Somerset councillors have been branded "fascists" after new measures aimed at tackling illegal travellers sites in and around Glastonbury were approved.

Mendip District Council consulted with residents in March about plans for a public space protection order (PSPO) which would criminalise unauthorised traveller sites in and around the town.

Following a meeting its scrutiny board in early-September, the council's cabinet met in Shepton Mallet on Monday evening (October 3) to give its unanimous backing to the proposals.

But this decision was greeted by dismay and disquiet from members of the traveller community, who branded the decision "fascist" and had to be escorted out of the council chamber.

Here's everything you need to know:

What does the PSPO involve?

The new PSPO covers the entirety of Glastonbury, along with Street and the majority of the western end of the Mendip district, stopping at the borders of Shepton Mallet and Wells.

It includes the Butleigh and Baltonsborough ward, where a by-election will be held on Thursday (October 6) to replace the late Nigel Woollcombe-Adams.

It is intended to further deter encampments which are already unlawful – namely those overnight on public highways, those trespassing on publicly-owned or -managed land, or those which stay in council-owned car parks.

The PSPO changes unlawful encampments from a civil matter to a criminal offence, with any encampment not deemed to be "reasonable, necessary or proportionate" or "having a reasonable excuse" being potentially subject to action in the courts.

The PSPO will be enforced by both Avon and Somerset Constabulary and the council's own in-house enforcement team – and each encampment will be treated on a case-by-case basis.

This is one of many measures which are being pursued by the Glastonbury Unauthorised Encampment Multi-Agency Group (MAG), which includes representatives from the police and the county, district and town councils.

The others include double-yellow lines on Wellhouse Lane, installing boulders and bunds on Stone Down Lane near Glastonbury Tor, and creating a multi-user path on Bretenoux Road.

More than 850 people took part in the council's consultation in March, of which 550 lived within the Glastonbury area (the BA6 postcode).

Other respondents took part from as far afield as London, Nottingham, Powys, St. Ives, Stockton-on-Tees and Wakefield.

Of those surveyed, 38 per cent were generally in favour of the PSPO being implemented, while 58 per cent were against it.

Who is in favour of the PSPO?

A number of local residents spoke in favour of the plans at the cabinet meeting held at the council's Shepton Mallet headquarters on Monday evening (October 3).

Margaret Oakden said: "It is vitally important that this situation is addressed, for both local people, the environment and travellers.

"There are now 54 caravans in various stages of rotting and disrepair waiting in Kennard Moor Drove. The destruction of this once-beautiful country lane is almost beyond repair – but it goes further than that.

"We residents face daily intimidation and antisocial behaviour from the  dwellers in these caravans. Local people are too afraid to walk down this lane.

"How can that be right in a civilised country? How can a minority of antisocial people take precedence over the majority – especially when that majority supports them through their council tax?

"If anyone here thinks that by doing nothing – by allowing these vulnerable people to continue to live in squalor – that this problem would be solved is seriously misguided. It is no exaggeration to say that lives are at risk here."

Susannah Hart added: "The increasing burden of environmental, policing, health and social costs, caused by people moving into the area and avoiding paying council tax here, is neither moral nor fair on local residents.

"The fact that these encampments cause not only distress to local residents but environmental damage – including human waste from latrines dug into the river banks – is something that needs addressing now.

"A 68-year-old lady was recently pushed from her bicycle and beaten on Kennard Moor Drove. Another local's dogs ended up chewing up human excrement laced with crack cocaine – these are the times of things that happen in Glastonbury."

Lilith Osborne said: "People are fed up. People who live in bricks and mortar feel like they are being discriminated against.

"I live in St. John's Square, and constantly there are overnight stoppings [sic] of caravans and vans there, taking up the residents' parking spaces.

"I've spoken to parents at St. John's Primary School; they are so concerned about that antisocial behaviour that they are seeing, that they are taking their children from that school. This is an issue that permeates the whole town."

Who opposes the PSPO?

Louisa Dix said the PSPO was "draconian" and a "desperate attempt" to prevent large encampments which had been set up since the coronavirus lockdowns.

She said: "The consultation process was a farce. It was deliberately designed to be short, being fitted in just before the local elections so no extension could be granted.

"To me, this shows a complete lack of respect for the townsfolk and the vehicle dwellers, neither of whom were directly notified that the consultation process was happening.

"When pilgrims and travellers have been visiting Glastonbury for millennia, they have shaped the character and culture of the town, and they contribute to the local economy."

Tony Thomson, a trustee of the charity Friends, Families and Travellers (FFT), warned that the PSPO would lead to those living in vehicles being treated as "un-people".

He added: "There is no proportionality here, and that is deeply concerning. You are going to cede authority to someone on the ground without judicial scrutiny until after the event.

"The PSPO itself could be deployed as a form of communal punishment, which are frowned upon by international law and are deeply unethical.

"It could actually become a vector for hate crime. It could be a tool for hate, and you are handing this potent instrument out without judicial oversight."

