gypsy and traveller accommodation appendix 10 - kent

Appendix 10

Regional Spatial Strategy (South East Plan) Partial Review on Provision of Gypsy and Traveller

Accommodation

REPORT OF KENT & MEDWAY STAKEHOLDER EVENT

LENHAM COMMUNITY CENTRE 10th AUGUST 2007

Contents page Report of Stakeholder Event

Engaging Stakeholders

Invitees

Format of the Meeting

Key Points Raised by Stakeholders Appendices Appendix 10a: Flyer for Stakeholder Engagement Event Appendix 10b: Letter of Invitation Appendix 10c: Invitees Appendix 10d _PowerPoint Presentations Appendix 10e: Stakeholder Questionnaire Returns

Report of Stakeholder Event Engaging Stakeholders SEERA is required, under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, to prepare, publish and keep under review a Statement of Public Participation setting out how public engagement and community involvement in the Partial Review process has been achieved. To achieve this it is necessary for each county area to demonstrate that relevant bodies have been engaged in the preparation of the Advice to SEERA for its own area. Stakeholder engagement in Kent and Medway was achieved through two specially arranged events. The first of these, the subject of this report, was planned both as a briefing event to inform participants of the Partial Review process and an opportunity to ascertain stakeholder priorities and seek views on the proposed methodologies and processes leading up to the submission of the advice for a distribution of pitches over the next ten years. Invitees and Attendees A flyer outlining the proposed programme for the event (Appendix 10a) was sent with a letter of invitation (Appendix 10b) were sent to planning and housing officers from all authorities in the area, environmental and community groups, representatives of the gypsy and traveller communities and other relevant organisations. (See Appendix 11c: Invitees). While there was initially some concern that the Gypsy and Traveller community had been under-represented in the invitations list (Appendix 10c), the event itself was very well supported by them, with over 30 members of the community attending. The short notice given of the meeting, and the fact it was held at a time when many people were on holiday – both of which were an inevitable result of the short timescale given for the preparation of the Advice to SEERA prevented some people from attending. Nevertheless, the turn-out on the day achieved a representative cross section of interests and the numbers recorded indicate a significant level of interest Format of the Meeting Mags Harrison (Continuous Improvement Manager, KCC Social Services) was unavailable to introduce the meeting and this task fell to Leigh Herington (County Planning Officer). He and Dick Feasey outlined the purpose of the meeting, the context of and process for the South East Plan Partial Review, and how the event would influence the advice to be submitted to SEERA. Copies of their presentations are appended to this report (Appendix 10d). Bill Forrester, Head of KCC’s Gypsy and Traveller Unit, then explained the GTAA (Gypsy & Traveller Accommodation Assessment) process and the information that had been obtained from this work. Reports had been received from East Kent, West Kent and Sevenoaks GTAAs but North Kent had not been able to deliver this in time for the meeting.

Gypsies and travellers listen attentively to presentations on the Partial Review After the presentations the meeting broke into several smaller groups to consider possible distribution options and ways in which these could be developed. Each group was seated at a table with a mix of interests (e.g. planner, housing officer, gypsy/traveller community) so that a range of perspectives would be available to inform discussion. Questionnaires were distributed to tables to guide discussion, and maps showing environmental constraints were available. Participants were encouraged to record key points from these workshop sessions on flip charts and/or the constraints maps. These sessions provided an opportunity for face to face contact between several different interest groups, helped break down barriers and preconceptions, and led to lively discussions and exchanges of ideas.

Workshop sessions: helped to break down barriers and preconceptions A final plenary session provided an opportunity to feedback from the discussion groups and outline how the work would be taken forward. Key Points Raised by Stakeholders While all participants were invited to complete and return questionnaires only 16 were filled in (Appendix 10e). Of these 10 respondents identified themselves as members of the Gypsy/Traveller community. Although the response rate was low, the questionnaires did prove useful in forming a basis for discussion in groups and at the final feedback session. There was general consensus among all stakeholders on the need to make greater provision in Kent and Medway for gypsies and travellers. Most expressed the view that with the shortage of stopping places in Kent and the continual moving on, they were unable to obtain proper healthcare and education for their children. The children present made posters stating: ”Gypsies need sites” and “Gypsy Children need Schooling” and staged their own good-natured demonstration.

