published in OJ Senate 20/01/2011 - page 124
Hervé Maurey attracts the attention of the minister of the Interior, Overseas France, local authorities and immigration on Law 2000-614 of 5 July 2000 on the reception and housing of Travellers. This law introduced a requirement for municipalities to participate in the reception of travelers whose traditional habitat is made up of mobile homes. The high cost of so doing, in terms of investment and maintenance is largely supported by local communities or municipalities, despite the subsidies paid by the state. This cost is all heavier than the equipment are often damaged by those to whom they are intended.
These provisions are therefore bear a significant burden on municipalities, so that, by definition, the Travellers are not linked to any specific municipality. Quite obviously, this issue is far more the rule than the town.
Also, he asked whether it would be desirable to modify the legislation in this area, so that the State supports this jurisdiction and the resulting expenditure.
Response of the Ministry of Overseas
published in the OJ Senate 16/02/2011 - page 1361
Hervé Maurey. Mr. President, Madam Minister, ladies and gentlemen, my question is about the law No. 2000-614 of 5 July 2000 on the reception and housing of Travellers.
This law attempts to reconcile freedom of movement of some 150,000 people in France with a mobile lifestyle with the legitimate concern of local officials regarding compliance with public and private spaces.
Under this law, mayors are responsible for the implementation of the departmental plan reception of Travellers and the achievement and maintenance reception areas, unless they have opted to transfer jurisdiction to the intercommunal level.
All municipalities with more than 5,000 inhabitants must thus have a reception area. Some municipalities with fewer than 5,000 inhabitants are also bound by this obligation when they were identified by the departmental plan.
The legislature has therefore decided to entrust this huge responsibility to the municipalities, which must bear the high cost of so doing in terms of investment and maintenance, even if they qualify for government subsidies. The cost to be borne by the local is even heavier Unfortunately, these facilities are subject to frequent and regular damage. To meet the requirements of safety, hygiene and decency, communities must regularly engage in work rehabilitation.
These costs are more difficult to support and justify to the citizens that the budgetary context requires elected officials to resort to arbitration and, thus, to abandon certain projects.
Beyond the financial aspect, the imposition of this burden municipalities seems contrary to the principle of subsidiarity: Travellers are by definition mobile, it does not seem justified to place this responsibility solely on the Commons.
regularly solicited by politicians, I have, since my election there is a little over two years, filed a written question on this subject. Having had no response to it or recovery carried out May 14, 2009, I filed in June 2009, a proposed law that has been particularly co-signed by my colleague Philippe Richert, now Minister for Local Government . This bill seeks to reaffirm the responsibility of the State in financing reception areas, installation and maintenance. I would like to know the Government's position on this bill whose purpose is to make the state a skill that is in my view, its full responsibility.
Mr. Chairman. I call Madam Minister.
Marie-Luce Penchard, Minister to the Minister of the Interior, Overseas, local authorities and immigration, with responsibility for overseas. Senator, I apologize for the absence of Mr. Brice Hortefeux, who asked me to bring the Government's response.
The law of 5 July 2000 on the reception and Habitat Traveller provides that municipalities participating in the reception of persons whose traditional habitat is made up of mobile homes.
All towns are home to the departmental plan of travelers, that is to say all those over 5 000 inhabitants and, where appropriate, some municipalities with fewer than 5,000 inhabitants are forced to make available a Traveller halting sites or more furnished and maintained.
expenditures for the acquisition, development and operation of these areas are mandatory expenditures for municipalities or public institutions which, according the departmental plan, must bear the burden.
Municipalities included in the departmental plan are disposed of within two years after the publication of the scheme to make the necessary investments and take advantage of a government subsidy to the tune of 70% of expenditure "fundable" for permanent sites and the maximum rate of 100% of the expenditure incurred under the conditions required for the major stopping points.
The deadline has been successively postponed until December 31, 2008. Funding requests have increased substantially on the eve of the deadline.
These subsidies are of course not exclusive of other sources of funding since the Act of July 5, 2000 provides that the aforementioned area, the department and the family allowance can provide additional subsidies to achieve these areas of Home.
According to the latest data available, the rate of attainment of permanent camp sites established at the end of 2009, 48% of forecast departmental plans. As at 31 December 2009, 19,936 seats had been opened in 840 permanent camp sites. Were funded 67% of spaces reception areas included in the diagrams, for a total of 260 million euros in investment and 132 million euros have been spent on maintenance through financial assistance to managers.
Moreover, because of its cross and its territoriality, the admission policy and housing of Travellers can be implemented at the intercommunal level. Intermunicipal can share the costs of investment and operation. The provisions of Article 2 of the 2000 Act have facilitated the use of this possibility because the common pattern appearing in the departmental home of Travellers and the municipalities those areas where savings can be transferred to an EPCI their own tax jurisdiction in which they define the content: development and management of halting sites for Travellers, or planning one, or management only.
Finally, the conflicts that may arise from degradation due to the occupation of areas within a common law procedure. When such facts are discovered, the mayor has the opportunity to complain to the judicial court to uphold the interests of the town.
Given all these factors, the Government has no plans to change the laws relating to the reception and housing of Travellers currently in force.
Mr. Chairman. I call Mr. Hervé Maurey.
Hervé Maurey. Madam Minister, you kindly remind me of the applicable legislative provisions on the subject, which I was not totally unknown ... You mentioned the financial participation of municipalities: their role is much heavier than that, since they assume responsibility of welcoming travelers.
Also, you mentioned the state subsidies, which could represent 70% of expenditure I can tell you - I speak from experience - that the expenditure ceiling makes this highly theoretical level. In fact, this level is never reached.
