Basildon site action on 19 September

[Guernsey Donkey]

Nice to see so many of you contributing on this subject with various thoughts ideas and suggestions along with the odd moan and groan but still not falling out with each other - just having your say and like me a little moan - and still staying friends - good banter on topic of the day - somewhat different to the old days eh. :have fun::yeahthat:

 

[kimbowbill]

Nice to see so many of you contributing on this subject with various thoughts ideas and suggestions along with the odd moan and groan but still not falling out with each other - just having your say and like me a little moan - and still staying friends - good banter on topic of the day - somewhat different to the old days eh. :have fun::yeahthat:

Yes GD, i feel comfortable expressing my opinion nowadays, i used to be scared to death to even post lol, the site is really nice now, among friends xx

 

[John H]

it a difficult situation here ,ok they have broken planning regs ,but to me the planning regs in this country are a farse . as for traveling folk being trouble ,then yes some are ,but you look in papers and listen to the news there are trouble causes in all walks of life . we lived close to a travelers site at darrington in the 70s and i must say they were the nicest people you could wish to meet ,in fact i used to work for a guy called pat part time when on nights when i worked at kellingley pit ,he was a tarmacker and a coupe of times a week i would go off with him working ,and he payed well cash up front no problem . hugie burton another personal friend god rest his soul as he died some years ago he had a roller and used to lend it to the may queen parade ,and other fairs the village may have when they needed a nice car . but you should have heared the comments made behind his back he knew about the insults he got but shrugged his sholders and said thats there problem . i do think that many full timers have the romany in there blood, i must have as i loved our time in the van .my wife is of sicilian decent and we did a family tree and there is romany blood in her viens. aswell as other sicilian family ties also . councils arround the country have a duty to provide places for traveling families but they dont ,due to expense so to me this site as its owned by these folks should be given retrospect planning for the residents that are there now.

I take your point, Mandrake, and agree with the vast majority of what you say - but even though the law may be an ass more often than not, it is the only law we have until it is democratically changed. It is tempting to go along with you but, as others have said, we can't pick and choose which laws we obey without taking the consequences. The consequences in this case are eviction and the people involved knew the risk they took when they took it. I feel very sorry for them - especially as they will probably be rejected again wherever they end up - but the law is the same for all of us and there are plenty of cases of house-dwellers having to demolish buildings/extensions that have not got the proper permissions.

 

[Channa]

I take your point, Mandrake, and agree with the vast majority of what you say - but even though the law may be an ass more often than not, it is the only law we have until it is democratically changed. It is tempting to go along with you but, as others have said, we can't pick and choose which laws we obey without taking the consequences. The consequences in this case are eviction and the people involved knew the risk they took when they took it. I feel very sorry for them - especially as they will probably be rejected again wherever they end up - but the law is the same for all of us and there are plenty of cases of house-dwellers having to demolish buildings/extensions that have not got the proper permissions.

Exactly my thoughts in respect of the legalities.

Channa

 

[Firefox]

I have the same thoughts as John and Channa.

Apart from some of the residents are not short of a few Euros and also have houses back in Ireland. They just prefer to come to the UK as, I guess, essentially economic migrants. If they do have other houses to go to, and are not short of cash, they can hardly be classed as homeless. I've an idea but no proof, that there are not many in this situation, and it has been exaggerated by the Daily Mail Brigade.

I'm also interested to see what the council do with the land. They say they are going to make it inaccessible, but I believe the travelers actually own it, so what is the legal position?

As it is Green belt, I believe it can be used for farming or forestry and some people would have a right to live there temporarily for 28 days a year and also seasonly in connection with gathering of timber or harvesting.

 

[Deleted member 775]

just been on the news the residents have just won ahigh court injunction, preventing the council from removing structures there untill friday .

 

[Channa]

just been on the news the residents have just won ahigh court injunction, preventing the council from removing structures there untill friday .

Travellers using the framework and remedies that the law provides Whatever next ?