The children’s demonstration highlighted the importance of education to the gypsy community: ‘Childrian must go to Shcool’ The gypsy community’s frustration over the timescale of the South East Plan, stressing the need to provide accommodation now, clearly emerged as its most pressing concern. While the urgency of the need was recognised by local authorities it was explained that the Partial Review was part of the South East Plan preparation process and would have to feed into the RSS timescale. It was intended that by making properly planned provision for the future gypsy/traveller children, who had attended the meeting in significant numbers, would not have to experience the sort of problems which the G/T community currently faces. With regard to the quantity of provision that would be required many people found it difficult to find an objective basis for making such an estimate and did not feel able to address the issue. Of those that did, the range of suggestions put forward for county-wide provision (15 to 300) served to highlight this difficulty rather than provide any steer on the actual numbers likely to be required. The G/T community tended to feel that provision should be made where demand currently arises (the GTAA-based ‘Option A’ approach) and, while accepting that each local authority area should provide some additional pitches, few locational preferences were apparent. There is more concern that sites should be safe and secure, have good accessibility to medical and educational facilities, and be free from intimidation by the settled community. While local authorities and amenity groups felt that areas with nationally important environmental designations should not be used to site new caravans some members of the G/T community considered that these areas would provide pleasant places in which to live. There was a general feeling that the Green Belt could be used to locate additional pitches once other alternatives within a district had been fully assessed. With regard to the size of encampments there was no clear preference. While some felt that smaller sites generated less conflict, both with the settled community and

within the G/T community itself, others said expressed a preference for family-based sites. Up to 16 pitches could be required to accommodate an extended family. The stakeholder event achieved a high level of involvement from the gypsy/traveller community and some clear messages emerged, particularly in relation to immediate needs.

Appendix 10a: Flyer for Stakeholder Engagement Event

Stakeholder Engagement Event

Gypsy & Traveller Accommodation South-East Region Review

Friday 10th August

Lenham Community Centre (Map Attached)

9.30 - Coffee and Registration

10.00 - Introduction to the event – Mags Harrison, Facilitator

• Welcome to the event - Leigh Herington, County Planning Officer, KCC

• The Partial Review of the South East Plan – Dick Feasey, KCC Planning Policy Manager

• Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments in Kent - Bill Forrester, Head of Gypsy and Traveller

Unit, KCC, with panel from Kent GTAAs •

11.00 - Questions Comfort/Coffee Break - 25 minutes

11.25 - Workshop/ideas gathering session looking at where people would ideally locate gypsy sites in

Districts (hypothetical numbers).

12.30 - Feedback session from each workshop to the whole group. With comments on those from other

people, if time. Mags Harrison facilitating.

13.00 - Buffet Lunch provided

Any Enquiries please call Joanna Burns - Admin Support Officer – Gypsy & Traveller Unit Tel: 01622 221798 [email protected]

Appendix 10b: Letter of Invitation Dear All, Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation: Partial Review of South East Plan: Stakeholder Engagement Event Lenham Community Centre, ME17 2QT – Friday 10 August The South East Regional Assembly (SEERA) is in the process of preparing that part of the regional plan concerning the provision of gypsy and traveller accommodation. The Kent and Medway local planning authorities have been asked to provide two alternative options to SEERA by 15 October, for the distribution of pitches needed, over the next ten years. As part of the process to produce those options, we are holding two stakeholder events, to which you are warmly invited. The first of these is on Friday 10 August, Coffee at 9.30 - Meeting Start 10am, at Lenham Community Centre, Groom Way, Lenham ME17 2QT The purpose of the first event is to explain what has happened so far in Kent and Medway, talk about the Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments in outline (only two of the four have been published so far), and discuss what needs to happen by 15 October, and who is doing what to meet that deadline. We shall also include workshops which will consider how site needs should be met across Kent and Medway. We hope you will be able to attend this event. If you are unable to attend please nominate a willing substitute. I attach a map showing where the venue is, and how to get there. As we are providing morning refreshments and lunch, please would you confirm, by e-mail in response to this (if you have received it by e-mail) and/or by completing and returning the attached tear-off slip, or by phone to 01622 221798 or 08458247247 and ask for the Gypsy and Traveller Unit. Please would you let us know any special dietary requirements or any other special needs of anyone attending. The venue is compliant with the Disability Discrimination Act. I hope you will be able to join us at this event, and look forward to meeting you. Yours sincerely

