►
From YouTube: Phase 3; 28/7/22; Day 12; Gypsies and Travellers and Travelling Show-people, AM (1 of 4)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
B
Please
use
only
the
main
doors
to
access
and
exit
the
building
and
for
security
purposes
do
not
use
the
side
doors
unless
you
you're
a
wheelchair
user,
and
someone
is
available
to
unlock
and
relock
the
door
after
you
just
also
make
you
aware
there
are
other
people
in
the
building
as
they're
having
language
classes
so
that
you
may
see.
Other
people
knocking
about
the
toilets
are
situated
on
the
ground
floor
and
the
corridor
adjacent
to
the
main
room
which
is
down
the
back
there.
B
Drinking
water
is
available
in
the
main
hall
for
attendees
and
anybody
who's
up
in
the
gallery.
I
don't
have
got
anybody
today.
There
is
water
in
the
fire,
there
are
other
refreshments
available
in
gilligan,
there's
coffee
shops
and
also
the
sainsbury's
expressing
building
just
to
remind
you
that
the
session
is
being
filmed.
So
if
anybody
has
any
issues,
if
you
could
just
let
me
know,
I
can
see
you
in
a
place
where
you
don't
get
picked
up
on
camera.
B
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
that
carol.
Yeah
looking
around
the
table,
I
think
most
people
at
least
have
form
in
terms
of
attending
the
hearing.
So
I
don't
think
that
there's
any
particular
need
for
me
to
to
explain
the
the
format
or
what
what
you
need
to
do,
but
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
to
have
brief
introductions
before
we
start
as
tradition.
Has
it
starting
with
the
council's
side.
Mr
alvin.
A
So
what
I'm
going
to
do
today
is
to
divide
the
issues
up,
quite
simply
for
the
purposes
of
our
discussion,
and
that
is,
first
of
all,
to
talk
about
need
and
and
the
robustness
of
the
gtaa.
I
think
we
can
all
use
that
that
shorthand
and
know
what
we
mean
and
then
to
move
on
to
the
question
of
supply
in
terms
of
quantity,
and
I
know
also
that
there
will
be
points
about
the
appropriateness
of
the
supply
identified,
and
so
that's
how
I'm
going
to
do
it.
A
C
Thank
you,
sir
I'll
make
some
brief
introductory
remarks
before
mr
murray
does
that
you
have,
of
course,
the
june
2022
gta,
but
what
you
also
have
importantly
within
the
vast
array
of
documents,
is
the
2014
version
and
the
2017
version,
and
they
are
important
contests.
This
is
not
a
council
that
is
coming
to
this
fresh,
with
only
one
gtaa
produced
very
shortly
before
examination.
C
The
latest
one
is
the
gta
2022,
the
one
on
which
the
council
lies.
As
you've
said,
we
refer
to
this
variously
as
a
refresh
or
an
update,
but,
to
all
intents
and
purposes
it
is
a
full
gtaa,
and
mr
moore
will
touch
on
that.
In
a
moment,
it
contains
all
of
the
essential
components
that
a
full
gta
does
the
headline
conclusions.
You
have
page
eight
figure
one
and
then
figure
two
below
that.
C
I
hope
the
hard
copy
made
its
way
to
you.
It
did
so
figure
one
the
need
you
get,
that
I
stress
the
whole
plan
period
and
then
figure
two
below
that
the
looking
at
the
five
year
periods.
Thereafter,
they
are
the
headline
conclusions
now
I'll
get
mr
murr
to
explain
in
sort
of
a
short
summary.
What
is
actually
in
section
three
of
this
report
and
then
I'll
come
back
on
a
couple
of
specific
points
thereafter
on
on
methodology.
So
mr
merge,
you
want
to
well.
E
E
I
actually
developed
much
of
this
methodology
and
particularly
we
developed
the
methodology
after
planning
policy
for
traveler
sites
came
out
in
2012,
so
the
framework
that
this
is
set
in
has
been
around
since
2012
and
has
been
examined
by
literally
dozens
of
as
part
of
literally
dozens
of
local
plans.
Over
that
time.
E
We
then
updated
the
methodology
in
2015
when
planning
policy
for
traveler
sites
was
updated
to
bring
in
the
new
definition
of
traveling
for
upon
the
new
planning
definition
of
a
traveler.
So
someone
who
is
traveling
as
a
to
seek
to
support
that,
basically
seeking
income
effectively
traveling
for
work
effectively.
