Councillors reject call to take animals into account when housing Travellers

Councillors have rejected a proposal to recognise the ‘need for culturally appropriate accommodation’ for Travellers that would include a provision for horses.

As part of ongoing deliberations over the Draft County Development Plan, Cllr Alastair McKinstry (Green) proposed that the document – which will go on public display early next year – should take into account the importance of horses to Traveller Culture.

This followed a recommendation of the European Human Rights Agency that the animals were ‘fundamental’ to Traveller identity. The motion was seconded by Cllr Tom Welby (Ind).

It failed to garner much support from councillors, with many arguing that the motion could have far-reaching consequences and may leave it more difficult for Traveller families to be accommodated.

Cllr Peter Roche (FG) said he was ‘vehemently opposed’ and said the motion could result in a land requirement for Traveller households where horses could be kept.

Cllr Jimmy McClearn (FG) echoed this and said by including such a stipulation, it could result in Travellers being excluded from future social housing schemes.

“My concern is [the motion] could have unintended consequences. If you must provide facilities for horses, then you are ruling out the chance of any Traveller getting social housing as we know it.

“You couldn’t have horses in a built-up housing development and my concern would be we would be leaving Travellers in a worse situation,” said Cllr McClearn.

Cllr McKinstry said the proposal was ‘mild’ and simply sought the recognition that Travellers and horses were ‘interconnected’.

“The motion does not require land to be purchased. It will need fleshing out,” he said, adding that the Housing Strategic Policy Committee would be the place to do that.

Cllr PJ Murphy (FG) also opposed the motion and said: “We don’t provide for the hobbies of any other citizens when talking about social housing tenants.”

Other councillors raised concerns about animal welfare issues including Cllr James Charity (Ind) and Cllr Karey McHugh Farag (Ind) who said while she supported Traveller ownership of horses, the Council didn’t make provision for other groups around the ownership of animals.

“It is honourable but I do have concerns that it doesn’t specify that horses should be registered or microchipped,” said Cllr McHugh Farag.

Cllr Noel Thomas (FF) said “anybody who gets a house should be glad to get it”.

“Do we provide culturally appropriate houses to farmers, to dog-breeders . . . it is an open-ended book and would cost a small fortune to accommodate for everybody,” said Cllr Thomas.

Cllr Eileen Mannion (FG) said was working with a number of Traveller families seeking accommodation and room for horses was not a priority for them.

“While I respect where Alastair is coming from, I don’t think this is the road to go down.

“I have contact with a number of Travellers who are looking for a home – they are not looking for anything else but a roof over their heads,” said Cllr Mannion.

Director of Services for Housing, Liam Hanrahan, told the meeting that the Council’s existing policy already included ‘supports for horses’.

“Our Traveller accommodation plan is, I believe, enough to cover all requirements,” said Mr Hanrahan.

Cllr Liam Carroll (FG) said accommodation for horses could be made available in relation to Traveller-specific accommodation, but argued that if this motion were to pass, new Part V requirements that include for 10% social housing in all new-build estates would exclude the Traveller Community.

“It would be very difficult to accommodate horses in that type of situation. While it’s very well-meaning, we are trying to get the integration of Travellers into all parts of society and this may have negative consequences.

Only three councillors backed the motion; 24 were against while eight abstained.