TRAVELLING PEOPLE IN FRANCE:

FRENCH LEGISLATION AND LIVING-CONDITIONS

 Introduction

         Tsiganes, Gypsies or Travelling people…lot of words to define people who are travelling all the time. Jean-Pierre Liegeois distinguishes 3 categories of Traveller in France: First there are Gitans who come from Spain, Portugal and France; Second, Manouches are fairground and come from Germany and France and Third, Roms are from Hungary, Romania and eastern countries. For them it is impossible to be settled; in their culture, in their life they need to travel. To stop it is the loss of their liberty. Because of its originality, Travelling people were and are victims of racism and discrimination. Settled people are afraid because they do not know this way of life, they exclude instead of trying to understand. In the 16th century, in France, they were persecuted because it was impossible for the authorities to put them in a social class. The 3rd Reich killed 500,000 Travellers in Auschwitz and in Dachau because they are « mongrel ». After this massacre, nothing is done for them, no advantages, and no compensations. Moreover the countries or the international organisations were not aware persecution and racism of travelling people. They are really in fringe of settled society. In France there are 300,000 Travelling people. In a democratic country as France, which should respect the rights of minorities, what is the politics about travelling people? What are their living-conditions? Is there an understanding between them and French population and authorities? Can we speak about respect and equality? We can notice that French policy and legislation are getting better for travelling people. Although they do some effort the reality is totally different and we can notice the misunderstanding between the two absolutely way of life.

I. French policy about travelling people

      It is very difficult to find some rules or laws about travelling people in French legislation. But since the beginning of 8o’s we can notice that it is getting faster. The social services are developed and lots of associations of travelling people are growing up.

                   A.Laws

         It is important to precise that Travelling people have to have a nationality. They depend of a State even if they travel in other countries. For French travelling people they are considered as French; then they have to pay taxes and to do the military service. Because in France it is the rule of ius solis if you born in France you are French. Travelling people pay taxes even if they do not participate in French settled society. It is the same for school, each child has to go to school; there is a specific agreement for travelling children, they can change school during the year and teacher has to integrate them. The first law about travelling people is in 1912.This one shows that it is possible to have the same nationality and not to be subject to the same rules. If the police ask for their paper, they have to show anthropometrical notebook, it means the size of ears or the size of bust for example. Moreover the notebook of the family with names of all the members has to be shown as well. Then the policeman has to ask how long they want to stay here and why. In this law, Travelling people are as criminal. But the law in 1990,  Besson’s law, is important to improve the relation between authorities and travelling people. Each municipality, which has more than 5000 inhabitants have to have an area for travelling people next to shops, schools. The halting sites have to have current water, toilets and electricity. It is an important measure to improve the living-conditions of travelling people and to participate in a better understanding between the both of populations. In 1992,there is a decree to organise a national committee for travelling people. The Prime minister is the President and they meet two times a year. It is interesting because it is at national level. Moreover, a new concept is introduced in France,actulay we have to use the politically correct “Gens du voyage” (travelling people) and not to use anymore Tsiganes or « Manouches » which are too pejorative:  »In France the travelling people comprise a community of some 300,000 persons. They are also known as Gypsies a generic term covering a range of ethnic groups (including Roma, Manush, Sirti, Jenish, Gitano) of whom over half continue their ancestral lifestyle, nomadism » (From the official text accompanying the launch of the Travelling people). It is going to the same way with the bill of 1999 which tries to find a consensus between municipalities and travelling people: First, municipality has to organise welcome of travelling people and Second, it has to find solutions to favour the settling process. That is why, in 2000, it is a law about welcome and accommodation of travelling people. It means that each town has to have a consultative commission in which there are representative of municipality, of Travelling people and of associations which cares about Travelling people. The State has to participate; it has to give money and to encourage the meetings.

         French legislation tries to improve and to have a better relation with travelling people and to improve their living-conditions when they want to stop for few days somewhere. Laws are not the only one way to help and to develop the communication between settled and travelling populations. The social services are also important.