Heaven forbid, with all the media interest perhaps some are like wildcampers and are choosing to send a message to the public that they arent adverse to dialogue to resolve the situation irrespective of the history that has resulted in the current situation.

I saw on the news, a pledge for a peaceful protest, however the police riot squad are there just in case.

I just hope all this doesnt turn into another Orgreave

Channa

 

[Teffy]

My brother served for a while as a local councillor. On one committee, a titled lady informed him that gypsies were not really people. It is all very well to talk about planning law but it tends to be applied very differently according to your status in local society. I would also say according to whose palm you can afford to grease but that is just an opinion, I have no evidence to support it. By the way, I love Guernsey Donkey's family photo, it's beautiful.

 

[just jane]

Travellers using the framework and remedies that the law provides Whatever next ?

Heaven forbid, with all the media interest perhaps some are like wildcampers and are choosing to send a message to the public that they arent adverse to dialogue to resolve the situation irrespective of the history that has resulted in the current situation.

I saw on the news, a pledge for a peaceful protest, however the police riot squad are there just in case.

I just hope all this doesnt turn into another Orgreave

Channa

Or another Battle of the beanfield.

 

[Deleted member 775]

Travellers using the framework and remedies that the law provides Whatever next ?

Heaven forbid, with all the media interest perhaps some are like wildcampers and are choosing to send a message to the public that they arent adverse to dialogue to resolve the situation irrespective of the history that has resulted in the current situation.

I saw on the news, a pledge for a peaceful protest, however the police riot squad are there just in case.

I just hope all this doesnt turn into another Orgreave

Channa

its getting that bad with police riot squads turning up where a group of people meet ,that even the mothers union jam making evenings may be under surveilance who no's what they are planning .they could be trying to JAM the countries radar defences

 

[donkey too]

I have kept quiet up to now and followed this thread avidly. I disagree with some comments but would fight for the right of those people to post those comments.
In my oppinion as a long serving councillor. I have to say that I think the council is wholly to blame for this situation.
They should have stopped the overflow of the site in the first place and not wait until now to take action. After all did all the extra travellers on the overflow site turn up together? Of coarse not they came in ones and twos. so as soon as the first one over the alloted number came in they should have been dealt with under planning law. The whole situation has been allowed to get out of control by the bad management of the local authority and its elected representatives.
Incedentally I live in a place where provision is not provided for travellers of this kind, (i.e. Irish tinkers). In fact I always voted against providing such provisions. Why should the electorate pay for provisions for people who do not pay into the system? Where I live though we do provide a camping place on our common land for two Romany families who turn up here regularly every year and have done so since as far back as anyone can remember. In fact the same families are mentioned in the town history books. they have horses and vardas and are what I call rightly or wrongly, real gypsies. They are great people, I have spent hours sat with them just talking about the old days.
Any views quoted herein are mine alone and not those of the local authority.

 

[Deleted member 775]

yes i belive the council have a lot to answer for ,they have turned a blind eye for so long that it is now beyond there capability to handle properly . we all know that the travelers will take a mile if they are given a foot ,but then many of us do aswell .i do think that the cheapest and easiest way to deal with the matter is to leave them as is.give them the planning they need for the families that are there now but moniter them more closely preventing any further expansion of the site it will be easier . it a case now of ,shutting the gate after the horse has bolted .this is costing the council hundreds of thousands of pounds when councils are supposed to be saving money.only my idea to bring an end to this case ,i may be wrong, but i am not an expert on these matters .

 

[Firefox]

yes i belive the council have a lot to answer for ,they have turned a blind eye for so long that it is now beyond there capability to handle properly . we all know that the travelers will take a mile if they are given a foot ,but then many of us do aswell .i do think that the cheapest and easiest way to deal with the matter is to leave them as is.give them the planning they need for the families that are there now but moniter them more closely preventing any further expansion of the site it will be easier . it a case now of ,shutting the gate after the horse has bolted .this is costing the council hundreds of thousands of pounds when councils are supposed to be saving money.only my idea to bring an end to this case ,i may be wrong, but i am not an expert on these matters .

