Perhaps, Don, I am wrong on this part but I thought that the council was planning to evacuate the whole site, then determine what was lawful development and what not, destroy what was not, and then permit the owners' return so that they could continue to use the lawful parts. I believe that was expected to be in about two years - and I have heard no sensible suggestions where the travellers go in the meantime.

On the planning front, as far as I know the site was a scrapyard before the travellers bought it, so there might well have been a case that the development was beneficial, but I cannot now remember whether that avenue was pursued (it could have gone to the secretary of state, and 10 years ago there could have been a policy argument about the need for such sites pending the observance (which never happened) by councils of their obligations to provide official sites). Retrospective applications are often tricky - and as is often said "Hard cases make bad law".