Councils ???????

Fazerloz said:
As can the day trippers. I would imagine by what I have seen a family with kids will spend far more than your average MHer on a day out.
Click to expand...
Off course they can, and as a former and still occasional day tripper so do I.
But many don't, and they require facilities that we don't, and are far better catered for than we are.
I used to drive under the barriers erected for us, and I took little notice of the no overnight parking signs, because they did not apply to me.
Until getting a Moho I like most non Moho owners was not aware of the treatment of Moho owners in this country.
Which quite frankly is dreadful.
 
Rolyan57 said:
Why let the facts get in the way of a good persecuted rant 😂

The initial report seems like a non story to me, drummed up by the gutter press to feed angst and despair, which for some unfathomable reason sells newspapers.

3 of the barbecues were ‘shut’ for cleaning for a few days due to staff shortages. Then the local press get wind of it, searched out some people against it and boom, all hell breaks loose. They didn’t bother finding those who used and enjoyed them. Because people don’t want good news, they want misery, conspiracy and paranoia.

This has absolutely nothing to do with Motorhome’s or wild camping, and in itself is nothing more than the usual gutter press claptrap. It’s nothing to do with the Council not funding Aires or parking restrictions. It’s not even a problem.
Click to expand...
So you reckon its ok to spend £106,000 for ten barbies then do you.
Do you not think that this money could have spent better then.
Possibly a couple of chemical waste points that could have generated income, instead of £10,000 barbies that require cleaning and maintenance at the locals expense. And I doubt if they would have cost £106,000. Arran council installed two on their Island for £6,500. Chemical waste points that is, not posh Barbies at £10,000 a pop.
This article may not directly be a WC issue, but what it serves to do, is highlight the disparity of how we are treated in comparison to others who also pay tax just as we do.
 
Last edited:
Fazerloz said:
Are you a councilor by any chance. 🤣
Click to expand...
I wish. If I were, there would be Aires where I am.

I’m very sceptical of newspaper reports though, having learned that most are written purely for shock factor.

So the one about fining overnight stayers was about people ignoring covid restrictions 12 months ago. The one about the bar-b-q is a complete load of nonsense and has zero relevance to wild camping.

As Kenneth Williams would say, “Infamy infamy they’ve all got it in for me”. 🤪
 
Fisherman said:
So you reckon its ok to spend £106,000 for ten barbies then do you.
Do you not think that this money could have spent better then.
Possibly a couple of chemical waste points that could have generated income, instead of £10,000 barbies that require cleaning and maintenance at the locals expense. And I doubt if they would have cost £106,000. Arran council installed two on their Island for £6,500. Chemical waste points that is, not posh Barbies at £10,000 a pop.
This article may not directly be a WC issue, but what it serves to do, is highlight the disparity of how we are treated in comparison to others who also pay tax just as we do.
Click to expand...
That’s a straw man fallacy and you know it. I haven’t said this is a good idea. Without being in full possession of the facts, none of us (you me or anyone else on here) can really make a judgement. We certainly don’t know how they were funded, whether it’s part of a regeneration project, what the feedback is etc. Yet everyone jumps on this ridiculous non story article, written by idiots for idiots, and somehow turns it into an anti motorhome point.

Councils spends money on lots of projects. We can’t go through life saying they shouldn’t do just because they haven’t provided dedicated motorhome parking etc. We need to persuade the Councils why they should listen, and these spurious and irrelevant comparisons don’t help.
 
Fisherman said:
How many times have we been told that we contribute nothing to local economies which is sheer garbage. We have posters on here saying why should they do anything to welcome us when we contribute little towards local economies. Well this is only a microcosm of what is going on around the U.K. Not only do car driving day trippers contribute little or nothing to these local economies, they are catered for with such things as parking spaces, toilets, fresh water, and now barbecues for them to abuse at OUR expense.
Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of what you say Bill, but the above highlighted statement sounds like something a councillor would say about motorhomes without any facts to back it up.

Might be better to integrate with car driving day trippers rather than sound like we are against them, after all a lot of us are also sometimes car driving day trippers.
 
