With another traveller site gaining planning permission in West Berkshire, we examine the complexity of planning and protected cultural characteristics
A gypsy without a horse is not a gypsy – or so the saying goes. But what happens when the lifestyle shifts?
In West Berkshire, the answer might lie in the growing number of planning applications for gypsy and traveller sites, many of which are on equestrian land and, almost inevitably, include stables.
The horse and caravan once defined a way of life that endured for centuries.
Then came the lorry and trailer, and with them, a seismic cultural shift.
The traditional nomadic lifestyle, once the backbone of gypsy and traveller identity, now oscillates between movement and settlement, the latter often dictated by land availability and, more crucially, affordability.
Yet, if the horse was once a means of transport, today it’s more than that – a symbol, a livelihood, and an anchor to a threatened identity.
The applicant behind a recent, albeit retrospective, planning approval granted by West Berkshire Council is an example.
The site, south of Abbottswood on Newtown Road in Newbury, will now officially serve as a gypsy traveller site, and its resident is a keen horseman – keen to keep stables for his ponies.
This speaks to a broader point.
Michael O’Flaherty, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, has been vocal about the need for “culturally appropriate” housing for the traveller community.
He’s even found himself in trouble for insisting on the importance of horses to this way of life.
For him, horses aren’t an eccentric preference but an intrinsic part of traveller culture.
The contradiction is stark. While horses may still be fundamental to the identity of many travellers, an increasing number are applying for permanent sites to secure stability – particularly for their children’s education.
Two families in Enborne recently won planning permission for a site after making this very argument.
Yet, these applications often come with controversy, as was the case with Enborne, where the applicants were accused of ‘Trojan horsing’ their way into securing permission.
The same site had already been tarmacked, and mobile homes stationed there without prior approval – a move that led to a heated retrospective application process withg locals angry that they felt the system had been manipulated.
The debate over what constitutes a ‘nomadic lifestyle’ – a legally protected characteristic – is becoming ever more complex.
Under government policy, local authorities must assess and plan for traveller site provision, ensuring they meet demand.
Failure to do so should be a “significant material consideration” when deciding on temporary planning permissions.
But one thing remains clear; while the Government mandates the provision of sites, there is no such requirement for the ponies.
So there is a dichotomy here.
The council is in a tricky position – in one sense, trying to solve a housing problem, but that is conflated with trying to protect the cultural characteristic of the gypsy.
I spoke to John, a former horse-drawn gypsy traveller who now lives the Wiltshire side of Hungerford.
He told me the horse link to gypsy culture goes way back.
“Where the women show wealth by wearing gold, the men have the ponies as a symbol of theirs,” he explained.
“Gypsy male pride is a big thing, and a lot of that is linked to the ownership of horses, both as a cultural link, but also as a way of earning money by breeding these ponies.
“Some of the blood lines go back a long way, and they are linked to the family with a great deal of pride.
“They are bred for sale or stud, and they are also a source of income with the trotting racing, selling horses or betting.”
Beyond identity and planning law, there’s a health and social dimension to this issue.
Gypsy men have a suicide rate seven times higher than the national average, and exclusion from education and employment remains endemic.
Research suggests that keeping horses can provide structure, purpose, and even economic opportunities, making the case for their role in traveller life even stronger.
So is West Berkshire Council solving a housing problem, or preserving a cultural one? The answer is likely both.
Traveller communities continue to engage in traditional equestrian activities, from horse dealing to sulky racing (that’s with horse and trap) and many still consider horses an essential part of their lives.
The Census records 71,400 people identifying as gypsy or Irish traveller in England and Wales, yet only a minority still live permanently on the road.
In West Berkshire, the figures show 63 traveller households, with 19 in caravans or mobile homes and 44 in traditional housing.
What’s missing from the data is the number of horses they own or any meaningful survey on the impact of ‘going static’ without the horses.
The challenge of site provision remains acute.
West Berkshire Council has long faced criticism for failing to provide enough authorised sites, leading to unauthorised encampments and legal disputes.
The latest Newbury site approval is just one example of the friction this creates.
Local objections often cite planning concerns, infrastructure impact, or, in some cases, outright prejudice.
The £3.5m council-funded redevelopment of the Four Houses Corner site in Ufton Nervet, infamous for its association with the killing of PC Andrew Harper, remains a particularly controversial case.
Yet, despite that dreadful crime, under equalities law, local authorities must consider the human rights of gypsy and traveller communities.
And despite formal recognition under the Race Relations Act 1976 and the Equality Act 2010, discrimination remains rife – with 62 per cent of travellers reporting racial abuse.
Meanwhile, the positioning of many sites raises health concerns, with research showing high levels of air pollution, poor sanitation, and proximity to industrial hazards affecting many residents.
As it stands, West Berkshire has several pending traveller site appeals, including one for a single pitch east of Blacknest Lane, Brimpton, and another for five pitches south of Sandhill, Hermitage.
Existing provision is scattered across sites at New Stocks Farm, Paices Hill, Aldermaston, Four Houses Corner, Padworth, Ermin Street, Lambourn Woodlands, and Wash Water, Enborne Row. The planning and legal framework governing these sites is complex, and growing more so.
A crucial detail; placing a caravan on land without planning permission isn’t necessarily illegal.
A breach of planning control only occurs if stationing the caravan constitutes a material change of use – for example, residential use on non-residential or agricultural land.
There are also legal exemptions, such as temporary stops of up to two nights, subject to a 28-day annual limit.
The latest twist in the tale? The Government is planning to relax rules on traveller sites in green belt areas by reclassifying some of this land as ‘grey belt’ – another layer of complexity in an already tangled web of policy.
And yet, amid all the legal wrangling, community tensions, fight for cultural survival and shifting government policy, the question remains; where do the horses fit into all of this?