It's worse than that in financial terms, the cost of the eviction is reckoned to be up to £10 million with central Gov paying £4.5 million, Dept of communities and local Gov paying £1.2 million, and presumably the council paying much of the rest.

 

[John H]

I have to say that I think the council is wholly to blame for this situation.
They should have stopped the overflow of the site in the first place and not wait until now to take action. After all did all the extra travellers on the overflow site turn up together? Of coarse not they came in ones and twos. so as soon as the first one over the alloted number came in they should have been dealt with under planning law. The whole situation has been allowed to get out of control by the bad management of the local authority and its elected representatives.

I tend to agree with you that the matter should have been dealt with more efficiently and a lot earlier but the incompetence of this particular local authority does not alter the fact that the structures were built without planning permission and that is illegal (unless, of course, the statute of limitations was exceeded before action was taken and I am not aware of the exact time-line involved here although I assume action was started within the ten year limit because of the recent court decision). Nonetheless, because the council has faffed around it may be that when the matter reaches the European Court (as I understand it is due to) that faffing around may be seen by the court as unacceptable and the travellers may be allowed to stay. We shall see.

 

[Canalsman]

It's worse than that in financial terms, the cost of the eviction is reckoned to be up to £10 million with central Gov paying £4.5 million, Dept of communities and local Gov paying £1.2 million, and presumably the council paying much of the rest.

And of course you know who foots the bill?

The tax payers of this country!

The council has basically been in dereliction of its duty regarding planning controls for this site, and we all pay as a consequence.

Incidentally, assuming that the High Court injunction is overturned on Friday, and the bailiffs then go in, more monies will have been spent unnecessarily.

Finally, had the bailiffs gone in immediately the High Court had ruled, there would have been no opportunity for the high profile international media coverage that has now resulted. And there would have been less likelihood of anyone being hurt.

I think it's a complete b***s up!

 

[Deleted member 775]

canalsman if dale farm is on the poi data base dont take it off yet :wave::lol-053:

 

[Guernsey Donkey]

My brother served for a while as a local councillor. On one committee, a titled lady informed him that gypsies were not really people.

A titled lady eh - where does she think her ancestors came from, behind a cabbage bush. :sad:

 

[Guernsey Donkey]

canalsman if dale farm is on the poi data base dont take it off yet :wave::lol-053:

Come on Mandrake surely you don't think they would let you in do you - :scared:

 

[Deleted member 775]

no ide give them a bad name :lol-053:

 

[Channa]

. In fact I always voted against providing such provisions. Why should the electorate pay for provisions for people who do not pay into the system?
Any views quoted herein are mine alone and not those of the local authority.

When you say you 'always' voted against 'providing such provisions' was that your own decision or did you take the trouble to consult the people that elected you moreover now and again check out that your electorate had not changed its view one way or the other ? ( this may sound a confrontational question but I am interested as to what happens once people are elected in my opinion only interested in the electorates thoughts come re election time )

When I had bricks and mortar I paid council tax, now I dont, because I dont actually live in a specific area so I dont pay into the system ?

But and an important But.... I buy fuel and pay the duty like everyone else, Pay Vat on my purchases like everyone else , Income tax, National Insurance, Which although goes to Central Government coffers is handed out to local government ? The share of the spoils is a seperate issue,and shouldnt affect my ability to claim help if I need it.

So the only tax I dont pay is council tax largely due to my lifestyle. So are you suggesting this precludes me from 'provisions'?

Think about your decision, had you voted in favour, is it not possible that the council despite expenditure would not have received revenue ? moreover you would have promoted people paying into the system ?

You state that your opinions are your own not representative of the council you serve that I accept, But are councils a council of personal opinions or representative of the people that elected them ?

regards

Channa