Rolyan57 said:
That’s a straw man fallacy and you know it. I haven’t said this is a good idea. Without being in full possession of the facts, none of us (you me or anyone else on here) can really make a judgement. We certainly don’t know how they were funded, whether it’s part of a regeneration project, what the feedback is etc. Yet everyone jumps on this ridiculous non story article, written by idiots for idiots, and somehow turns it into an anti motorhome point.

Councils spends money on lots of projects. We can’t go through life saying they shouldn’t do just because they haven’t provided dedicated motorhome parking etc. We need to persuade the Councils why they should listen, and these spurious and irrelevant comparisons don’t help.
Click to expand...
So let me be clear here.
You reckon this is a straw man argument/ falacy and anyone who takes any cognisance of this article are idiots.
We don’t know exactly how it’s funded, well we can be sure that it came from our taxes, and this was not financed from the private sector who would have no interest in such a project.
Yes councils spend money on all types of projects, and such spending must be open to scrutiny from the very people who pay for these projects, us.
Quite frankly to even consider installing barbies at £10,000 a pop in the current crisis baggers belief.
But then being no better than an idiot, what do I know, what right of reply do I have, and I sincerely apologise for expressing an opinion about expensive toys installed by a council who draw comparisons between us and Australia, a country which values its motorhomes and their owners.
 
Robmac said:
I agree with a lot of what you say Bill, but the above highlighted statement sounds like something a councillor would say about motorhomes without any facts to back it up.

Might be better to integrate with car driving day trippers rather than sound like we are against them, after all a lot of us are also sometimes car driving day trippers.
Click to expand...
Yes you are correct Rob.
We have enough problems without alienating more with my bad tempered comments. It’s just frustrating that we rarely get anything done for us, and we need less than those who travel with no facilities. This article and my thread were councillors reckon they can rip us off for £30 a night to use our carparks seems to underline just how poorly we are treated. It shows a massive disparity between how the general public, (who we are part of), and 'we' are treated.

Ok of to look on eBay, to see if I can find any barbies at £10,000 a pop :)
 
Last edited:
Fisherman said:
So let me be clear here.
You reckon this is a straw man argument/ falacy and anyone who takes any cognisance of this article are idiots.
We don’t know exactly how it’s funded, well we can be sure that it came from our taxes, and this was not financed from the private sector who would have no interest in such a project.
Yes councils spend money on all types of projects, and such spending must be open to scrutiny from the very people who pay for these projects, us.
Quite frankly to even consider installing barbies at £10,000 a pop in the current crisis baggers belief.
But then being no better than an idiot, what do I know, what right of reply do I have, and I sincerely apologise for expressing an opinion about expensive toys installed by a council who draw comparisons between us and Australia, a country which values its motorhomes and their owners.
Click to expand...
It WAS a straw man argument.

My initial post was very clear that I’m referring to this populist fear and envy driven biased reporting that we all claim to hate when it’s about motorhome. But apparently when this type of unsubstantiated drivel (the original article and how it’s written) is about something other than Motorhome’s, it’s okay. You state that spending that money on barbies in today’s climate beggars belief, but if someone claimed that about dedicated motorhome parking you would be up in arms.

We should recognise these pathetic attempts at journalism for what they are. Idiotic and not worthy of serious review. In the meantime we should all continue working to inform local councils of why Motorhome’s should be provided for. Based on facts, not an emotional response to tacky journalism about unrelated subjects.
 
At least it seems they took the decision to install electric BBQ points as part of a rather more 'hollistic' thought process involving environmental impact, littering, wild fire issues and safety etc
Rather than some of the frankly hair brained ones our local council gets themselves involved in...


As for the costs involved....

Show me anything done by a government agency that isn't 3 times, over cost and 4 times over time scale
 
Last edited:
mistericeman said:
At least it seems they took the decision to install electric BBQ points as part of a rather more 'hollistic' thought process involving environmental impact, littering, wild fire issues and safety etc
Rather than some of the frankly hair brained ones our local council gets themselves involved in...


As for the costs involved....

Show me anything done by a government agency that isn't 3 times, over cost and 4 times over budget.
Click to expand...
The Scottish Parliament original cost £40 million. Final cost £414million.
Edinburgh Tram original cost £375million, final cost over £1 billion. and the finished line only goes to Edinburgh.
Originally it was to go to Leith. And it was two years late in finishing.
Yes they do get away with things don't they.