County Planning Officer

Appendix 10c: Invitees Department of Communities & Local Government SEERA Government Office for the South East Kent County Council (Environment & Regeneration Dirtectorate) Kent County Council (Adult Social Services Directorate) Kent County Council (Children, Families & Education Directorate) Kent County Council (Communities Directorate) Kent County Council (Chief Executive’s Directorate) Kent Police Kent Fire & Rescue Services Ashford BC Canterbury CC Dartford BC Dover DC Gravesham BC Maidstone BC Sevenoaks DC Shepway BC Swale BC Thanet DC Tonbridge & Malling BC Tunbridge Wells BC C A English Canterbury Gypsy Support Group Cranbrook Parish Council Campaign to Protect Rural England Friends, Families & Travellers P D Hasler Kent Association of Parish Councils Kent Invicta Chamber of Commerce Kent Trust for Nature Conservation Nigel Whitburn; PAAD Race Equality Commission Shelter Showmen’s Guild of Great Britain The Civic Society South East The Weald of Kent Protection Society Tom Crookall Tony Day Tony Parry Willsher

Appendix 10d: PowerPoint Presentations

South East Plan Partial Review: South East Plan Partial Review: Gypsy and Traveller Gypsy and Traveller

AccommodationAccommodation

STAKEHOLDER EVENTSTAKEHOLDER EVENT

LenhamLenham Community Centre 10Community Centre 10thth August 2007August 2007

South East Plan Partial Review: Gypsy and Traveller AccommodatioSouth East Plan Partial Review: Gypsy and Traveller AccommodationnSTAKEHOLDER EVENTSTAKEHOLDER EVENT

1010thth August 2007August 2007

INTRODUCTION & WELCOMEINTRODUCTION & WELCOME

Leigh HeringtonLeigh HeringtonCounty Planning OfficerCounty Planning Officer

Kent County CouncilKent County Council

Secure place to live – a basic human need

Government commitment to ensure gypsy and traveller communities have same rights and responsibilities as every other citizen

Planning seeks sustainable and equitable development.Planning seeks sustainable and equitable development.

For gypsies and travellers to maintain their lifestyle they For gypsies and travellers to maintain their lifestyle they require:require:

reasonable chance of gaining planning permissionreasonable chance of gaining planning permission

sufficient supply of sitessufficient supply of sites

Gypsies/travellers have unique relationship with planning system.

As with house dwellers their homes need planning permission yet:

• few sites have permission

• difficult to obtain permission for new sites

TodayToday’’s aims:s aims:

Find out about Partial Review Find out about Partial Review Understand the role of Gypsy & Traveller Understand the role of Gypsy & Traveller

Accommodation Assessments (Accommodation Assessments (GTAAsGTAAs))Inform evidence gatheringInform evidence gatheringThink about issuesThink about issuesAsk questionsAsk questionsMake suggestions and commentsMake suggestions and comments

South East Plan Partial Review: Gypsy and Traveller AccommodatioSouth East Plan Partial Review: Gypsy and Traveller AccommodationnSTAKEHOLDER EVENTSTAKEHOLDER EVENT

1010thth August 2007August 2007

SOUTH EAST PLANSOUTH EAST PLANPARTIAL REVIEW PARTIAL REVIEW

Dick FeaseyDick FeaseyPlanning Policy ManagerPlanning Policy Manager

Kent County CouncilKent County Council

Gypsies and Travellers Gypsies and Travellers

Planning Definition ( Circular 01/06)Planning Definition ( Circular 01/06)

‘‘Persons of nomadic habitat of life whatever their race Persons of nomadic habitat of life whatever their race or origin , including such persons who on grounds or origin , including such persons who on grounds only of their own or their familyonly of their own or their family’’s or dependentss or dependents’’educational or health needs or old age have ceased to educational or health needs or old age have ceased to travel temporarily or permanently, but excluding travel temporarily or permanently, but excluding members of an organised group of travelling show members of an organised group of travelling show people or circus people travelling together as suchpeople or circus people travelling together as such’’

General approach set out in:

•The Housing Act 2004

•The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

The Housing Act 2004

• gave better protection for gypsies and travellers (extended protection from eviction and harassment);and

• established a new duty for councils to assess the accommodation needs of minority groups

The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

• introduced major changes to the planning system with emphasis on delivering sustainable communities

• emphasis on community involvement throughout preparation of plans to better reflect community aspirations and to help more effective implementation

•Two tier system of plans :- the Regional Spatial Strategy- Local Development Frameworks

South EastPlan

DistrictLocal

DevelopmentFrameworks

Planning Applications

REGIONAL

LOCAL

LOCAL

How the planning system operates

Circular 1/2006 Circular 1/2006 introduced new approach at introduced new approach at local and regional levels.local and regional levels.

