Thank you. It links in a bit with Carolyn's previous question about the extent to which the kind of legislative framework and the policy framework is really delivering what it needs to deliver. I think that there is a real issue about the fact that we have a clear duty and, under that, we have some clear statutory guidance around how the assessment should be carried out and how the duty should be met. But, as Martin clearly said, it's missing what is needed, because what happens is that local authorities—. This is meant to be an ongoing process, like this periodic review, the engagement with Gypsies and Travellers, understanding local need, working with people to find sites, working with people to find sites that will be socially rented, and working to help people find sites that they might be able to lease or own themselves, because, obviously, there are different needs within the community, but what we see is that local authorities—many local authorities—only pay attention to this at the point at which they are expected to put in a report with an assessment. So, I wouldn't so much say there's a reluctance as there's a lack of understanding and commitment, or care, about using this process to actually deliver tangible benefits for Gypsy and Traveller communities. And I think that, whilst it's really important to have robust guidance that local authorities have to follow, what we're seeing is that people are following that but missing out the really core elements that actually make it successful, and therefore it fails. We have got local authorities who've spoken to community members, they've done interviews and things, and then you have this kind of formula that's done and it's like, 'Oh, there's one local authority that says one pitch between now and 2034. They reckon there's a need for one additional pitch and zero transit pitches'. That just doesn't make sense. This is a local authority that has a lot of people travelling through it, and it has a small but significant group of different Gypsy and Traveller families living there. It just doesn't make sense. So, I think what there are is there are lots of barriers.
One of the difficulties of this legislative and policy guidance process is that, unlike any other housing for ordinary citizens, it places very publicly the needs of Gypsy and Traveller families—really publicly. It requires all these different assessments that have to go through all these political processes. It immediately triggers hostile opposition and campaigning from other local people against any kind of Gypsy or Traveller sites. For example, we saw one in the last couple of years. We're talking about one family—they're a local family, they've been there generations, they're Welsh speaking, they are part and parcel of the community; they're not people who've just kind of arrived from somewhere else last year. They have a long-established need, and the campaign against the site for that family, who did not identify themselves because of fear for them and their children, even though they're local people and well-known—. The opposition was organised with legal input, tactics shared with other opposition groups across England and other places that campaign against Gypsy and Traveller sites. And the pressure, then, on that family to have any faith and to feel safe in that process—. The pressure, then, on elected members is huge. You know, Martin's already touched on the fact that people have said to him quite openly, 'We can't be seen to support Gypsy and Traveller sites'. So, officers, sometimes very skilled and well-intentioned officers, are working hard in some instances to go through this process, to deliver sites, to identify sites, to bring elected members with them and to deliver for what might actually be one family who needs four pitches—you know, we're not talking about a great, big new housing development.
And this process is what is failing to deliver, really, for local authorities. So, the process allows them—. The other thing about the Gypsy and Traveller accommodation assessments is that, of the reports we've seen of this second round, the majority of them have not used that opportunity to review and reflect whether they've met the previous need. So, what they've done is almost started from ground zero and just said, 'Well, here we are again. This is what our need is now' and hand it over to the Minister as to whether or not they'll sign this off as a properly done report. But the barriers are this lack of engagement with Gypsies and Travellers and lack of understanding about what's needed, but, really, driven by the inability of the democratic process to deliver these sites because of the long-held prejudice against Gypsies and Travellers and lack of understanding of who Gypsy and Traveller families are. And the reluctance is accepted because there's been no action taken by Welsh Government on any of the local authorities that have failed to meet any need in the last seven years, even when those local authorities have voted against their own proposals, for example, as happened in one local authority. I'm not an expert on planning law, but, potentially, that could've been called in by the Minister to look at that. It wasn't. So, it doesn't really matter whether local authorities are reluctant or not. Some local authorities are trying their best and struggling and not getting past the organised opposition and prejudice that Gypsy and Traveller families have to deal with every day. And some are not really doing anything, but there's no consequence to that, and that's what families say to us, 'What's the point of this law, because nothing happens as a result of it?'