Policies affecting Nackens (Scottish Gypsy Travellers), Gypsy/Travellers and Scottish Travellers: lived experience testimonies

Learning and Moving Forward

The testimonies above demonstrate that participants have experienced, and continue to experience, mistreatment based on their ethnicity. From a legal perspective, the concept of ethnicity was given definitive consideration in the 1983 Mandla v. Dowell Lee case heard in the House of Lords. During this case, Lord Fraser of Tullybelton recognised an ethnic group as a distinct community by virtue of certain characteristics, namely:

The conditions which appear to me to be essential are these: (1) a long-shared history, of which the group is conscious as distinguishing it from other groups, and the memory of which it keeps alive (2) a cultural tradition of its own, including family and social customs and manners, often but not necessarily associated with religious observance.

In addition to those two essential characteristics the following characteristics are, in my opinion, relevant: (3) either a common geographical origin, or descent from a small number of common ancestors (4) a common language, not necessarily peculiar to the group (5) a common literature peculiar to the group (6) a common religion different from that of neighbouring groups or from the general community surrounding it (7) being a minority or being an oppressed or a dominant group within a larger community.^[22]

Nackens, Gypsy/Travellers and Scottish Travellers unequivocally satisfy Lord Fraser’s essential characteristics and many of the other relevant characteristics that follow. The legality of Nacken, Gypsy/Traveller and Scottish Traveller ethnic status was subsequently cemented in Scotland during an employment tribunal in 2008.^[23] Countenancing this legal understanding, and in the context of the testimonies presented within this report, careful consideration should be given to the Scottish Government’s response in terms of how policies and legislation disproportionately targeted certain ethnic groups and therefore constituted racial discrimination as defined by the United Nations.[24]

As noted in the Introduction and Context section above, the testimonies have also revealed instances of semantic tensions around the terminology being used to describe the participants and their experiences. There are a number of terms that individuals use to identify themselves – Scottish Gypsy Traveller, Gypsy/Traveller, Scottish Traveller, Nacken, Nawken and Nawkin – and these differentiations are yet to be fully recognised in the Scottish Government’s official literature. The current term ‘Gypsy/Traveller’, that was used in the 2022 census, has the potential to distort census findings because individuals might feel that inaccurate compound terms undermine their long history, identity and heritage in Scotland.^[25]

For example, the Scottish Parliament’s Equal Opportunities Committee’s ‘Inquiry into Gypsy Travellers and Public Sector Policies’ (2001) crystallised the compound term ‘Gypsy/Traveller’ and the oblique punctuation was a later addition.^[26] Reflecting on her part in updating the terms used to describe her community, Traveller Sheila Stewart remarks that the compound term did a lot of harm in Scotland because it led to the Travellers’ distinctive identities being misrecognised by other members of society.[27] Gypsy/Traveller Willie Reid makes a similar point more strongly:

As a Gypsy/Traveller myself I am made painfully aware that we have always been defined by outsiders. Countless names and descriptions have been foisted upon us. The language used to describe [us] is constantly changing and has more to do with government policy than ethnic identity […] society has an incurable urge to label us so that they can painfully squeeze us into a corner.^[28]

A further insight from the research, again in terms of terminology, is the use of the term ‘Tinker Experiments’. The term ‘Tinker’ derives from an anachronistic and now pejorative term used to refer to Nackens, Gypsy/Travellers and Scottish Travellers, and the more recent rhetoric surrounding ‘experimental’ attempts by authorities to assimilate or ‘settle’ itinerant groups who were deemed to be ‘a problem’. Research has revealed that one of the first recorded instances of such policies being enacted was at Kirk Yetholm in the Scottish Borders in 1829, with others appearing elsewhere in Scotland during the twentieth century.^[29] [30]

The archival research has shown that housing ‘experiments’ took place at a variety of locations across Scotland, including schemes in Perthshire, Angus, Ross and Cromarty, and Shetland. However, despite the misguided actions of officials, the settlement schemes should not be viewed in isolation from the other impacts of historical policies, such as the displacement of families, but rather as a discrete element of wider attempts to fragment then assimilate Nackens, Gypsy/Travellers and Scottish Travellers into mainstream Scottish populations. The researchers who conducted the archival research were unable to identify the first use of the term ‘Tinker Experiment(s)’ but it remains an emotive phrase that has come to signify prejudicial sociocultural attitudes and dehumanisation.