E
E
E
E
C
So,
unless
you
want
more
on
the
methodology
I'll
propose
to
leave
it
there,
we've
got
some
points
that
we
will
pick
up
the
specific
criticism
made,
perhaps
if
I
might
take
it
like
that,
can
I
deal
with
this
in
two
stages.
Firstly,
four,
four
points
of
contest
and
what
we
say
are
important
points
of
context.
When
you
look
at
this
assessment
in
york,
the
first,
as
you
would
have
seen,
is
that
it
it
identifies
the
vast
majorities
of
gypsies
and
travelers
who
are
resident
within
the
council's
area.
C
Dues
are
resident
on
local
authority
sites
and
there
is
a
good
reason
for
that.
They
are
well
managed
safe
sites
and
the
vast
majority
of
residents
who
are
on
those
sites
are
in
receipt
of
either
house
and
benefit
or
universal
credit,
and
so
are
in
a
position
where
it
is
very
unlikely
that
they
would
be
able
to
purchase
or
develop
a
private
site
within
the
council's
area.
That's
the
first
point
of
context
and
that's
very
important
when
we
come
to
look
at
the
policy
response
in
the
second
part
of
this
discussion.
C
C
C
C
C
A
C
C
A
C
E
E
A
E
A
E
E
E
C
C
C
Thank
you
very
much.
That's
that,
then,
is
the
second
point
made
against
us.
The
third
point
made
against
a
sirs
about
the
travan
club
site
at
nurburgring.
You'll
have
seen
reference
to
that
site,
so
that
site
is
a
is
a
lawful
site
which
has
permission
for
use
as
a
caravan
site.
It's
not
restricted
to
members
of
the
gypsy
and
traveller
community.
C
C
Now
the
allegation
is
made
against
us.
Well,
you
didn't
interview
those
members
of
the
gypsy
travel
community
who
may
have
been
on
that
site
a
number
of
points
to
be
made
in
response
on
that.
Firstly,
all
the
indications
on
the
evidence
available
to
the
council
to
date
is
that
that
is
a
transient
need,
which
is
met.
C
C
And
you
will
note
that,
for
example,
whilst
this
point
is
raised
in
representations
on
this
matter,
nobody
tells
you
any
alternative
figures
or
provides
you
with
any
detail
as
to
who
might
be
there.
That
would
be
unmet
need,
that's
not
been
covered
in
the
gta,
and
so
we
say
the
point
goes
absolutely
nowhere.
C
E
It
is
always
possible
that
a
gypsy
and
trophocyte
can
be
hidden
normally,
potentially,
a
single
caravan,
for
example,
most
gypsian
traveler
sites
are
very
visible
and
certainly
from
our
own
experience
is
that
within
a
few
hours
of
an
encampment
or
a
new
development
starting,
it
will
be
reported
to
the
council
as
part
of
an
enforcement
action
so
genuinely
hidden
gypsy
and
traveler
sites.
We
think
are
quite
rare.
C
C
C
That
we
don't
need
to
go
there,
but
like
likewise
so
hence
I
haven't
done
it.
Thirdly,
though,
even
if
the
council
had
had
a
meeting,
it
is
clear
to
the
council
that
the
travelers
trust
would
not
have
changed
their
position,
and
I
say
that,
for
this
reason,
just
mr
pittman,
in
response
to
the
offer
of
a
meeting
by
the
council,
said
this.
He
said
that
might
make
sense,
but
it
would
not
constitute
ors
engaging
with
the
york
travelers
trust.
C
C
H
It
was
quoted
in
response
to
an
email
that
was
sent
to
us
by
the
council,
saying
that
ors
wanted
to
meet
with
us,
but
two
days
in
the
four
I
think
the
email
came
in
if
I'm
not
right.
Two
days
before
this
meeting
was
was
meant
to
be,
and
it
was
impossible
for
several
of
us
to
make
that
meeting,
and
we
said
all
that
we
said
was.
H
That
might
be
a
possibility
to
have
a
meeting
with
someone,
but
it
could
not
constitute
what
we
think
was
proper
engagement
with
the
york.
Travelers
trust
and
I'd
like
to
put
that
into
the
context
of
you,
sir,
inviting
the
council
to
meet
with
the
york
travelers
trust
in
2019
and
again
at
the
end
of
phase
two.
