‘We saw it coming’: Councillor attacks response to unlawful Traveller site near Leeds
He has called for stronger police powers
A council has been accused of failing to take effective action to stop an unlawful traveller site being established near Leeds, despite receiving advance warnings that land was about to be occupied.
Councillor Tim Grogan has submitted a motion to next week’s full North Yorkshire Council meeting calling for urgent changes to the way the authority responds when land is occupied and developed without planning permission.
The motion follows the creation of a Traveller site on a four-acre paddock at Betteras Hill Road, Hillam, near Selby, on September 11.
The Reform councillor, who represents the Monk Fryston and South Milford division, claims the council’s response was ineffective despite receiving information suggesting the land was likely to be occupied.
He said legal advice indicated there were insufficient grounds to seek a pre-emptive injunction, a decision he described as highly frustrating.
Coun Grogan said a convoy of trucks and industrial machinery carrying building materials, septic tanks and large quantities of hardcore arrived at the site at 4.44pm that Friday.
He described the operation as having a “mechanical synchronisation akin to an operation of military professionalism”.
He said the incident followed similar developments at Lumby and Biggin, also in North Yorkshire.
His motion, seconded by Conservative councillor Andrew Lee, calls for an out-of-hours planning enforcement service so officers can respond quickly to similar incidents.
It also seeks the urgent allocation of suitable land for Travellers and a policy to speed up retrospective planning applications where sites have been substantially altered without permission.
Coun Grogan is also calling for the council to lobby the Government for new police powers, including the ability to impose a 72-hour emergency stop on unauthorised development.
The proposed powers, which he says are supported by the Hertfordshire Police and Fire Commissioner, would allow officers to halt significant development where there were reasonable grounds to believe planning permission was required but had not been granted.
They would also introduce a power of arrest, giving councils time to investigate and take formal enforcement action.
Coun Grogan said: “I am not here to demonise the Travelling community but what has happened in Hillam, Lumby and Biggin is wrong.”
“I recognise and value democracy but this is neither. It is favouring individuals who break the law with impunity over those law-abiding rate payers who play by the rules.”
“This, it could be argued, has created two-tier planning enforcement.”
However, council leader Coun Carl Les defended the authority’s response and questioned whether additional out-of-hours staffing would be justified.
He said: “The issue isn’t as straightforward as Coun Grogan and Coun Lee are suggesting.”
“They’re also asking for us to tell the police how to do their job, which I don’t think is the role of the council, although we can have a conversation with the police.”
“The only point I would make about timeliness is that we got onto this issue on the Monday and prepared an application for an injunction, which are detailed legal documents so took some time to prepare.”
“It was then submitted to the court midweek, and the court did not hear it until the Saturday. We’ve got to understand what the timeframe is in all this before we commit to having extra staff on duty over the weekend on the off-chance that something may happen.”
A report accompanying the motion acknowledges that the proposals would have financial implications, including additional staffing costs and potential expenditure on acquiring or allocating land.
It also warns that changes would require a full equality impact assessment and compliance with national planning legislation.
The proposed emergency police powers would require a change in the law.
Last month, a High Court judge agreed to allow the interim injunction to be extended.
The hearing heard that the occupants of an unauthorised site were planning to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate in a bid to remain on the land.
The injunction will remain in place until the outcome of the appeal.