Birmingham Council Flunked Traveller Encampments Policy Solution Birmingham 2026

Key Points

• Birmingham City Council leader Roger Harmer stated that the council has failed to find a proper solution to unauthorized Traveller encampments.
• A rise in unauthorized encampments throughout 2025 and 2026 led to community disruption, clean-up expenses, and local frustration.
• Councillor Sam Forsyth raised concerns regarding disruption to local residents, park access issues, and the cancellation of council services due to encampments.
• Council leaders stated that providing designated stopping sites is necessary, but noted that ward councillors routinely oppose proposed sites in their own areas.
• The council secured funding to restrict vehicle access across 31 public parks, with phase-one work scheduled throughout the winter.
• Campaigners noted that Birmingham lacks permanent local authority pitches or usable transit sites compared to neighboring areas.

Birmingham (Birmingham Express) September 16, 2026 – As reported by Alexander Brock, Local Democracy Reporter for Birmingham Live, Birmingham City Council leader Councillor Roger Harmer has publicly acknowledged that the local authority has “flunked” establishing a workable strategy to manage unauthorised Traveller encampments across the city. Addressing a full council meeting, Councillor Harmer pointed out that while elected representatives regularly complain about unauthorised sites on behalf of their constituents, local ward councillors simultaneously block attempts to establish legitimate, official transit sites in their own areas.

The candid admission follows a significant surge in unauthorised encampments across the West Midlands during the 2025/2026 municipal period. The situation has generated friction between local communities, public service workers, and members of the Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller communities due to a persistent shortage of authorized permanent pitches and operational transit accommodation across Britain’s second-largest city.

What Concerns Were Raised By Ward Councillors Regarding Local Disruption?

The debate was reignited during the full council meeting when Councillor Sam Forsyth, representing the Birmingham Independents Group for Quinton, challenged the leadership over the continuing impact on local neighborhoods. As documented by Alexander Brock of Birmingham Live, Councillor Forsyth noted that unauthorised encampments represent “an increasing problem” affecting large swathes of both northern and southern Birmingham.

Councillor Forsyth highlighted the mounting distress experienced by local residents and community groups. As reported by Alexander Brock of Birmingham Live, Councillor Forsyth stated:

“It’s a real shame but I know a lot of park groups are utterly fed up now of having to do the tidy up – they’re having to deal with human excrement, rotten food, sometimes stray animals.”

Councillor Forsyth further explained that in her ward and neighboring Highter’s Heath, local public services had faced direct cancellations. As recorded by Alexander Brock of Birmingham Live, Councillor Forsyth told the council chamber:

“In my ward and Highter’s Heath, we have also seen the cancellation of council services because we’ve had visits from tip trucks cancelled. Can the leader commit to give licensing and public protection committee the power we have asked for to bring in new measures so we can control unauthorised encampments?”

How Did Council Leadership Respond To The Criticism?

Responding directly to Councillor Forsyth’s question, Council Leader Roger Harmer conceded that the local authority had repeatedly failed to deliver an effective framework. As reported by Alexander Brock of Birmingham Live, Councillor Harmer stated:

“It’s a very important question. And it’s also a question that I think this council has flunked getting a proper solution to. Whenever we have issues with unauthorised encampments, every councillor complaints quite rightly on behalf of their residents.”

Councillor Harmer emphasized that resolving the cycle of unauthorized roadside encampments requires providing designated space for families seeking legal accommodation. As detailed by Alexander Brock of Birmingham Live, Councillor Harmer added:

“Part of the solution is that we need more sites in the city where travellers can stay. Yet whenever sites are proposed, every councillor who has a proposed site in their ward says ‘not in my ward’. If we are to say to our residents as a body that we are determined to stop this, as part of that we have to accept that we need to find sites for travellers who wish to stay legitimately. Absolutely that is not going to be easy. That will be very challenging but it has to be part of the solution.”

In addition to addressing long-term accommodation requirements, Councillor Harmer confirmed that the local authority is implementing immediate physical security measures across vulnerable green spaces. Funding has been allocated for structural works designed to restrict vehicle access at 31 high-risk public parks, with phase one installation work commencing immediately and continuing throughout the winter months.

What Position Have Gypsy and Traveller Campaigners Taken On Local Site Provision?

The policy deadlock in Birmingham has drawn criticism from Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller advocacy groups. As reported by The Travellers’ Times, Romany Gypsy campaigner Abeline McShane previously highlighted the city’s structural infrastructure deficit. As quoted by The Travellers’ Times, Abeline McShane stated:

“It’s disgraceful that Birmingham has no official policy or transit site to support roadside families, unlike neighbouring Walsall Council which has the only working transit site in the West Midlands… It’s also disgraceful that the UK’s second biggest city does not have a single permanent public authority Traveller site. Let that sink in: Birmingham does not have a single local authority permanent pitch.”

To address these deficits, Birmingham City Council previously evaluated a “negotiated stopping” trial model. As outlined in council documentation reviewed by The Travellers’ Times, negotiated stopping establishes formal temporary agreements allowing mobile families to occupy designated, unused council land for short-term stays. The model aims to redirect roadside caravans away from sensitive residential parks, lower legal eviction expenses, and ensure access to basic amenities and welfare support.

Background of the Development

The management of unauthorised encampments in Birmingham operates under a joint protocol between Birmingham City Council and West Midlands Police, relying on statutory powers under Sections 77 and 78 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Under UK law, local authorities can issue directions to leave unoccupied land, backed by Magistrates’ Court eviction orders executed via certified bailiffs.

Historically, Birmingham City Council has relied on high-court injunctions covering specific high-risk parks—such as Daisy Farm Park, Swanshurst Park, and Billesley Common—to prevent unauthorised vehicle entry. However, local authorities are legally restricted in executing rapid evictions under national police guidelines if no viable transit sites exist to direct mobile populations toward.

While neighbouring authorities such as Walsall Council operate dedicated transit sites, Birmingham’s lack of permanent public pitches has consistently complicated police enforcement under Section 61 powers, leading to repeated displacements between public green spaces.

Prediction: How This Development Will Affect Local Stakeholders

The admission of structural policy failure by Birmingham City Council leadership signals immediate and long-term impacts across several key groups:

• Local Residents and Park User Groups: Residents living near vulnerable green spaces will likely see physical access barriers installed over the winter as phase one perimeter work completes across 31 parks. However, until official transit sites are approved, unauthorised encampments are likely to shift toward unprotected suburban areas, industrial estates, or private property, maintaining localized tensions over maintenance, noise, and public amenity access.
• Elected Ward Councillors: Local representatives will face heightened political pressure from both leadership and constituents. As council leadership demands candidate site submissions for official Traveller accommodation, ward councillors will encounter intense opposition from resident associations reluctant to host temporary or permanent sites within their electoral divisions.
• Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller Communities: Travelling families migrating through the West Midlands will continue to face unstable living conditions, frequent legal evictions, and restricted access to healthcare and education services due to the ongoing shortage of official transit space. If the council successfully transitions from emergency perimeter security toward implementing formal negotiated stopping sites, travelling groups may gain safer, regulated temporary stopping options with access to basic refuse and sanitation facilities.
• Local Authority Finances: In the short term, Birmingham City Council will continue to absorb legal fees, bailiff costs, and cleanup expenditures following unauthorised stays. Achieving a permanent site allocation strategy could drastically reduce recurring enforcement costs over time, though initial capital expenditure for land acquisition and site security will place further pressure on the council’s already constrained municipal budget.