H
We
had
one
meeting
on
the
fell
on
zoom,
and
that
was
purely
because
we
had
asked
if
we
could
perhaps
reach
a
grounds
to
reach
a
common,
a
statement
of
common
ground,
and
we
had
one
zoom
meeting,
which
eventually
happened
the
day
before
the
publication
of
the
ors
report.
So
the
idea
that
that
could
be
considered
for
us
being
uncooperative,
I
think,
is
completely
out
of
the
question.
G
G
G
The
site
was
then
secured
again
at
a
cost
of
fifty
thousand
pounds
to
the
public
purse.
This
was
after
the
council
received
homes
and
communities
agency,
money
in
2013.
I
think
from
memory
673
500
pounds
was
granted
for
better
site
management
and
an
increase
in
pitches
on
that
site,
and
that
has
been
money
completely
and
utterly
wasted.
I
I
I
mean
I
don't
under
in
having
said
that,
I
don't
underestimate
some
of
the
methodological
difficulties
of
getting
accurate
assessments
of
needs
and
we'll
come
on
to
why
those
methodological
difficulties
mean
that
in
our
submission,
particularly,
the
2020
review
is
not
robust
and
a
substantial
underestimate
of
need.
But.
A
I
I
I
I
This
is
a
bit
hypothesis
on
my
part,
but
I
obviously
have
worked
for
gypsy
clients
across
the
country
and
what
we,
what
I
ten
there
is
a
it's
very
difficult
for
gypsy
people
to
get
hold
of
land,
and
so
the
number
of
applications
is
very
typically
related
to
land
holding
conditions.
So
a
number
of
areas
I'm
familiar
with,
let's
say
north
of
cambridge
out
into
the
fence,
where
there
are
a
lot
of
ex
plant
nurseries,
small
land
holdings
over
the
years.
I
It's
been
very,
it's
not
easy,
but
gypsy
families
have
been
able
to
acquire
quite
a
substantial
number
of
of
sites,
and
so
there's
a
relationship
between
the
land
holding
situation
and
the
number
of
applications
that
come
forward.
My
hypothesis
is
that
the
open
agricultural
land
around
york
means
that
it's
been
very,
very
difficult
for
any
travelers
to
acquire
land.
I
don't
know
if
you
want
to
come
in
on
that
violet.
J
Yeah,
I'm
the
ceo
of
york,
travelers
trust,
I'm
also
a
romney
gypsy
and
I've
struggled
for
five
six
years
to
identify
land
in
york
to
live
and
I've
had
to
leave
york.
My
parents,
the
same
york
family
now
live
in
selby
on
private
land
because
they
can't
identify
land
in
york.
So
just
because
there
isn't
need
there
in
your
report
doesn't
mean
the
need
doesn't
exist.
We've
just
been
priced
out
of
the
area
through
bad
policy
and
housing
prices.
I
And
there
is,
whenever
gypsy
people,
there
are
many
cases,
I'm
aware
of,
because
I'm
often
asked
by
gypsy
people.
I
know
about
whether
to
buy
a
piece
of
land
in
many
cases
yeah
when
gypsy
people
look
at
land
either.
There
are
extremely
strong
planning
reasons
why
they
shouldn't
acquire
it
or
the.
When
it's
clear
that
the
prospective
applicants
are
travellers,
the
ability
to
buy
it
falls
away.
So
we
cannot
conclude
that
the
lack
of
applications
is
indicative.
I
I
Indeed,
quite
a
few
have
been
sold
off,
and
some
of
those
sold
off
have
passed
out
of
have
then
not
become,
have
no
longer
become
accessible
to
gypsy
people,
the
it's
very,
very
difficult
for
gypsy
people,
a
to
acquire
land
and
when
be
when
they
do
to
then
get
planning
permission.
All
the
additional
pictures
that
have
been
developed
effectively
over
the
last
30
years
by
the
energies
of
individual
gypsy
applicants.
But
what
we
have
is
a
national
crisis
and
we'll
come
on
to
some
of
the
implications
of
that.
I
Then,
moving
on
to
this
point
about
proxy
interviews,
I
think
we
were
told
that
most
of
the
interviews
in
relation
to
the
three
council
sites
were
effectively
proxy
interviews
and
that
the
ones
on
private
sites
were
face-to-face
interviews.
Maybe
I've
got
this
wrong,
but
my
reading
of
the
2022
news
assessment
is
that
no
interviews
were
completed
on
any
of
the
private
sites.
