Written submission from MECOPP (Minority Ethnic Carers of
People Project) (GRT0036)

1. Context

MECOPP is an independent registered charity providing a variety of services to Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) carers in Scotland. Since 2011 we have been working with carers, and those being cared for, from the Gypsy/Traveller community in rural and urban areas of Scotland. To our knowledge we are the only social care organisation in the UK providing a dedicated outreach service to Gypsy/Traveller carers. We work with carers, of any age, who live in housing, on sites and on roadside camps. Our work is multi-dimensional – including advocacy, community-led research and training, arts-based work, film-making, casework and policy development. We also work with partners from the statutory and voluntary sectors to develop their capacity to respond more appropriately to the needs of this marginalised community.

This submission is based on the observations of staff, recent casework, research (conducted by MECOPP and others) and, most importantly, direct feedback from many of the Gypsy/Travellers we work with in Perth and Kinross, Argyll and the Lothians.

Whilst many of the policy areas covered by the Ministerial Working Group in their 2012 report are devolved matters there is clear evidence to suggest that Gypsies, Travellers and Roma across the UK continue to face significant inequalities and prejudice on a regular basis. In our submission we have included relevant information from the Scottish context, comment on the Ministerial Working Group policy areas which do apply in Scotland and areas where we feel there are particular challenges and/or gaps in provision.

2. Scotland

The Scottish Parliament Equal Opportunities Committee (SPEOC) Inquiries, most notably the 2012 ‘Gypsy/Travellers and Care’ and 2013 ‘Where Gypsy/Travellers Live’ reports, both expressed frustration at the lack of progress in delivering tangible improvements in the lives of Gypsy/Traveller families.[1] Similarly, both reports also noted the urgent need for strong leadership and positive action from the Scottish Government, and others, to tackle the myriad of inequalities experienced by, and the disturbing levels of prejudice displayed towards, Gypsy/Travellers in Scotland.

They noted the countless examples of promises not being fulfilled or actions not being implemented to tackle the well-documented prejudice and discriminatory practices faced by Gypsy/Travellers and the poor living standards on local authority/RSL sites.

Of particular relevance to the current Women and Equalities Select Committee inquiry is our observation that many of the Gypsy/Travellers who gave evidence in 2012 – 13, and invited MSPs into their homes, were initially hopeful and engaged in the SPEOC inquiries, saying that for the first time they had felt ‘listened to’. However, perhaps not surprisingly given the lack of progress, in 2017 there is already a strong sense of déjà vu and comments include ‘why bother’, ‘what was the point’, ‘whatever you do, things will never change for Travellers’ and ‘nobody’s bothered’. At the time of writing, those we spoke to commented that there has been little, if any, evidence of real and significant improvements in their lives.

Similarly, recent findings from the most recent Scottish Social Attitudes Survey indicate that negative attitudes towards Gypsy/Travellers remain stubbornly entrenched.[2]

3. Employment and Department for Work and Pensions

Our daily contact with Gypsy/Travellers suggests that the commitments made in the 2012 Ministerial Working Group Report have not translated into tangible improvements in accessing DWP services and/or financial inclusion. The following examples from our recent casework may help to illustrate some of the difficulties:

• applicants for work-related benefits are still being told by Job Centre staff that they stand little chance of securing employment unless they change their name and/or address, particularly if the address is a ‘site address’;
• over the last fifteen months a great deal of time has been spent supporting carers to ‘navigate’ recent Welfare Reform changes. These changes continue to create a great deal of anxiety and worry for families in receipt of welfare benefits. In particular, the ‘digital by default’ approach has already caused significant difficulties for those with literacy difficulties and those living on sites in remote locations, many of whom do not have access to a landline or internet provision;
• for individuals in work we note with increasing concern that many people are likely to be living below the poverty line. Many traditional occupations are not well-paid and some families remain reluctant to apply for welfare benefits. Accordingly many are struggling to secure an adequate income and difficulties are compounded by the disproportionately  high rents on many local authority sites;
• countless examples of individuals being unable to secure appropriate insurance for their homes or vehicles, both whilst living on local authority/private sites as well as whilst travelling;
• the initial roll out of Universal Credit has already caused confusion and hardship, very often because DWP staff themselves seem to be unsure about entitlements and processes;
• families living on local authority sites continue to experience difficulties in receiving basic services such as postal deliveries, this has an obvious knock on effect for those in receipt of welfare benefits with claimants being penalised for missed appointments or the timely return of forms;
• residents continue to experience difficulties in accessing financial services, and other services such as equipment hire and deliveries, often when using a site address.

4. Challenges/Gaps

4.1 Social Care

The poor health status of Gypsy/Travellers across the UK has been well-documented, meanwhile nature and extent of informal caring in some areas is largely undocumented. Evidence from the 2011 census indicates Gypsy/Travellers are, compared to other ethnicities, some of the highest providers of informal care, often providing 50 hours or more per week.

Similarly, MECOPP research and casework indicates the majority of Gypsy/Traveller carers are not accessing social care services, statutory or voluntary, on a regular basis, and many have never accessed services at all. General knowledge about carers’ rights/entitlements within the community remains low.[3] This often means that the 'burden' of caring for someone impacts disproportionately on physical and mental wellbeing.

