Travellers’ sites would save a lot of aggravation

Travellers in Harold Avenue
Travellers in Harold Avenue

With regard to the article entitled “No need for sites” and our MP’s comments, I would like to know just where this MP is getting his information from and how he can state he has been on the Burnley Council for 35 years.

According to his profile, he has been a Burnley councillor since 1982. I make that 32 years. Yes, I know it isn’t much of a discrepancy but if he can’t get his length of service correct, how can we place any credence on other dates he gives?

For instance, he actually states: “I understand there is only need to provide these sites if the local authority feels they are needed”.

His Government commissioned the report by Salford University and stipulated that local plans must include dedicated sites for travellers. To hear you say this is just about Burnley is not correct. It’s nationwide.

And when did you set yourself up as the local authority? Because they obviously are of the opinion such sites are necessary. You also state that, in your opinion, these sites are no longer necessary.

Just what do you base your assumptions on? Because in recent times there have been camps in Cliviger, on the old Towneley School site, at least three on Hargher Clough, at least one in Whittlefield and at least one on Gannow Lane, not to mention roadside camps set up around the town. And if my memory serves me correctly, there was a problem with the site of the old coach house on the New Road.

We most certainly do need designated areas for travellers to stay, as they would save a lot of aggravation, not to mention money, which the council no longer has, thanks to you and your Government’s cuts.

K. Royle

Mizpah Street