Wednesday 22 November 2017

No more, no less, for Travellers

Sir -- I have just read Emer O'Kelly's article on Travellers (Sunday Independent, February 13, 2011). It is a noble piece with plenty of fine words. Personally, I feel she is in cloud cuckoo land. For as long as I remember, we have regarded Travellers as a separate entity and thrown money at them willy-nilly.

So much so that they have become dependent on that money and all you will hear is 'I want, I want' and 'I'm entitled to it' -- never 'what can I give back to the community?'. In fact, I would say that we did them a disservice. Yes, by all means integrate them, but by giving them only what everybody else in the country is entitled to -- no more, no less. I have no problem with people living in caravans or even trees, but I don't see why I or my children should have to pay for them indefinitely. Finally, after reading her last sentence, "personally speaking, I'm all for integration and that includes the Travellers", I would like to ask Emer a question which requires a simple 'yes' or 'no'. I don't know where you live, Emer, but would you accept for the sake of integration a halting site next door to your house?

Aidan Hampson,

Please sign in or register with for free access to Opinions.

Sign In

Promoted Links

Today's news headlines, directly to your inbox every morning.

Don't Miss