But to be fair and balanced.
The M74 extension through to Glasgow was completed 6 months ahead of schedule and £50 million below budget.
At £650 million.
 
Last edited:
Fisherman said:
The Scottish Parliament original cost £40 million. Final cost £414million.
Edinburgh Tram original cost £375million, final cost over £1 billion. and the finished line only goes to Edinburgh.
Originally it was to go to Leith.
Yes they do get away with things don't they.
Click to expand...
Don't mention HS2, but you must appreciate that there are some people getting very wealthy from our hard earned taxes.... ;) ;)
 
mistericeman said:
At least it seems they took the decision to install electric BBQ points as part of a rather more 'hollistic' thought process involving environmental impact, littering, wild fire issues and safety etc
Rather than some of the frankly hair brained ones our local council gets themselves involved in...


As for the costs involved....

Show me anything done by a government agency that isn't 3 times, over cost and 4 times over budget.
Click to expand...
Exactly. So the decision to install the barbies could be seen as a balanced and responsible one that benefits the local community.

The costs and budget may or may not have over run. Which in and of itself may or may not be a problem.

None of which was reported in the original journalistic rubbish, which was designed purely and solely to generate an angry and emotional response.
 
RoadTrek Boy said:
Don't mention HS2, but you must appreciate that there are some people getting very wealthy from our hard earned taxes.... ;) ;)
Click to expand...
One thing that Covid has taught us is we don't have to always be physically present anywhere to perform our work related tasks.
I was undecided on HS2, but I am more minded against it now.
It may end up being a massive overpriced white elephant.
 
Rolyan57 said:
That’s a straw man fallacy and you know it. I haven’t said this is a good idea. Without being in full possession of the facts, none of us (you me or anyone else on here) can really make a judgement. We certainly don’t know how they were funded, whether it’s part of a regeneration project, what the feedback is etc. Yet everyone jumps on this ridiculous non story article, written by idiots for idiots, and somehow turns it into an anti motorhome point.

Councils spends money on lots of projects. We can’t go through life saying they shouldn’t do just because they haven’t provided dedicated motorhome parking etc. We need to persuade the Councils why they should listen, and these spurious and irrelevant comparisons don’t help.
Click to expand...
So everyone who reads The Metro is a Idiot now. How high is that horse you are on, be careful getting off or you might hurt yourself and end up in the papers. 🤣
 
Fisherman said:
One thing that Covid has taught us is we don't have to always be physically present anywhere to perform our work related tasks.
I was undecided on HS2, but I am more minded against it now.
It may end up being a massive overpriced white elephant.
Click to expand...
I don't think there's any may about it..
 
Fazerloz said:
So everyone who reads The Metro is a Idiot now. How high is that horse you are on, be careful getting off or you might hurt yourself and end up in the papers. 🤣
Click to expand...
No, I certainly didn’t say that. I’m talking about that specific article. It’s written by idiots (the low grade journalists writing drivel purely to stir up angst) for idiots (the ones who uncritically accept anything that’s written, taking it at face value, without requiring any proof and without being able to think for themselves).

Im hoping that most if not all on here wouldn’t fall into that last group, particularly as we are so quick to condemn those who fall for all the anti motorhome rubbish repeatedly published.

However, if you believe that the article is balanced, factual, newsworthy, relevant, accurate and a genuine contribution to the serious art of professional journalism, then obviously I support your right to believe that.
 
Rolyan57 said:
No, I certainly didn’t say that. I’m talking about that specific article. It’s written by idiots (the low grade journalists writing drivel purely to stir up angst) for idiots (the ones who uncritically accept anything that’s written, taking it at face value, without requiring any proof and without being able to think for themselves).

Im hoping that most if not all on here wouldn’t fall into that last group, particularly as we are so quick to condemn those who fall for all the anti motorhome rubbish repeatedly published.

However, if you believe that the article is balanced, factual, newsworthy, relevant, accurate and a genuine contribution to the serious art of professional journalism, then obviously I support your right to believe that.
Click to expand...
There comes a time when you should stop digging.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Back
Top