 

                   B. Social services

         For the second half of the century, the development of social services in charge of travelling people is growing up. In France they develop the concept of prevention. It means « it is deemed preferable to prevent harm than to have to punish or cure it after it has occurred » (“Roma, Gypsies, Travellers” from J.P Liegeois p 233). For French people, social services for travelling people seem to be good because they can have access to a doctor or to solve a problem of money or to understand the paper for taxes. The goal is to help them and to try to care about their problem. But it is very wicked because nobody knows Travelling people’s culture. Social protection can become for them a stifling imposition on those determining factors to it. Socio-educative backup can become an arbitrary takeover.  For them this kind of help force them into dependence and it is not their wishes and lifestyle. The social services are not adapted for travelling people because their culture, the manner to help each other it is not the same. Moreover, social services oblige them to integrate French settled society and then some of them lost their culture, their own lifestyle. It is not adapted for Travelling people, and the staff is not used to working with them and they do not get to adapt their job for Travellers. In a extract from an activity report in France in 1970, one of the representatives said « Whoever comes into close contact with T.p cannot fail to observe how the psychological traits and constants which characterise the adults are already discernible from early childhood. The majority of these behaviours constitute so many obstacles to their adjustments, and should be the priority target of educate action whenever conditions permits one-to-one work ». It is like a big misunderstanding we try to help people but they have to integrate my lifestyle, my way of thinking. Now social services consider that Travelling people are underprivileged, disadvantaged and deprived. Then it is very difficult to improve because nobody tries to understand culture of Travellers. French politicians believe that they do something but at least it is pointless. Some associations for travelling people defend their rights. Social services analyse everything in social rather in cultural terms. The idea to help is good but it is a wrong way to force someone to integrate another society. Respect is tolerance.

 

                   C. Association

         Over the 8o’s, travelling people took a place in the field. There are the new players. It means that they decided to organise themselves to defend their lifestyle, their culture. Moreover, Lots of international organisations as Council of Europe or European Community started to care about them. The law of 2000 in France is going to the same direction: to have more consideration about Travellers to integrate them in discussion. In the 90’S a new type of committee is created. They are specialised and efficient because they included some representative of travelling people. It is a real progress. It is very important in France. For example « La voix mondiale tzigane » (World Gypsy Voice) it comes from an international organisation but it is in French. French Travelling people are very dynamic and create lots of organisations to explain to French settled population how they are, what their culture is. For example, the music group Tanslave plays lots of songs to explain how it is hard to endorse discrimination and racism. There is still a problem. That is true that it is good to have travelling people’s organisations. But if they want to have a discussion with some politicians about their rights or something else, they have to create a real association (law in 1901 about creation of association). It means that they have to elect a President, to have a treasurer, and so one and so one. Then they took the rules of settled population. Is it really respectful for travelling people who are not used to respecting this kind of authority? French settled society imposes its rules on Travellers. In the other hand, J-P Liegeois shows that authorities at national and local levels are rethinking their analysis, becoming more open to innovation and to direct with representatives of the Gypsies and Traveller communities. May be it is a transition and step by step settled population understands better travelling people. It is a real lack of respect to oblige them to follow rules of settled population.

         Although politicians, social services and associations try to change the situation even if it is really difficult. The most important is to know that the reality is really worrying

 

.

  II THE REALITY

          “Common rights are common in name only, but selective discriminatory in practice, resulting de facto segregation “ (J-P Liergeois in Roma, Gypsies, Travellers p.162 163).

          Even legislation forbidding racial discrimination in accommodation, schools and employment deemed applicable to Gypsies and Travellers, who are often after defined as a marginal social group (“Les Gitans” from Francois Coupry p 34). Authorities do not simplify the relations between the two ways of life. Moreover we can find discrimination at school and for halting sites. Racism is important also in the culture.

