Brighton and Hove City Council spends thousands of pounds every year moving gypsies and travellers on from illegal encampments.

It now hopes proposals for a permanent traveller site, where residents would pay rent and council tax, will bring an end to the problem.

Here Councillor Geoffrey Theobald, cabinet member for the environment, defends the 14-pitch site scheme proposed for Brighton’s Sheepcote Valley.

Work is under way to find a new site in Brighton and Hove for gypsies and travellers.

This is something the city council – like other local authorities in the region – is required to do by the Government.

The aim is to provide a small permanent site of up to 14 pitches. It would be properly run with an on-site manager and residents would pay rent and council tax.

A single fixed site would reduce the number of unauthorised travellers’ encampments around the city.

The proposals are expected to substantially cut the waste and disruption caused by unauthorised camps and therefore reduce the cost to the council taxpayer.

They will also ensure the council fulfils its commitment to serving all sections of the community and meets the legal requirements handed down by the Government.

Clearly there is a lot of interest in plans for a new site and it is important residents and other interested parties fully understand the facts and reasons behind our proposals.

Various locations have been assessed to see whether they might be suitable for a new permanent site.

After careful consideration and on the advice of officers, part of the former BMX site off Wilson Avenue, east Brighton, has emerged as a possible option.

This proposal will be considered at a meeting of the council’s full cabinet next Thursday.

If cabinet approval is given, residents will be consulted and will have every opportunity to have their say, ask questions and find out more about what is being proposed.

Any new travellers’ site will require full planning permission – in the same way as any other development proposal – and an application would have to go before the planning committee for a decision.

Residents, councillors and other interested parties will be able to comment and make representations as they can on any planning application within a statutory period of consultation.

At the moment there is one authorised gypsy and traveller site in the city – at Horsdean.

This is a transit site which has 23 pitches providing temporary accommodation for up to 12 weeks.

The Horsdean site is provided to meet the needs of travellers who wish to visit the area and who would otherwise set up an unauthorised encampment.

This site does not meet the needs of gypsies and travellers who wish to live on a permanent site.

A new permanent site will help to meet the demand for pitches from gypsies and travellers with local connections who live permanently in the area but move from one unofficial site to another.

It will also put us in a stronger position to move on unauthorised camps.

Provision of more pitches in other areas of the South East will also reduce the number of gypsies and travellers moving around the region.

While some travellers want to retain a nomadic lifestyle, an increasing number wish to have a permanent base so their children can receive regular schooling and they can have access to health services like the rest of the community.

Most don’t want to be illegally occupying land and regularly facing the prospect of being moved on.

As I have already made clear, travellers living on a permanent site would pay rent and council tax like any other resident.

There are grants available from the Government which currently meet the full cost of providing any new permanent site in the city, with no cost to the council.

The rent charged would cover the maintenance and upkeep of the site.

A site manager would directly oversee and manage the site and refuse and recycling collections from the site would be made by the council’s Cityclean service.

The council would not hesitate to take strict enforcement action against any residents breaching site regulations as it would with anyone in a similar position.

Providing permanent spaces would cut down the number of unauthorised encampments – and reduce the cost to local council taxpayers of moving these on and then clearing up.

Experience in other areas shows the cost of enforcement and clearing up after unauthorised sites falls significantly where permanent pitches have been provided.

In Bristol, for example, these costs fell from £200,000 a year to under £5,000.

It should also be noted that where permanent sites are provided in other parts of the country, there is very little evidence of antisocial or illegal activities associated with them.

However, should such activity occur, it could be dealt with exactly as if it occurred in any other part of the city.

This is an important issue and we need to work together to meet the needs of both residents and travelling communities.