I
E
A
E
A
E
H
I
I
mean
if
I
could
summarize
that
sir
we
were,
we
were
led
to
believe
there
was
one
approach
on
the
the
public
sites
and
one
on
the
private
sides.
In
reality,
no
interviews
were
conducted
on
private
sites.
What
would
I
mean?
That's
important,
so
what
we
have
is
a
survey
restricted
to
the
local
three
local
authority
sites
and
we're
then
told
that
the
majority
of
those
interviews
were
proxy
interviews.
Now,
I'd
make
two
points
about
that.
One
is
who,
who
are
the
proxy
interviews
fought
by
council
staff?
I
C
E
We
got
the
information
we
required
on.
Ultimately,
the
two
can.
The
absolute
key
information
is
the
households
who
are
living
on
every
pitch
and
an
indication
of
the
travelling
status
of
those
households,
and
obviously
the
managers
know
within
reason,
who
comes
and
who
doesn't
come.
That
moment
works
who
doesn't
work.
C
E
Yes,
we
had
a
background
pitch
a
background
picture
on
who
was
living
on
the
sites.
The
same
sites
in
2017
in
many
cases
is
it
is
all
it's
the
same
households
who
are
living
there.
People
don't
move
that
much
within
public
sites
quite
often,
but
it
also
provides
us
just
with
extra
information
on
the
households
who
weren't
interviewed
in
2017.
A
E
I
Yes,
I
suppose
I
was
making
an
observation.
Not
no.
In
fact,
the
other
question
we'd
like
to
ask
is
not
only
what
how
many
were
proxy
interviews,
how
many
were
carried
out
or
carried
out
by
council
staff,
how
many
were
provided
by
family
members
or
neighbours?
I
then
was
making
the
point,
and
this
is
just
sort
of
based
on
my
experience
of
working
with
gypsy
people.
The
gypsy
people
are
private
and
they
are
very
reticent.
I
I
I
No,
no
at
one
level,
yes
right,
honor
on
the
other,
reflecting
that
privacy
people
will
only
tend
to
I
mean
come
in
violet.
If
you
think
of
what
I'm
saying
about
your
community
is
wrong.
In
my
experience,
people
will
only
share
on
a
kind
of
need
to
know
basis,
and
particularly
one
of
the
issues
we'll
come
on
to
is
the
disparity
between
ors's.
I
I
I
For
that
big
disparity,
one
is
gypsy
people,
don't
automatically
trust,
non-gypsy
people,
and
if
you
my
experiences,
I
work
with
families
and
gain
their
trust
and,
as
a
consequence
of
gaining
their
trust.
I
get
a
much
more
much
fuller
picture
of
how
the
family
operates
and
particularly
that
nomadism.
I
I
I
J
I
just
answer
your
direct
question,
please
so
around
who
should
carry
out
these
interviews
as
a
person
that
was
involved
heavily
with
the
labour
government
in
creating
the
planning
circular
106
and
a
person
that
was
involved
heavily
in
creating
the
guidance
around
gta's
and
how
they
should
be
constructed
in
the
very
first
years
that
they
were
done.
I
actually
carried
out
the
orchard
and
humber
gypsy
and
travel
accommodation
assessment.
I
carried
out
the
greater
manchester
gypsy
and
travel
accommodation
assessment
didn't
carry
out
yorks
because
they
did
that
separately
from
yorkshire
and
humber.
J
I'm
very
aware
of
how
these
should
be
carried
out,
and
the
best
guidance
to
say
is
that
you
use
peer
research.
So
when
we
carried
out
the
greater
manchester
research,
we
were
very
aware
there
was
a
large
number
of
travel
insure
people
there,
so
we
recruited
traveling
sherman
to
train
as
interviewers
who
then
went
out
and
carried
out
the
interviews
in
my
personal
opinion,
that's
the
best
way
of
doing
this
work
and
that's
the
reason
why
many
gypsy
and
travel
organizations
have
a
problem
with
the
way
in
which
yourselves
work.
J
J
However,
when
we've
spoken
to
one
particular
site
manager,
who
is
the
most
in
touch
on
the
ground
site
manager
for
york,
he
had
no
awareness
and
his
words
were
if
this
was
something
I
was
supposed
to
have
done.
Nobody
told
me:
I
find
that
an
incredibly
interesting
quote
no
gypsy
or
traveller
person
on
any
of
the
sites
were
aware.