New approach requires:

Gypsy & Traveller Accommodation Assessments (GTAA)

These:

• assess need

• identify pitch requirements

for each local authority area.

Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) [ the South East Plan]

• provides a strategic view of needs across the region; and

• identifies the number of pitches to be provided for each local planning authority over a ten year period

Development Plan Documents (DPD) prepared by each local authority

• identify specific sites to provide for pitch numbers identified within RSS

A A Government Task ForceGovernment Task Force established in 2006 to:established in 2006 to:support and encourage site provision support and encourage site provision

find new ways to strengthen enforcement find new ways to strengthen enforcement powers.powers.

Task Force interim report published March 2007

• supports general approach set out in Housing Act 2004 & Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

• recognises enforcement against unauthorised sites is only effective when there is appropriate provision of authorised sites

• urges local authorities to find local solutions for local needs, but set in a regional context.

The South East Plan The South East Plan –– RSS for South East RegionRSS for South East Region

prepared by the Regional Assembly (SEERA) prepared by the Regional Assembly (SEERA)

sets strategic planning framework sets strategic planning framework

submitted to Government for approval following submitted to Government for approval following full public consultationfull public consultation

is is ‘‘testedtested’’ through a public inquiry ( Examination through a public inquiry ( Examination in Public)in Public)

when adopted forms part of statutory when adopted forms part of statutory development plandevelopment plan

South East Plan addresses :South East Plan addresses :

environment environment economyeconomysocial issues social issues transport transport development (including housing)development (including housing)

The South East Plan: Housing The South East Plan: Housing

aims to provide everybody with the opportunity aims to provide everybody with the opportunity of a decent homeof a decent home

sets level of housing provision at district levelsets level of housing provision at district level

requires full range of accommodation to meet requires full range of accommodation to meet the needs of the needs of allall sectors of the community sectors of the community including provision for gypsies and travellers.including provision for gypsies and travellers.

The South East Plan could not quantify The South East Plan could not quantify provision for gypsy accommodation as GTAA provision for gypsy accommodation as GTAA data was not yet available data was not yet available

It identifies a need for a It identifies a need for a Partial Review for Partial Review for Gypsy & Traveller Accommodation.Gypsy & Traveller Accommodation.

Review to be informed by advice from Review to be informed by advice from groupings of local authorities in the region groupings of local authorities in the region

South East Plan Area

SEERA requires advice on two alternative spatial options

1. Meeting the pattern of identified needs (reflecting GTAAs)

2. Considering wider planning context (e.g. natural environment, previously developed land, infrastructure, accessibility)

NB Options are NOT SITE SPECIFIC but relate to distribution of pitches between districts

Five principles identified for considering the distribution of pitches

• sustainability

• equity and choice

• social inclusion

• environmental protection

• flexibility

Advice also requested on:Advice also requested on:

Demand for transit provision Demand for transit provision Any provision required for travelling Any provision required for travelling showpeopleshowpeopleTiming of Development Plan Documents that will provide Timing of Development Plan Documents that will provide for site allocationsfor site allocationsCost and type of facilities required on sitesCost and type of facilities required on sitesImplementation costs for provision proposed Implementation costs for provision proposed Diversity of the Gypsy and Traveller population and Diversity of the Gypsy and Traveller population and number/size of sites requirednumber/size of sites required

TodayToday’’s meeting is first of two events to involve s meeting is first of two events to involve interested parties.interested parties.

