There's a link to the consultation document in the article; I'm sure plenty of people will have an opinion!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-22764136

I can see some of those sites being very popular! LOL

Having lived alongside these sites in the past, I can understand why people don't want them. Not all travellers are bad, but it's like most things in life, the minority will ruin it for the few.

These travellers are a culture apart, and fiercely defend their way if life and thatmuch I agree with.
I have known a lot of gypsies and went to school with some-on their compulsory -if reluctant appearances.
We -at school- envied their freedom and confidence as children and they appeared to be smart and reasonable
.However they would never compromise, and as grown ups do not change.
They are bright, but obviously not bright enough if they wonder why no-one want's to live near them, and cannot understand
why they must not covet other peoples property-to put it kindly--or make such a squalid mess wherever they settle..

'A new criteria added by the government states that the location must also "promote peaceful and integrated coexistence between the site and local communities" '

Personally, I doubt either community will ever be able to see eye to eye, let alone live peacefully side by side.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-22812232

lEX- YOU ARE RIGHT. WE ARE TOO DIVERSE.

Yes, both the settled & traveler communities are just too different.

I bet the people of Beausale are happy!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-24841057

The thing is though, we're only passing the problem on to someone else.

The whole traveller issue needs sorting out once and for all.

Not so long ago we had them encamped in a recreation area near us.
The local authorities in this area have a tried and tested method which is that as soon as they get a complaint they issue a kind of pro forma claim, which they attach to the fence of gate near where they are , and if the travellers haven't gone within a specified time, then they have an expidited procedure with the courts to get possesion very quickly.

It is a very difficult situation because the law says that local authorities must provide sites for them, but very few have done this, mainly because of local opposition. There is very little the courts can do if the Councils keep moving them on, and on the other hand the travellers resist having a permanent site alloted to them.

Hi totally agree with you, just a pity Warwickshire County council does not use the tried and tested method on our be lovable Student Travellers,who have turned our lovely town of Leamington into a total Student ghetto ,and shame on you Warwick district Council,for the devaluation of my and many other rate payers Propertys within the Leamington Area

Locally, I believe we are far too reliant on the education sector. When it crashes (and it will) we are going to catch an almighty cold!

A list of possible sites has been drawn up for Warwick district: http://www.leamingtonobserver.co.uk/2014/02/07/news-Gypsy-site-shortlist-for-Warwick-district-96468.html

Leamington FC's ground has been picked out as a possibility for a traveller site. It'll be wrong in so many ways if the decision is made to put the land to that use.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-28740528

Why bother, they won't use it. They'll continue to desecrate farmer's fields and common land just as they've been doing in Coventry over the last few weeks.

Coventry City Council are getting proactive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-29175493

I think a lot of it's hot air Lex, aimed at placating the citizens who are rightly annoyed at the current situation.

You can't seize their caravans because then they'd be homeless and you'd have to find them accommodation.

If you seize their vehicles, they can't move on, but I believe those using them don't actually own them, so seizing them would be difficult anyway.

You can't seize the tools of their trade.

All in all, I think we're a bit b*ggered.