In relation to caring and healthcare, our casework indicates that a lack of recognition and understanding of Gypsy/Traveller culture within social care, and carer support, services often results in inadequate service responses. Similarly, we continue to be dismayed by the lack of professionalism, stereotyping and regular breaches of confidentiality displayed by service-providers.  The prevalence of such attitudes, and the lack of cultural awareness, often results in inadequate service responses. Families often report that they feel like they are being blamed for causing their own problems, as if it is their ethnicity that is the problem, rather than an inappropriate service or lack of flexibility, as one carer said recently “I despair at times, sometimes they behave as if like it is my fault that this site is so badly made, it isn’t my fault that the amenity block has no insulation. My daughter can’t help being in a wheelchair but they make us feel as if it is our fault that the site doesn’t have ramps and that”.

Across the three areas we work in Gypsy/Traveller carers regularly voice their frustration and unhappiness at being forced to give up their traditional lifestyle and live in housing, especially those who have caring responsibilities. For some this has also resulted in an erosion of their cultural traditions and strong sense of loss. Part of the reason for having to move into a house is the lack of suitable facilities on sites, as well as insufficient site provision more generally. The design and management of sites is rigid and quite uniform across the UK, with little provision for the elderly or disabled.

At the time of the SPEOC inquiry into Gypsy/Travellers and Care, it was suggested that Self-Directed Support (SDS) could provide a way of offering more flexibility for Gypsy/Travellers accessing social care services. In theory this may well be true – our research, and daily contact with carers, indicates that SDS, if implemented correctly, can present an opportunity for Gypsy/Travellers to access support that is culturally, and personally, more appropriate. However, just because there is greater choice and control over how social care is delivered does not in itself remove the barriers that continue to prevent many Gypsy/Travellers from accessing services.

Our research suggests from a community perspective there is most certainly an appetite for SDS but:

• Not a priority - most carers continue to struggle with accommodation issues and experiences of discrimination, on top of the demands of being a carer, which means that they often do not have the time or energy to even think about SDS.
• ‘Nothing will happen’ - there is a sense of fatalism among many, with a feeling that nothing will happen even if they did try to access it. “It’s like hitting your head against a brick wall” and others feeling that they are blacklisted by the council because they have questioned decisions in the past.
• Lack of positive stories - there is an absence of examples where Gypsy/Travellers are directing their own support. In contrast, there are many stories of delays and misinformation being given by service providers.

The links between health status and care are self-evident, and as long as significant health inequalities exist, the consequent care needs are likely to increase. Our work with carers indicates that the options for families with an elderly or disabled relative are extremely restricted - families have the ‘choice’ between living on sites, often with sub-standard facilities, or in houses having to deny their ethnic identity. 

4.2 Mental Health and Wellbeing

Across the UK, much work on health, including the commitments in the 2012 report, focus largely on physical health. There is evidence to suggest Gypsy/Travellers often experience high levels of mental distress and extreme levels of isolation. For centuries Gypsy/Travellers have had to live with prejudice, misunderstanding and generally being made to feel like a ‘second class citizens’ and this inevitably has an impact on wellbeing.

In relation to health we would argue there needs to be a stronger focus on equalities, in particular the long-term impact of living with discrimination or prejudice. Over the last three years MECOPP Gypsy/Traveller Carers’ Project has had a growing focus on mental health, often using the creative arts to tackle stigma and explore wellbeing. We know that many we work with do not seek support and even when they do there is little, if any, acknowledgement or understanding of the long-standing prejudice they have endured and the growing sense of loss/isolation and this in itself can often be a barrier to recovery. Our experience suggests for those who do access mental health support services they still feel they have to hide their ethnic identity and/or struggle to explain the isolation whilst living in a house:

“GP’s don’t always recognise mental illness especially if you’re a Traveller, how can you explain that feeling or sense of loss”

“Come on, they’d think you were mad, lock you up, if you said you were depressed ‘cos you lived in a house”

“finding somebody you can trust is just so important – it is a taboo amongst Gypsy/Travellers, it is ‘shaming’ so don’t talk or let anyone know”

“amongst Travellers there’s still a ‘pull yourself together” attitude. Is it denial or is it shame amongst Gypsy/Travellers?”

“Travellers feel trapped, aren’t they, trapped in emotions even if free to travel we are trapped.”

Further work is required, in a skilled and sensitive manner, around mental health and suicide prevention - anecdotal evidence suggests higher than average suicide rates.

5. Concluding Remarks

Whilst there are some pockets of improved practice in recent years - and some excellent work by third sector organisations across the UK - in general terms there is little evidence of any significant progress in tackling the widespread inequalities faced by many Gypsy/Traveller families in accessing public services. Appropriate provision remains very patchy across the UK and is still often reliant upon the interest of an individual, or small organisation, rather than a strategic or sustainable approach.

The SPEOC work, whilst limited to Scotland, is relevant not least because they recognised an ever-widening gap between what service-providers and policy makers ‘think’ the situation is and what the actual experiences of Gypsy/Travellers are. The ‘Where Gypsy/Travellers Live’ report also highlights the dangers of simply relying on so-called ‘mainstream’ strategies or agendas in, for example, education, health and accommodation. This approach implies that there is ‘a level playing field’ and a desire, and willingness, by the general public and decision-makers to be inclusive. We would argue there is now ample evidence to indicate Gypsy, Traveller and Roma communities rarely encounter ‘a level playing field’.

In order to effectively tackle the inequalities faced by Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities, and to avoid the need for similar inquiries in the future, there remains an urgent need for Government, at UK level and in the devolved administrations, to show strong leadership and, in conjunction with community members, develop a robust strategy with effective monitoring, timescales and resources.

January 2017