While I am not suggesting an unfastening of the term from discourses, it should be used advisedly when referring to the experiences examined in this and the archival research because it often refers to a specific set of circumstances and at specific locations. It is important, therefore, to acknowledge and differentiate between experiences that, although they may stem from the same historical policies, have manifested in significantly different ways. For instance, consider one participant’s preference for the term ‘Traveller experiment’ in their testimony included above when describing their experiences.

Similarly, some participants voice the individual, personal nature of their experiences and the lack of acknowledgement is a significant point:

It’s very personal, the individual and your own circumstances, but it’s being compounded by the refusal to accept verbatim what the victims are saying. We’ve been meeting with a barrage of insinuation and gaslighting of victims, calling us liars on social media, saying we invented our own backstory.

Rather than someone having the decency to say, “Yes, that did happen, you’re telling the truth and that’s been validated [by evidence]. That’s adding a layer of trauma that’s totally unnecessary because you’re having to regurgitate and relive that harrowing experience over and over again whilst being called a liar and [people] saying you invented it.

Building on this point, the participants were generous enough to offer their insights and perceptions about what the Scottish Government should do moving forward. Attention should be given to those participants who specifically identify as ‘Tinker Experiment Victims’ because this conceptualisation of their ongoing mistreatment is the very reason they agreed to offer their testimonies and help the Scottish Government to fill knowledge gaps. An effective apology is beyond doubt the consensus, and participants presented additional advice once the apology has been offered. Overall, participants are critical but also enthusiastic in terms of moving forward and maturing the relationship between Nackens, Gypsy/Travellers and Scottish Travellers and the Scottish Government.

For instance, on a related point about knowledge and acknowledgement, one participant sees a way forward and echoes the educational recommendations that the archival research makes:

It’s education, people need to know about these things, they need to educate themselves on them [...] maybe we could teach things in schools about the Travelling community. It’s ignorance through [non]education. AR: Educational Institutions

Another participant takes this point further:

When people call you a ‘Tink’ I don’t think you should be feeling sorry for yourself, I think you should be feeling sorry for the person that called you that.

I would say the vast majority of house dwellers, which are the non-Travelling people, know absolutely nothing whatsoever about what really took place a way back in the 40s and 50s, some of the horrible things. AR: Recommendations

The interest in discovery is therefore also an important one and reinforces the theme of education and understanding when it comes to moving forward from the discrimination of the past:

I think it would be great thing, honestly [...] I don’t care if it’s a non-Traveller or Traveller, if they could actually write a book [about] the real thing that happened to Travellers, the real life, the real story, I think that would be a good thing.

On the same topic, another participant expresses disappointment about the way Nackens, Gypsy/Travellers and Scottish Travellers continue to be treated, and the lack of a formal apology:

I just think it has taken a long time for an apology from the governments and the Church of Scotland. It is a long time, it is ridiculous [...] we’re stuck to the backburner and that’s wrong. Something should be done, and we should be getting an apology. AR: Recommendations

These testimonies also represent new knowledge and insight into the ways that historical policies can reverberate through generations of already marginalised and vulnerable individuals:

I have felt like my background has been gatekept by some organisations, institutions [...] I internalise it a lot, I sometimes don’t feel enough, like I’m enough of a Traveller.

Because of what happened to us, that’s why I’ve started becoming an advocate for the community [...] what [Nackens] went through, it was a big deal, and I’ve always tried to educate people about it.

There was a clear role the state played that said, our [Nacken] culture, our way of life, our heritage, is wrong, is like a stain on Scottish society [and] they wanted rid of us, they wanted us gone. AR: 8.1

It was an historical attack [...] I say historical but it’s still ongoing even today. It’s good that this is happening [the present research] because I still feel like we don’t have the same human rights as everyone else. AR: 4.2

In the short term, learning from the mistakes and historical policies so that stuff is not repeated, I think the government could [...] do more in terms of raising much more awareness publicly about it [...] more people need to know outside of the community, I feel that that is missing.

