A proposed new Gypsy and Traveller site in the heart of North London has triggered opposition from residents who fear the loss of a “much-loved” green space, however a group of Travellers say they feel “intimidated” by the campaign.
By Josef Steen, Local Democracy Reporter
A proposed new Gypsy and Traveller site in the heart of North London has triggered opposition from residents who fear the loss of a “much-loved” green space, however a group of Travellers say they feel “intimidated” by the campaign.
The backlash to proposals to create a caravan site on an Islington Council estate for the community, which currently has no permanent pitches in the borough, has left some Gypsies and Travellers feeling “intimidated” as they claim opposition is not only being heavily co-ordinated but is discriminatory.
For many Gypsies and Travellers, living in a caravan is a core part of their ethnicity and cultural heritage. Under the Housing Act 2004, Islington’s Labour-run council has to identify and meet the accommodation needs of Gypsies and Travellers, but has long struggled to do so – until 2025, when nine possible sites were put forward.
The latest proposals include turning a small green space on a council estate, Aubert Court, into a pitch for members of the community already living in social housing there or nearby.
A petition from ‘Friends of Aubert Park’, which has now reached 1,800 signatures, argues that the plans are unsuitable given the dearth of green spaces in Islington. “We support the need to provide suitable accommodation for Gypsy and Traveller families, but this should not come at the cost of one of Islington’s scarce parks,” the petition states. “Once this space is gone, it is gone.”
One member of the Traveller community, Lisa Casey, 58, told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) that caretakers on Aubert Court were warning residents they would be “overrun with Travellers and feral children”.
“It’s not even a park. The land on Aubert Park is disused, you can only use it if you’re a resident. We’re taking a small portion of it. Why can’t we live within the community?” she said. “We already exist. We’ve been here probably a lot longer than a lot of these residents. We just want to give up our council homes we already live in and go back to our cultural roots.”
Ms Casey, who was born in the borough, added that she had in the past been the target of abuse and had her car vandalised after appearing at a meeting about a different pitch site at Ronalds Road.
Mena Mongan from advocacy group London Gypsies and Travellers said her organisation had been contacted by local residents who judged the objections were being driven by “pure discrimination”.
“I’m downhearted about all this. I’ve seen it far too often,” Ms Mongan told the LDRS, claiming that opponents to the scheme are presenting deep opposition by “getting comments from every Tom, Dick and Harry” without considering the consequences. “These people have nothing better to do with their money than playing with people’s lives,” she added.
Ms Mongan referred to academic data showing suicide rates are six to seven times higher among Gypsies and Travellers than the general population. “The council has got to get on top of this,” she added.
According to YouGov, nearly half (45 per cent) of the general population would be “uncomfortable” with a Gypsy or Traveller moving next door to them.
The LDRS previously reported council officers last year were forced to cut some “discriminatory” remarks from an earlier consultation report on the nine possible sites.
An Islington Council spokesperson said: “Islington is proud of its diversity and committed to meeting the housing needs of all communities, including Gypsy and Traveller residents. This is extremely challenging in a high-density borough like Islington which has very limited land for development.”
The council is now reviewing responses to the consultation, which closed on Tuesday, August 18. However, it is still accepting late representations via email, post or online surveys until September 1. The spokesperson added that the plans would later be reviewed by an independent Planning Inspector.
The LDRS contacted Friends of Aubert Park for further comment, but at the time of publication the group had not responded.