                   A. Authorities

         Authorities are not able to care seriously about travelling people. There are two kinds of reluctance. First, direct reluctance when authorities of municipalities take decisions to avoid travelling people in their town. For example lots of municipalities put some sign post on which it is written “Forbidden for Gypsies “ or the major can decide that travelling people bring some problem of hygiene, law and order or tranquillity, then the police goes to the halting sites to say to them to leave. Second is the indirect reluctance, it is very perverse because they build some halting sites for travelling people but it is very small or near by rubbish tip for example. The authorities can ask for vaccination certificate or to make some difficulties to immatriculate children at school. Laws do not have a good application. The major has the power to change or to arrange the law. In France there is not civil servant who cares about this issue. If one of them is interesting in this topic or wants to act he or she has some problem with his or her superior. Then it is more difficult to find good solution. They totally avoid the problem. Travelling people are subject to the strictest possible implementation of the rules. Because population is afraid, the major does not want to take a decision if population disagree. At national level we can find problem as well. If relations between two countries are not good there is a restriction to cross the border; it is more complicate for Travellers to change of country. If the relations are good, States reach an understanding (official or not) on limiting the movements of nomadic families.  Life for travelling people is very difficult. It is very often in France to see travelling people to go to another field because the halting site is very dirty. Then settled population is angry because it is private field and Travellers have not to be there. Nobody understands that the halting site is so horrible and it is impossible to live in these conditions. In Saint Herblain, a small town next to Nantes, this kind of problem often happens and everybody makes offensive remarks about Travellers even if they say that they are not racist or xenophobic. Where is the limit? Why are people afraid?

         Authorities do not respect the rules and avoid the problem. About halting sites and school, the French policy does not try to integrate travelling population and to have a real communication with them.

                   B. The problem of halting sites and of school

          There is a connection between the two problems. Moreover, Tom Lee (secretary of Romany, Guid, UK) said, “To discuss education before providing stopping-places is like putting the cart before the horse”.

         Even if there are lots of laws about the halting sites, we notice that they are very horrible places. They are not adapted for needs of a family. Geographically is all the time far from the centre of the town. Moreover, in one decree it is written that the best halting site has to have not more than 15 caravans but the municipalities continue to build up a big halting site in which it is possible to have 100 caravans. It is the case near by Avignon. Life is really impossible. Travelling people call this place a Ghetto. In 1986, 48% of French halting site did not have running water and 50% no toilets. There is not grass, any toilets enough and sometimes they do not exist. A horrible example is the stopping place of Montpellier. It is between two big factories, near by one polluted lake and it is the end of the sewerage system. In spite of law, the major does not accept more than 2 or 3 days travelling people in his or her town .He gives as a pretext the protection of environment or public health. A major said in 1980 “Camping and parking on the public road by individuals of no fix-abode presents a serious inconvenience, and often even a danger, from the point of view of public hygiene and security of goods and persons; moreover, they are a permanent cause of disorder”.  In this conditions how is it possible for children to go to school if it is very faraway and if they just can stay 2 or 3 days. 6o% of travelling people can not read and write. For school, the other problem is that children are not used to having an authority as a teacher and to staying in a classroom during all the day. That is why in the north of France they tried to put just travelling children together. It does not work because they are much more marginalized. Sometimes, parents disagree to put their children at school because the culture of travelling people is very different from settled population’s culture and they are afraid that settling process influences children. For them to integrate settled culture means to be a slave and to follow the rules. But it is getting important to go to school because now everybody need to have a diploma if you want to be a fairground for example. School is getting an obligatory for all of them. But the structure of school is not adapted for them. Teachers are not able to integrate children because he knows that they will not stay a long time and the other children are criticized them. The integration is difficult.  Some travelling children have to go to specific class for handicap people, not because they have problem but because they are backward and teacher think that they are stupid. At least they do not develop the same kind of intelligence or capacity because their life is really different. Now there are some new schools adapted for these children and they get some books in their own language. New techniques of pedagogy are proposed as caravan school or intercultural pedagogy. The goal is to link the culture without losing his or her own identity.

