Confusion – Cock-up and controversy on day one of Stovolds Hill Gipsy Inquiry

Our Spider wanted to crawl under Waverley’s Council Chamber carpet in the hope that someone would tread on it within moments of Inspector Richard Clegg reconvening a Public Inquiry postponed last November due to his ill health. No such luck!

We could Bet Fred that Mr Clegg was in dire need of a cup of tea and a lie down following what can only be described as a ‘Nightmare on Waverley Street.’ Or, in this case, the gipsy sites in Stovolds’ Hill. Let’s hope he has the stamina to endure days like this in June and then another long session in November.

Adjourned Gipsy Inquiry re- convenes today.

Well, folks – the nightmare began when it became patently obvious that a vital piece of evidence was missing. Had it slipped down the back of a chair, or was it sitting on the planning officer’s desktop? No way, it turned out that the Contractor given the task of providing an up-to-date assessment of Gipsy and Traveller needs in the borough had been halted halfway through the job. Why? Because it was claimed that the council was short of funds, and it wanted to concentrate on getting its new Local Plan off the drawing board.

Was that the sound of the Cllr and Portfolio Holder for the Local Plan, Liz Townsend, screaming “untrue” along the corridor? 

One barrister wanted the planning officer, or councillor, responsible for halting the vital current needs assessment, to be hauled before the Inspector to answer for their actions. Some hope of that! Because the blame may lie with Head Honcho – Ups and Downs?

Continuing this inquiry without a proper current assessment of need, we might as well not go ahead with this Inquiry, said one of the lawyers.   At this point, there was a glint in the Inspector’s eye for the first time, or perhaps it was a tear? Difficult to tell while watching a Webcast.  Particularly when you can only hear half the argument, as some speakers didn’t turn their microphones on!

For the uninitiated – every council in the country has to have an up-to-date Gipsy and Traveller Site Assessment. However, Waverley’s legal eagle confirmed they did the up-to-date assessment in 2017!  Holy Moly, nearly a decade ago!  As `Nessa would say “, What’s occurring?” Quite a lot, according to how the locals described the massive influx of ‘other people’ living in ‘tinnies’ on sites called ‘Yellowstone Park’ and ‘Willow Brook.’ Sites owned by gipsies, requested and consented by ‘Your Waverley’  but who were they being occupied by? 

Here lies the Big Question – according to barristers acting for the Doherty family, who want to stay on a site they have occupied for years, nobody knows.

Bramley Parish Councillor Councillor Stern claimed the units at nearby Lydia Park are not gipsies as the pitches are being occupied by “people including som from – “The North of England”  Are there no gipsies living north of Watford? She claimed she could tell who was advertising the units, as their Facebook pages. reveal they have ” lots of friends.” Though obviously not in many in Bramley, judging by her evidence! Much of which we are unable to report.

It was not the first time we had heard Cllr Stern make defamatory remarks in Waverley’s hallowed halls. She once accused the residents of Bramley’s Clock House Lane of being threatened by a developer to support his planning application, which they had unanimously endorsed. They strongly refuted this and registered a complaint, to which they received no response.

Docherty’s Barristers (there were two) respectfully suggested to the Inspector that Waverley’s failure to take enforcement action against unauthorised development or breaches of planning conditions by court injunction, etc., on an adjacent site had nothing to do with his client’s case for staying put.  Waverley’s failures to act elsewhere on Stovolds Hill should not impact on others who wanted, due to need,  to occupy their land. To do so was...

“Both unfair and cruel.“

The Inspector was respectfully asked to consider that Waverley’s failure to take proper enforcement action, with court injuctions against unauthorised development or breach of planning conditions – which rules sites could only be occupied by gipsies/travellers had nothing to do with their client’s appeal to remain on the site they owned albeit near other gipsy sites.

There were hours of debate about “known knowns,” “known unknowns,” and “unknown unknowns,” popularised by former US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld. 

It was generally agreed that there were definitely lots of “unknowns’ about the gipsy and traveller need for sites and pitches in Waverley.

Hopefully, all will become clear in the coming days; however, we won’t be holding our breath. If we can stomach more of it, we will let you know.