I express regret that the Government has no plans to change the law on this point. Indeed, the problems posed by so-called nomads is an issue beyond the competence of municipalities and intermunicipal same. You also alluded to a possible transfer of jurisdiction between municipalities. I know that such a possibility exists, but that step is, I think he, not good: the problem is of national solidarity.
Again, I regret that the Government does not intend to change the laws that have yet shown their limits in the last ten years, and he does not want to assume this responsibility, in my view, it primary responsibility.
This law attempts to reconcile freedom of movement of some 150,000 people in France with a mobile lifestyle with the legitimate concern of local officials regarding compliance with public and private spaces.
Under this law, mayors are responsible for the implementation of the departmental plan reception of Travellers and the achievement and maintenance reception areas, unless they have opted to transfer jurisdiction to the intercommunal level.
All municipalities with more than 5,000 inhabitants must thus have a reception area. Some municipalities with fewer than 5,000 inhabitants are also bound by this obligation when they were identified by the departmental plan.
The legislature has therefore decided to entrust this huge responsibility to the municipalities, which must bear the high cost of so doing in terms of investment and maintenance, even if they qualify for government subsidies. The cost to be borne by the local is even heavier Unfortunately, these facilities are subject to frequent and regular damage. To meet the requirements of safety, hygiene and decency, communities must regularly engage in work rehabilitation.
These costs are more difficult to support and justify to the citizens that the budgetary context requires elected officials to resort to arbitration and, thus, to abandon certain projects.
Beyond the financial aspect, the imposition of this burden municipalities seems contrary to the principle of subsidiarity: Travellers are by definition mobile, it does not seem justified to place this responsibility solely on the Commons.
regularly solicited by politicians, I have, since my election there is a little over two years, filed a written question on this subject. Having had no response to it or recovery carried out May 14, 2009, I filed in June 2009, a proposed law that has been particularly co-signed by my colleague Philippe Richert, now Minister for Local Government . This bill seeks to reaffirm the responsibility of the State in financing reception areas, installation and maintenance. I would like to know the Government's position on this bill whose purpose is to make the state a skill that is in my view, its full responsibility.
Mr. Chairman. I call Madam Minister.
Marie-Luce Penchard, Minister to the Minister of the Interior, Overseas, local authorities and immigration, with responsibility for overseas. Senator, I apologize for the absence of Mr. Brice Hortefeux, who asked me to bring the Government's response.
The law of 5 July 2000 on the reception and Habitat Traveller provides that municipalities participating in the reception of persons whose traditional habitat is made up of mobile homes.
All towns are home to the departmental plan of travelers, that is to say all those over 5 000 inhabitants and, where appropriate, some municipalities with fewer than 5,000 inhabitants are forced to make available a Traveller halting sites or more furnished and maintained.
expenditures for the acquisition, development and operation of these areas are mandatory expenditures for municipalities or public institutions which, according the departmental plan, must bear the burden.
Municipalities included in the departmental plan are disposed of within two years after the publication of the scheme to make the necessary investments and take advantage of a government subsidy to the tune of 70% of expenditure "fundable" for permanent sites and the maximum rate of 100% of the expenditure incurred under the conditions required for the major stopping points.
The deadline has been successively postponed until December 31, 2008. Funding requests have increased substantially on the eve of the deadline.
These subsidies are of course not exclusive of other sources of funding since the Act of July 5, 2000 provides that the aforementioned area, the department and the family allowance can provide additional subsidies to achieve these areas of Home.
According to the latest data available, the rate of attainment of permanent camp sites established at the end of 2009, 48% of forecast departmental plans. As at 31 December 2009, 19,936 seats had been opened in 840 permanent camp sites. Were funded 67% of spaces reception areas included in the diagrams, for a total of 260 million euros in investment and 132 million euros have been spent on maintenance through financial assistance to managers.
Moreover, because of its cross and its territoriality, the admission policy and housing of Travellers can be implemented at the intercommunal level. Intermunicipal can share the costs of investment and operation. The provisions of Article 2 of the 2000 Act have facilitated the use of this possibility because the common pattern appearing in the departmental home of Travellers and the municipalities those areas where savings can be transferred to an EPCI their own tax jurisdiction in which they define the content: development and management of halting sites for Travellers, or planning one, or management only.
Finally, the conflicts that may arise from degradation due to the occupation of areas within a common law procedure. When such facts are discovered, the mayor has the opportunity to complain to the judicial court to uphold the interests of the town.
Given all these factors, the Government has no plans to change the laws relating to the reception and housing of Travellers currently in force.
Mr. Chairman. I call Mr. Hervé Maurey.
Hervé Maurey. Madam Minister, you kindly remind me of the applicable legislative provisions on the subject, which I was not totally unknown ... You mentioned the financial participation of municipalities: their role is much heavier than that, since they assume responsibility of welcoming travelers.
Also, you mentioned the state subsidies, which could represent 70% of expenditure I can tell you - I speak from experience - that the expenditure ceiling makes this highly theoretical level. In fact, this level is never reached.
I express regret that the Government has no plans to change the law on this point. Indeed, the problems posed by so-called nomads is an issue beyond the competence of municipalities and intermunicipal same. You also alluded to a possible transfer of jurisdiction between municipalities. I know that such a possibility exists, but that step is, I think he, not good: the problem is of national solidarity.
Again, I regret that the Government does not intend to change the laws that have yet shown their limits in the last ten years, and he does not want to assume this responsibility, in my view, it primary responsibility.
News Gypsies 
0 comments:
Post a Comment