Cat Rocca, a traveller from the Glastonbury area, said the PSPO was not an appropriate solution to the problems associated with encampments.

She said: "None of us are really denying that there are problems. What we are asking and appealing for is a less barbaric solution. This is not a solution at all – it will just cause further problems. It is so short-sighted.

"When I read the PSPO, I cried. To be pre-emptively accused of antisocial behaviour just because of my choice of lifestyle – and for many it's not a choice, it really is the only option besides homelessness.

"To be accused of antisocial behaviour because somebody might be afraid that I might commit antisocial behaviour – it's fascist, to be honest.

"The discrimination and hatred that's incited by your report is disturbing and upsetting."

Will I Om, another traveller, added: "I did live in a bus for a while, on some agricultural land. I ended up in that situation by being evicted, by becoming homeless, and being in a bus what was saved me from being completely homeless.

"For me, it was a solution that a lot of us may end up facing as energy prices increase and the housing crisis gets worse and worse. This PSPO would make it very, very difficult for any of us to fall back on that as a potential solution.

"They are not all bad people – they are just people in bad situations. I don't think the PSPO is the best way for us to move forward."

Tom Willis – whose family have lived in Glastonbury for three generations – went further still, comparing the PSPO to the treatment of Jews and gypsies during the Holocaust.

He said: "In Somerset, my forebears were thrown in local jails for having different religious beliefs. In Poland, members of my family were sent to forced labour and death camps for belonging to a minority ethinic group.

"Now the town is threatening to imprison my friends for their chosen way of life.

"Glastonbury has been a place of pilgrimage for 2,000 years – should we lock up Joseph of Arimathea if he were to return and dare to camp on Wearyall Hill?

"Our holy books, the Qu'ran and the Bible, do not teach us to dominate others with batons and handcuffs. They teach us to treat others with respect, even to help and assist others less fortunate than ourselves, as in the story of the Good Samaritan."

What did the cabinet say?

Councillor Heather Shearer, portfolio holder for community health and services, said that the PSPO would be part of "a suite of measures" designed to help and support non-bricks and mortar residents in and around Glastonbury.

She said: "This is one extra thing which the MAG felt was absolutely needed in order to give us the best opportunities possible to deal fairly with people.

"We recognise that people have the right to live where they want to live, but there is a situation where the number of van-dwellers within Glastonbury has become unsustainable. We have 20-30 times the number of van-dwellers per head of population here than we do in Bristol.

"We want to bring a balance to the town. All communities need to protected and enjoy quiet living to live harmoniously, but it is a nuanced situation.

"The consultation was not a referendum on people's freedom or the right to roam. We have a duty of care to ensure everyone lives happily in Glastonbury. Our intention is not to criminalise people at all."

Councillor Barry O'Leary, portfolio holder for enterprise and finance, said that future provision for travellers needed to provide strong links to the town and the amenities therein.

He said: "I speak as someone who has actually got three travellers' sites within my ward, within almost footfall of my own home, and I opposed one of them because there was not an adequate footpath into the village for the dwellers.

"I work in financial advice and many people are one or two paycheques away from being on the breadline, or worse.

"We are a council that is to supposed to make Mendip a fairer, greener, more equal place. While I'm not a man of God, I do think some of the words used here tonight are un-Christian."

Councillor Garfield Kennedy, portfolio holder for planning and development management, said doing nothing about the issues surrounding illegal encampments would be disastrous.

He said: "There has been abuse of individuals – the business of burning down caravans and so forth, it sounds pretty grim for me.

"If we sit on our hands and do nothing, then we are not giving ourselves the power to act under those circumstances.

"We're not actually wanting the power to act in an outrageous rampage against a community. It seems to me we are obliged to do something – and if we don't, I think we are being irresponsible."

What did the cabinet decide – and what happens next?

After around an hour and 45 minutes' debate, the cabinet voted unanimously to approve the PSPO – which, unsurprisingly, did not go down well with members of the traveller community present.

Following the vote, Ms Rocca declared: "On behalf of the whole traveller community, under natural law, we do not consent to this order. It means karmic responsibility for the perpetrators of this fascist order."

A number of other members of the traveller community openly criticised the cabinet's decision, forcing council leader Ros Wyke to suspend the meeting for five minutes while the individuals were escorted out of the council chamber.

The PSPO will remain in force until October 2025, when the unitary Somerset Council – which will officially take the reins in April 2023 – will have the option to renew it.

The district council confirmed in late-August that it intended to sell off part of the former Morlands factory site on Beckery Old Road, with the remainder being retained for travellers.

The council's asset management group is expected to discuss the terms of the planned sale and land transfer in October, with a view to the transactions being completed by March 2023.

A separate site for travellers will be delivered by March 2026 as one of 11 projects within the Glastonbury town deal, which has attracted £23.6m of central government funding.

A planning application for this additional site – whose location has not yet been confirmed – is expected to be submitted by the council before Christmas.