                   C. Discrimination

         Travelling people are discriminated for everything. French authorities try to force them to be settled. Discrimination is not only at school or in politics.

         Travelling people decide to stop because of political, economical reasons. It was too difficult for them to continue travelling. The problem is that this settling process is more or less forced by decrees, laws or order. Then they live in the suburbs in a small flat and all the life of community of travelling people that they had it is over. It is hard for them and their neighbours already have problem of drug, of poverty, of delinquency or unemployment. In this context, they are still the victims because if there is a problem, travelling people are the firsts to be accused. If they try to get a house or to have caravan as a house, it is very difficult to get the authorisation. When travelling people decide to stop to travel is it a real choice? Juan de Dios Ramirez Heredia, speaking at Council of Europe seminar, June 1983 said, “We prefer to be 1st class Gypsies than second-class Gadje “. To force travelling people to stop, they feel “ill-adapted”. Is it tolerant to force someone to stop, to force him or her to let everything, to forget his or her culture just because the majority of the population is settled?

         In the French culture it is amazing to notice the racism towards travelling people. Jean-Pierre Liegeois wrote that in practice nomadism is “de facto” synonymous with parasitic marginalism. They are rejected with violence or denied access to shop, restaurant. Caravans parks routinely refuse travelling people, even for a single night. Then we just accept travelling people for their music, cinema or dance. Francois Coupry in his book “ Les Gitans” explains that settled people are attracted by travelling people but in the other hand we are very afraid because of the myth of Carmen (opera from G Bizet) and the myth a total free life without rules.   It is a kind of exploitation because their art is accepted but not their way of life. In French vocabulary, there are some racist expressions. For example, when children learn how to do the sound “ien” two words are all the times used together; it is bohemien and vaurien (bohemian and scoundrel). If you are looking at a French dictionary, define the word “savage” it refers not to have a house, to be settled and to have no religion and law. We can notice that settled people have in their culture and education this fear.

 

 

CONCLUSION

         Even if there are laws to improve the relations with travelling people it seems difficult to find a solution because the authorities do not favour the communication. The goal is to do a settling process. Is it respectful? Why have travelling people to integrate and to respect laws of settled people? Travelling people have rules as well but settled people do not pay attention in this staff because they think to be the majority is to impose its own rules. It is the same problem about social services we want to help them but it is not the good way. Settled people consider that they are in the normality and the other, Travellers, are different and have to integrate our rules because they are the minority and they are French. Even if you are French you can have your own culture and the other have to respect it. The problem is the same in France about Immigrants. Some French people consider that Immigrants have to be totally integrated and to forget their culture. It is not good because people need to keep their origins and their culture. The misunderstanding is very important. We can notice some efforts to counterbalance this direction but settled people have to realise that their culture is not the best one. This racism can not be useful to solve the problem. They can not accept other culture, other lifestyle. At European level some new measures are made for travelling people. May be it will be the way to improve. Because European Union is a mixture a population, may be it is easier to understand life of travelling people. Even if the French legislation is not strong and implemented enough is a real progress or it is all just for show? Can we hope that it is the beginning of a co-operation even if it needs time to change mentality?

 

GAGNET Violaine

Erasmus 2000-2001

MULTICULTURALISM

Miss Laubeova

TRAVELLING PEOPLE IN FRANCE : FRENCH LEGISLATION AND LIVING-CONDITIONS

 

Bibliography:

-“Tsiganes et voyageurs”from J-P Liegeois

-“Les Gitans” from f. Coupry

-“Tsiganes et sedentaires” from B.Formoso

-“Les Tsiganes” from J.P Clebert

-“Roma,Gypsies,Travellers”from J.P Liegeois

-“The Traveller-Gypsies” from J. Okely

-www.interieur.gouv.fr

-www.legifrance.fr