This
was
happening.
A
J
J
J
We've
done
nothing,
I
don't
know
what
you're
talking
about
and
if
it
was
something
I
was
supposed
to
do,
I'm
not
aware
of
it.
I
just
find
that
an
incredibly
interesting
point
that
the
person
that
has
the
most
contact
with
the
community
wasn't
asked
to
be
part
of
the
research
from
the
council.
It's
also
worth
noting.
There
doesn't
seem
to
be
any
reference
to
the
homeless
families
we
have
in
york.
J
H
And
if
I
could
just
add
to
that,
I
mean
you
know,
I
feel
really
sad
that
we're
at
this
position
that
we're
actually
having
to
challenge
our
local
council
on
this,
our
local
council,
where
the
leader
and
the
deputy
leader
I've
just
recently,
given
a
complete
commitment
to
your
being
a
human
rights
city
and
a
universal
council
decision
to
be
an
anti-racist
city.
And
yet
what
I
think
I'd
like
to
suggest
to
you,
sir,
is
that
all
the
evidence
about
need
is
coming
from
the
council.
H
You
know
the
and-
and
you
asked
that
we
were
brought
into
this
and
we
would
have
been
willing
and
happy
to
be
engaged
with
a
process
that
was
cooperative.
But
unfortunately
that
has
just
not
happened,
and
so
the
information
that
you're
being
provided
from
the
council
comes
from
the
council
and
not
from
the
community.
A
I
H
The
2017
study
as
well
that
we
were
not
able
to
find
anybody
who
felt
that
they'd
been
interviewed
and
just
to
add
to
what
violet
was
saying.
I
mean
we
haven't,
got
the
resources
to
go
around
and
actually
do
surveys
ourselves,
but
on
our
facebook
post
we
had
17
people.
That's
quarter
of
all
the
proposed
people
who
should
have
been
surveyed
who
said
they'd
heard
nothing
about
it,
but
we
had
none,
not
a
single
person
who
said
that
they'd
been
interviewed
for
this
survey.
H
J
Thank
you
there's
just
a
point
as
well
that
we're
all
skirting
around,
because
it's
quite
scary-
and
I
don't
really
want
to
be
the
person
that
raises
it,
but
there's
a
lot.
There's
a
lot
of
doubling
up
on
york
sites.
There's
a
lot
of
families
that
have
married
that
are
now
in
breach
of
their
conditions
living
doubly
on
york
sites.
They
are
not
going
to
put
their
head
above
above
the
pulpit
and
say
yes,
I
need
a
pitch
because
that
would
mean
they
would
be
evicted.
We're
not
talking
about
that.
We're
not
discussing
that.
J
So
what
usually
happens
is
a
young
girl
gets
married
or
a
young
boy
gets
married.
He
forms
a
new
household
with
his
wife
and
children
there's
nowhere
for
him
to
go
so
the
family.
Let
him
live
on
the
same
pitch,
so
you've
got
two
households,
possibly
seven
or
eight
people
sharing
one
bathroom
and
kitchen,
but
if
they
raise
their
head
above
the
pulpit
or
they
cause
trouble.
As
it's
been
named
by
the
local
authority,
workers
they'll
be
put
off,
they'll
be
evicted,
so
it's
best
just
to
stay,
quiet
and
stay
beneath
the
radar.
G
G
G
A
A
I'm
also
I'm
also
I'm
just
in
replying
keem,
to
know
what
the
council
says
about
the
appropriateness
of
the
timing
of
when
the
interviews
were
undertaken
in
terms
of
the
time
of
year
and
also
on
those
sites
where
no
one
was
available
to
interview
and
a
calling
card
was
left.
What,
if
anything,
has
subsequently
happened?
A
You'll
not
be
surprised
to
hear
that.
I
hear
this
quite
often
I'm
at
examination
hearings
and
I
am
sometimes
told
that
the
people
involved
in
conducting
the
interviews
have
made
multiple
attempts
to
return
to
the
site
to
actually
catch
the
person,
whilst
they're
present.
So
I'd
be
keen
to
know.
What's
happened
in
that
respect.
F
A
Sorry,
forgive
me
messages
when
you
say
that,
because
of
covered
there
were
restrictions
in
terms
of
enforcement.
