Brighton & Hove Traveller Scrutiny Panel

Media attention and intervention by local politicians reveal that site provision and housing for Travellers is one of the most contentious issues in Brighton and Hove. In 2011, Basildon Council made international news and was the subject of widespread condemnation for its handling of the ‘Traveller issue’. Brighton and Hove Council was keen to handle the creation of a Traveller Strategy through an informed and rational debate. My research has focused on the political participation and representation of Roma communities across Europe and I was approached, via the Community University Partnership Programme (Cupp), to act as an independent chair of a Scrutiny Panel which would at once scrutinize and inform the creation of the city’s new Traveller Strategy. It was felt that the current approach was not working for either locals or Travellers, including those which reside in the city year round. The new strategy should address contentious issues head on, including the decision to create a permanent site in Brighton. Three local councillors from the Green, Conservative and Labour parties respectively constituted the Scrutiny Panel and we were supported by the Scrutiny Team within the Council. We heard evidence from over 30 people, including Travellers, concerned local residents, MPs, the editor of the Argus, policy advisors, advocates for Travellers, council officers and support workers. The purpose of the Scrutiny process was to hear as much evidence as possible, asking pertinent and sometimes difficult questions, in order to make informed decisions and present our findings to the council.

Our main findings were that Travellers are one of the most marginalised groups in the city and experience acute discrimination when attempting to access services such as health, housing, education and employment. The most significant and controversial finding was that Brighton and Hove should create a permanent site for Travellers, which we believed was necessary to address societal marginalisation, breakdown prejudices, and facilitate integration. We visited the transit site at Horsdean and spoke to residents. One mother highlighted the positive impact that having a permanent site can yield as her son can attend school and make friends, noting that her son had never received Christmas cards before and had recently come home with a schoolbag full of them from classmates.

One of the main challenges we faced was ensuring that the Panel could listen to evidence in a safe, neutral environment. The issue of Travellers, in particular site provision, is highly politicised with local politicians weighing into the debate and often fanning the flames of discontent. For these reasons we decided to hold closed evidence gathering sessions which were recorded. We also had to hear from all sides including some anti-Traveller tirades. Our responsibility was to remain calm and considered throughout, which I found difficult on several occasions. One of the key successes was drawing attention to how the issue is reported in the Argus, asking the editor to clarify how they report on Travellers, which is sensationalist, disproportionate and negative. This led, indirectly, to a change of practice with the Argus presenting positive stories on and from Travellers. The Scrutiny Team told me this had been one of the most successful scrutiny processes given the contentious nature of the topic and when I presented our findings to the Council and answered questions I did so knowing that the process was fair, extremely well-informed and balanced. Our findings were approved by the Council when it voted in plenary. Horsdean has since been selected as the permanent site and the planning application process is underway. Finally, the Scrutiny Panel on Travellers was awarded with a national prize for ‘Innovation’ by the Centre for Public Scrutiny.

I found the experience to be incredibly rewarding, allowing me to apply my expertise as a researcher to a real-world issue. It was refreshing to come down from the ivory tower and put my knowledge to good use and I have been encouraged by the outcome. The work was certainly challenging and controversial but I was supported throughout by the university including my Head of School and the Scrutiny Team in the council. I have been able to draw on this experience to inform my research as well as my teaching and would encourage anyone to get engaged in such activities; after all the university is a vital part of our city and we have a duty to share our knowledge to improve the lives of all its residents.

Aidan McGarry, Senior Lecturer School of Applied Social Science

A.Mcgarry@brighton.ac.uk