Aims to explore: Aims to explore: issuesissuesprocess of preparing advice on alternative optionsprocess of preparing advice on alternative optionsviews on alternativesviews on alternativesfactors that should affect distribution between factors that should affect distribution between

districtsdistricts

Still at the evidence gathering stage Still at the evidence gathering stage

Provisional and broad indications from need Provisional and broad indications from need assessments to date are for some 250 additional assessments to date are for some 250 additional pitches across the Kent and Medway area over pitches across the Kent and Medway area over the next five years with a much reduced but the next five years with a much reduced but continuing requirement beyond that to provide continuing requirement beyond that to provide for demographic and household changefor demographic and household change

What Happens Next?

Conclusions from today will inform preparation of the alternative distributions and other elements of advice.

A future meeting (September) will provide opportunity for full stakeholder consultation on proposed options prior to decisions being taken on them by the local authorities

Both options to be submitted to SEERA by mid October.

And after that?And after that?

Mid 2009Mid 2009Examination in PublicExamination in Public

Early 2009Early 2009Public consultation on Public consultation on submissionsubmission

December 2008December 2008Submission of preferred Submission of preferred option to Governmentoption to Government

May May –– August August 20082008

Public consultation on Public consultation on options by SEERA with local options by SEERA with local authoritiesauthorities

South East Plan Partial Review: South East Plan Partial Review: Gypsy and Traveller Gypsy and Traveller

AccommodationAccommodation

STAKEHOLDER EVENTSTAKEHOLDER EVENT

LenhamLenham Community Centre 10Community Centre 10thth August 2007August 2007

Appendix 10e: Stakeholder Questionnaire Returns RSS PARTIAL REVIEW – GYPSY AND TRAVELLER ACCOMMODATION 16 questionnaires were completed and returned. Additional provision of pitches Provisionally GTAA assessments across Kent are indicating an overall need for some 250 permanent pitches in the county over the period to 2011. 1. Do you agree that there is need to provide additional pitches within Kent of this order of magnitude? YES 15(one gypsy respondent added that this could be higher) NO DON’T KNOW 1 (district council)

Planning guidance for additional gypsy and traveller accommodation needs to look ahead to 2016. Allowing for continuing family formation and turnover of pitches there is a provisional assessment of a need to provide a further 40 pitches in the period 2011-2016 2. Do you agree that there is a need to provide additional pitches within Kent of around this level? YES 13 NO 1 DON’T KNOW 1 (district council) NON RESPONSE 1

3. If you disagree with the broad scales of provision indicated under 1 and 2 above do you have any views about the number of additional permanent pitches for which provision should be made in Kent and Medway? Number of additional pitches (a) between now and 2011 (b) between 2011 and 2016 ( c) overall between now and 2016 4 What considerations have influenced your answers to Q3? One response from a district council representative referred to the Gypsy & Traveller Select Committee. Nine respondents added notes to their returns referring to the need to make provision at the earliest opportunity to meet current demand. This theme also arose frequently in the workshop discussion groups. 5 Do you consider that additional provision should be made for transit (non-permanent) pitches in Kent by 2016? If so what level what level would be appropriate?

Number of additional transit pitches Provision to 2016 Most respondents did not answer this question, though

some specific suggestions were received from some gypsy/traveller respondents. These variously advocated 300, 200, 100, 50, 30, 20 and 15 pitches

6. Where would such provision best be made in terms of broad location? Several respondents suggested these should be spread across the county, one favoured main transit routes. One favoured locations near urban centres and facilities (education, healthcare) and away from electricity pylons, sewage works and floodplains. Several members of the gypsy/traveller community considered that the emphasis for provision should be on fixed sites rather than transit pitches. Distribution of Pitches GTAA findings tend to indicate that need for additional permanent pitches is concentrated in districts where existing provision is located For the following statements please indicate whether you strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree or have no opinion 7. The distribution of any additional pitches should reflect the projected pattern of need Ring one box STRONGLY AGREE 8 respondents

AGREE 5 respondents

DISAGREE STRONGLY DISAGREE

DON’T KNOW/NO OPINION 3 respondents

8. The distribution of any additional pitches should be more weighted to those parts of the county where existing provision is not currently concentrated STRONGLY AGREE 3 respondents

AGREE 4 respondents

DISAGREE 3 respondents

STRONGLY DISAGREE respondents


9. It is reasonable to accept the principle that each local authority area should provide some additional pitches STRONGLY AGREE 7 respondents