That
presumably
I
mean
I
don't
know
it
depends
when
during
the
pandemic,
this
occurred,
I
suppose,
but
was
that
about
enforcement
officers
not
being
able
to
go
out
and
attend
site
and
that
that
kind
of
thing.
C
E
A
C
G
Thank
you
for
letting
me
back
in
sir.
It
doesn't
because
this
to
my
recollection
three
caravans,
numerous
vehicles
on
on
this
site,
just
to
be
clear.
It's
public
highway,
it's
a
lay
by
so
the
fact
that
the
vehicles
aren't
roadworthy
is
an
offence
in
itself,
and
I
cannot
accept
this.
This
business
of
the
pandemic
interfering
with
any
enforcement
action
for
the
simple
reason.
The
first
time
the
evictees
were
seen
in
public
was
from
my
recollection
february
2019,
and
it
would.
They
were
camped
out
on
the
approach
to
the
patton
ride.
C
A
We
are
yeah.
What
I'm
trying
to
understand.
Clearly,
mr
moore,
is,
is
telling
me
that
in
the
gta
one
pitch
on
one
unauthorized
site
has
been
accounted
for.
Mr
moore
wasn't
able
to
tell
me
whether
it
was
the
site
that
you're
referring
to
or
not
so
I'm
asking
you
does
this
sound
like
it's
your
site
or
are
you
talking
about
something?
That's
a
bigger
site
or
what.
J
C
A
J
You
so
much
sorry
about
that,
but
I
just
felt
I
needed
to
offer
some
insight.
The
land
adjacent
to
oswald
week
is
a
unauthorized
development
of
a
long-standing
family
that
live
on
there.
So
that's
another
completely
forgot
that
they
were
there
to
be
honest
with
you,
because
it
feels
like
it's
part
of
the
site.
J
The
and
the
fact
that
they're
saying
that
council
walters
just
threw
this
up.
This
family
have
been
roadside
for
three
years
plus
they
haven't
just
appeared
in
york,
they've,
never
moved
from
york.
They
are
york
residents.
That
is
the
family
that
mr
jones
was
talking
about.
Definitely,
and
we
are
working
I'd
love
to
chat
to
you,
mr
walters,
afterwards
about
what
we're
doing
to
support
the
family.
J
So
I'll
be
honest,
my
assertion
that
I
don't
believe
that
you
went
there
and
found
it
empty
is
probably
wrong
because
we're
talking
about
different
sites,
because
the
roadside
camp
always
has
somebody
there.
They
have
very
little
movement
and
just
to
clarify
mr
walters.
It's
the
caravans
that
are
unroadworthy,
not
the
actual
driving
vehicles.
They're
classed
as
vehicles.
A
Yeah,
the
the
problem
I
have
here
is
I'm
hearing
about.
You
know
sort
of
various
sites,
and
I
need
to
be
clear
in
my
mind
for
reasons
you'll
understand
whether
or
not
those
are
sites
that
have
been
taken
into
account
in
the
gta
or
whether
they
aren't,
because
if
I
don't
know
that
that
leaves
me
with
something
of
a
problem.
C
C
So
my
point
is:
it
is
not
to
your
question,
but
it's
if,
if
we
have
were
given
warning
that
these
were
the
points
going
to
be
taken
against
us
in
respect
to
the
gta,
we
could
looked
at
them
for
you
before
we
got
here
today,
as
we
did
on
the
one
side
that
was
raised.
So
just
be
very
clear
about
that.
But
the
question
you
raise
absolutely:
we
can
look
at
that
and
we
can
provide
you
that
information
in
due
course.
C
A
C
C
E
Yes,
the
I
come
at
this
kind
of
work
as
a
background.
I
was
an
economic
statistician,
so
the
first
thing
that
jumps
out
of
me
always
is
biased
samples
and
if
someone
has
been
prepared
to
take
something
to
a
planning
appeal
on
the
status,
including
the
status,
that
they
are
a
traveling,
that
they
meet
the
definition
of
planning,
then
they
are
confident
enough
that
they
meet
the
definition
for
planning
purposes.
That
is
not
a
representative
sample
of
the
whole
population.
E
As
I
think
I
said
in
my
introduction,
we
were
asking
this
question
before
planning
status
became
important
because
it
became
really
significant
and
we
were
getting
less
than
10
percent
of
people
were
telling
us
that
they
traveled
for
work
that
has
now
increased
significantly
that
it's
obviously
become
within
the
community.
They're
aware
now
that
this
is
an
important
issue.