I think acknowledging the history month [Gypsy, Roma and Traveller History Month] and getting funding to improve a couple of [state-sanctioned sites] is not enough [...] it feels very performative.

As we heard within the testimonies above, along with an effective apology, the focus moving forward is predominately around education and awareness:

What happened to us needs to be put into the [curriculum]. Not just schools; universities and colleges. AR: Educational Institutions

More [discussion] about the culture. If there were more people addressing people from [our] culture [and] explaining it to people, I think that would be a good stepping stone, so that they have an understanding, so that we are getting rid of this prejudice and stereotyping.

Because that way of life is gone, you’ve still got Traveller families who’ve got children [and grandchildren], and a lot of them are very lost because they don’t know where they belong.

We’re part of the history of Scotland, the Travellers, we go right back. It’s something we should be really proud of [...] going forward the younger generation should feel proud of their culture because [the Travellers] did wonderful things.

Another participant goes further, and the gathered participants agree:

I think there definitely needs to be laws to protect Nacken culture and way of life.

There definitely needs to be acknowledgement of what happened to Traveller people [...] I know an apology is good, but it has to be properly acknowledged so that it’s recorded [...] put into law, so that it never happens again, that kind of protection [...] what happened to the children, that needs to be mentioned strongly as well.

The stolen children [...] needs more acknowledgement [...] the biggest injustice was taking the children.

Part of the acknowledgement and apology should also consider those were transported abroad:

Acknowledgement of the ones who were shipped abroad, to work in Australia, they were taken from their families, Travellers. That’s something that needs to be included in our history [...] there were lots of children shipped abroad [...] they were still shipping them abroad in the ‘70s.

Perhaps most poignantly:

I’d like to see an apology to us for the way we’ve been treated because who knows how long I’ll live [...] parents would’ve lost us if they didn’t take the experimental hut and that hut shouldn’t have been given. AR: Recommendations

In terms of learning and moving forward, participants voiced the gravity of their experiences and also made suggestions:

There has to be an admission that there was genocide here [...] and there has to be an admission that we need to move towards an apology before we can suggest anything really, beyond that.

This has been a deeply traumatic and dehumanising experience and I’m still suffering from it [...] I want an effective apology and I’m not moving forward from this until I get that. AR: Recommendations

This sentiment of an apology as a first step is shared by another participant:

Before the healing process can begin the Scottish Government and [the] institutions involved need to look at and acknowledge their part in what has happened to our family, and other families in experiments, so that this mistake doesn’t happen again.

They need to make reparations to all those concerned by giving a formal public apology, recognising what they did to victims of experiments [...] the need to [...] address the gravity of these human rights breaches.

The participant also believes that the Scottish Government should consider the SHRC guidance on apologies, cited in the previous section, and that:

There also needs to be access to effective legal remedy through the courts if there is to be any accountability for the victims of Traveller experiments.

Others agree on this first step because it is felt that what they have lost cannot be replaced; their childhood, their youth; their child-bearing years; their life-chances; and their ongoing health issues:

An effective apology is a start for a discussion. The discussion has to bring in redress of some kind [...] I’ve got fifteen health conditions now [...] these have to be addressed, there has to be redress for that. Then there’s the trauma. AR: Recommendations

Several participants again reflected that perhaps more robust educational provisions around Nackens, Gypsy/Travellers and Scottish Travellers, their history and culture, would be a positive step forward:

There’s a lot of misguided information about the Gypsies [...] the misguidance has become toxic. AR: Educational Institutions

It’s okay going to a meeting, some of us Gypsies and some of us non-Gypsies, but I wonder if the people that went to that meeting, who never suffered the same as us, I wonder how they feel, can they identify with us?

I don’t think that the government, and 60 or 70% of the population of Scotland, know exactly who Gypsies really are.

The education that’s been done so far to disseminate myths and what have you, a lot of it is being driven by agencies, and a particular agency [...] they’re not actually working with victims who’ve come through it, and they need to be worked with, to produce the education. There should be a platform for this story to be told, there should be a platform for the ramifications, and for what not to do going forward. AR: Educational Institutions