AGREE 6 respondents

DISAGREE respondents

STRONGLY DISAGREE respondents


10. Any additional permanent pitches for Gypsies & Travellers should be located: (a) only within or close to Kent and Medway‘s large towns. STRONGLY AGREE 1 respondent

AGREE 1 respondent

DISAGREE 1 respondent

STRONGLY DISAGREE 2 respondents


(b) only within or close to Kent smaller towns and villages STRONGLY AGREE 0 respondents

AGREE 1 respondent


STRONGLY DISAGREE 1 respondent


(c) at a combination of the larger towns and small towns and villages STRONGLY AGREE 3 respondents

AGREE 5 respondents




(d) in the countryside away from towns and villages STRONGLY AGREE 2 respondents

AGREE 0 respondents


STRONGLY DISAGREE 1 respondent


(e) at a combination of the larger towns, smaller towns and villages and in the countryside STRONGLY AGREE 5 respondents

AGREE 6 respondents

DISAGREE 1 respondent



11. Where there is a need it may be necessary to use greenfield sites as well as previously developed land for additional pitches STRONGLY AGREE DISAGREE STRONGLY DON’T

AGREE 6 respondents

5 respondents

0 respondents


KNOW/NO OPINION 5 respondents

12. Whatever the level of need, locating additional pitches should always avoid nationally designated areas of environmental importance such as Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AoNB) and Sites of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) STRONGLY AGREE 2 respondents

AGREE 6 respondents




13. Whatever the level of need locating additional pitches should always avoid areas at risk of flooding STRONGLY AGREE 11 respondents

AGREE 3 respondents




14. Where there is a need it may be necessary to locate additional pitches in Green Belt locations once all other alternatives within a District have been fully assessed STRONGLY AGREE 11 respondents

AGREE 0 respondents




15. Are there any other environmental or policy constraints that are so significant that they should influence the distribution of pitches between local authority areas in Kent and Medway Land needs to:

• be located away from sewage works, electricity pylons, floodplains, industry • have same characteristics as housing land • be of sufficient size • be uncontaminated • be affordable

16. It is better to provide additional pitches by expanding existing sites than by providing entirely new sites STRONGLY AGREE

AGREE

DISAGREE

STRONGLY DISAGREE

DON’T KNOW/NO OPINION

2 respondents

2 respondents

2 respondents

3 respondents

7 respondents

17 It is better to provide a mix of expanded existing sites and new sites STRONGLY AGREE 8 respondents

AGREE 3 respondents




18. It is better to concentrate additional pitches on a few large sites (for example of over 10 pitches each) than on a greater number of small sites STRONGLY AGREE 1 respondents

AGREE 4 respondents




One Gypsy/Traveller respondent added a comment that smaller sites generate less conflict both within and between different gypsy and traveller communities and the settled community. Others, who were members of large family groups, said that sites should be family-based and, in many instances, this would require larger sites (approximately 16 caravans) to accommodate the whole family. They maintained that such groups would not be welcome on existing sites. Other Considerations Apart from the pattern of need and environmental considerations other factors could be important in determining the most appropriate distribution of additional pitches 19. Please rank the following considerations in their order of importance in considering the distribution of additional pitches for gypsy and traveller accommodation (Scale = 1 - Low Importance through to 5 High Importance Proximity to major centres of employment 1 2 3 4 5 Proximity to primary health care ( i.e. GP surgery/health centre

1 2 3 4 5

Proximity to primary education facilities 1 2 3 4 5 Proximity to the major ( A road ) network 1 2 3 4 5 Access to regular bus services 1 2 3 4 5 Questionnaire returns and discussions in the workshop indicated that all these attributes were valued, though particular emphasis was placed on proximity to

healthcare and primary education facilities. Access to regular bus services was generally not considered to be as high a priority as the other factors. 20. The provision of pitches for Gypsies and Travellers is part of the overall housing provision for the county. In the light of this how important is the distribution of housing planned for the county to the distribution of provision for Gypsies and Travellers Level and distribution of housing planned in the region

1 (low importance)

2 3 4 5 (high)

respondents 3 3 6 (4 respondents did not answer this question.) ________________________________________________________________ To assist analysis can you please confirm which of the following whether you are a representative of: Tick one box only The Gypsy and Traveller Community 10 A Parish or Town Council 1 A District/Borough Council 1 A Service Provider An Environmental Group Other grouping unidentified 4