certainly on the left as some of you know - but not that far left ) to garner support to their cause

https://www.gypsy-traveller.org/cam...-police-powers-against-gypsies-and-travellers

People here who are affected may wish to make the appropriate noises. But I'm left wondering if the 'Friends, Families and Travellers' are being more effective than the NFU etc?

 

[steveR]

Apologies if this has been posted before (but I haven't seen it). However, time is short.

On 5 November 2019, the Government launched a consultation to strengthen police powers against roadside Travellers; the consultation ends soon on the 4th March.

The home office online consultation is here

The travelling community seem to have got themselves organised and the link below to their website is popping up on a lot of left wing Facebook pages etc. (I'm certainly on the left as some of you know - but not that far left ) to garner support to their cause

https://www.gypsy-traveller.org/cam...-police-powers-against-gypsies-and-travellers

People here who are affected may wish to make the appropriate noises. But I'm left wondering if the 'Friends, Families and Travellers' are being more effective than the NFU etc?

First part of the survey seemed loaded, but no worse than some I have seen.

Does the survey remain anonymous or are names/addresses published by the HO??????

 

[Farfrae]

Does the survey remain anonymous or are names/addresses published by the HO??????

No Idea and I agree that they should make that point clear.

It is of course possible to write and email as well. It is possible to complete the online form without entering an address (I tried) so for anyone who has issues the could write possibly write 'address witheld because of possible retaliation ' (or something similar) in that box if they have concerns?

I was just trying to point out that the 'Travelling Community' seem to have got their act together in getting publicity out and maybe farmers should be doing the same?

 

[Steevo]

First part of the survey seemed loaded, but no worse than some I have seen.

Does the survey remain anonymous or are names/addresses published by the HO??????

The survey in the FFT link is not the full government consultation, hence its bias. They’ve just condensed it to make it easier for their members.

 

[Guy Smith]

 

[deleted user 837354]

Illegal or not I bet the police won't bother. They won't go anywhere near these places as it is as they don't have anywhere to send them nor the manpower to do anything.

 

[Guy Smith]

I agree that Enforcement and police resource are always the other part of this but it helps to give the police and the courts the powers they need in the first place.

 

[Steevo]

Thanks Guy. I'm trying to access the website line in your article but can't seem to load it.

 

[Steevo]

Seems the NFU website is having issues today

 

[steveR]

No Idea and I agree that they should make that point clear.

It is of course possible to write and email as well. It is possible to complete the online form without entering an address (I tried) so for anyone who has issues the could write possibly write 'address witheld because of possible retaliation ' (or something similar) in that box if they have concerns?

I was just trying to point out that the 'Travelling Community' seem to have got their act together in getting publicity out and maybe farmers should be doing the same?

I submitted with no address detail given on teh Govt site.

 

[Goweresque]

Illegal or not I bet the police won't bother. They won't go anywhere near these places as it is as they don't have anywhere to send them nor the manpower to do anything.

They rarely enforce the basic laws of the land on pikeys, so why should they bother to enforce another one?

 

[Steevo]

Here's the actual page of the consultation and response form link....

Strengthening police powers to tackle unauthorised encampments

Consultation on measures to criminalise trespassing when setting up an unauthorised encampment in England and Wales.

www.gov.uk

 

[Steevo]

It's pretty confusing....


1. To what extent do you agree or disagree that knowingly entering land without the landowner’s permission should only be made a criminal offence if it is for the purpose of residing on it?
2. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the act of knowingly entering land without the landowner’s permission should only be made a criminal offence if it is for the purpose of residing on it with vehicles?

Key word in both of those - "ONLY".


3. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the landowner or representatives of the landowner should take reasonable steps to ask persons occupying their land to remove themselves and their possessions before occupation of the land can be considered a criminal offence?
4. To what extent do you agree or disagree that a criminal offence can only be committed when the following conditions have been met?

	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree or disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
the encampment prevents people entitled to use the land from making use of it
the encampment is causing or is likely to cause damage to the land or amenities
those on the encampment have demanded money from the landowner to vacate the land
those on the encampment are involved or are likely to be involved in anti-social behaviour

5. What other conditions not covered in the above should we consider?
6. To what extent do you agree or disagree that police should be given the power to direct trespassers to suitable authorised sites in a neighbouring local authority area?
7. Should this be subject to conditions around agreements being in place between local authorities?
8. Should there be a maximum distance that a trespasser can be directed across?
9. Should there be any other conditions that should be considered when directing a trespasser across neighbouring authorities?
10. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the period of time in which trespassers directed from land would be unable to return should be increased from 3 months to 12 months?
11. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the number of vehicles needing to be involved in an unauthorised encampment before police powers can be exercised should be lowered from 6 to 2 vehicles?
12. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the police should be granted the power to remove trespassers from land that forms part of the highway?
13. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the police should be granted the power to seize property, including vehicles, from trespassers who are on land with the purpose of residing on it?
14. Should the police be able to seize the property of:

	Yes	No
Anyone whom they suspect to be trespassing on land with the purpose of residing on it
Anyone they arrest for trespassing on land with the purpose of residing on it
Anyone convicted of trespassing on land with the purpose of residing on it

15. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the proposed amendments to sections 61 and 62A of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 contained in this consultation are sufficient measures to tackle the public disorder issues which are associated with unauthorised encampments without the requirement for introducing specific powers that criminalise unauthorised encampments?
16. Do you expect that the proposed amendments to sections 61 and 62A of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 contained in this consultation would have a positive or negative impact on the health or educational outcomes of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities?
17. Do you expect that criminalising unauthorised encampments would have a positive or negative impact on the health or educational outcomes of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities?
18. Do you have any other comments to make on the issue of unauthorised encampments not specifically addressed by any of the previous questions?



11. About you

Please use this section to tell us about yourself

19. Full name


20. Job title or capacity in which you are responding to this consultation exercise (for example, member of the public)


21. Date

	DD/MM/YYYY

22. Company name/organisation (if applicable)


23. Address


24. Postcode


25. If you would like us to acknowledge receipt of your response, please tick this box:

• Please acknowledge receipt

Address to which the acknowledgement should be sent, if different from above

26. If you are a representative of a group, please tell us the name of the group and give a summary of the people or organisations that you represent.

 

[Grassman]

Illegal or not I bet the police won't bother. They won't go anywhere near these places as it is as they don't have anywhere to send them nor the manpower to do anything.

Gypsies are the popular thing now with all this boxing malarky at the moment. However Tysons father wasn't allowed to travel to the USA due to a previous conviction. Whoever would of thought that. They don't get involved in crime apparently!