Is Brighton and Hove too tolerant of tolerance?

At first, I was aghast and dismissed the author as a rogue, someone who clearly did not get our city by the sea. But then I realised the problem: I was being one of those high-minded tolerants he was referring to, who comfortably exists in a middle class majority.

The truth is the lack of diversity in a city lauded for being different is astonishing.

Stattos may want to leaf through recent census figures and see that less than a fifth of those living in Brighton and Hove class themselves as a member of a black or minority ethnic (BME) community.

But the lack of diversity in our city is obvious to most by just taking a look around. Why in a city of 50,000 people who identify themselves as BME do we have 54 white councillors?

Where is the melting pot of cultures as people from a variety of backgrounds intermingle as a community?

Other cities and towns, such as Bristol, Manchester, even Crawley, have managed this pretty well. Instead Brighton and Hove is a mishmash of ghettos established on lines of wealth with rich itinerants establishing themselves in the city centre and pushing those less well off into the suburbs.

Nowhere is the lack of tolerance in our city more apparent than the annual traveller merry-go-round.

Every year groups of up to 60 vehicles descend on the city in the summer months.

Every year residents complain about antisocial behaviour as unauthorised encampments are set up in parks and open spaces.

Every year Brighton and Hove City Council and Sussex Police has to spend money and time acting as mediators while they pursue court action to legally evict groups from public land.

With clean-up costs, provision of bins, replacement of gates and maintenance of a transit site, this year more than £500,000 will be spent providing for travellers.

Even the most ardent tolerant will find it hard to justify why the taxpayer has to contribute this amount at a time when libraries, public toilets and children’s centres are at risk of being closed.

Especially as legally there is another way, with the police able to carry out an immediate eviction for free under section 61 orders.

So why do we put up with it? Because we, as a city, are trying to be too tolerant.

Everyone, from the police to the general public, seems to be afraid of actually saying or doing anything which appears critical of these travelling groups.

That’s because anyone who does is immediately labelled a racist.

Yes, Romany and Gypsy families are among the most deprived groups in society and have, wrongfully, been subjected to the most awful hate crimes.

For these groups there is a 23-pitch transit site in Horsdean, as well as plans for a permanent site for those groups that have links to the city – a move for which Brighton and Hove should receive much praise.

But there is a difference between traditional families, who often have local routes, and Irish travellers, who don’t.

Having visited encampments and spoken to groups, those in these mobile home communities proudly state that Brighton and Hove is a wonderful place to come and visit.

If they really are “just visiting”, how are these groups any different to members of the caravan club?

The current tactics of turning a blind eye to unauthorised encampments until a county court order can be obtained only serves to increase resentment among local communities, as well as adding extra expense to the taxpayer.

Speaking to a former top cop, it appears the police make an active decision to do this as it allows them to keep track of the groups.

But just who has decided that immediately evicting groups from land within hours of them moving on will cause more damage than good?

And where is the tolerance in allowing groups to remain on land such as Waterhall, where sports are regularly played, and Wild Park, which is a vital open space for the communities of Moulsecoomb and Coldean?

Does anyone seriously think that the police would maintain this “soft approach” if groups tried to get onto more “prestigious” open spaces Preston Park, Hove Park or Queens Park? What’s more, any chance of a proper debate on how this issue can be dealt with sensitively is immediately obstructed by accusations in the council chamber that talking about the subject is inherently racist.

This is not about being racist; it is about opening up a sensible discussion on an issue which affects a large section of the community.

So let’s be as tolerant as we claim to be and push the PC police to one side by having a proper grown-up debate on this highly contentious topic.