Petition Against NC 500 Campers

GreggBear

Full Member
Posts
1,345
Likes
1,563
Surely the nc500 is just a collective group of public roads? If that is the case, then as the owner of a fully road legal vehicle, why should I need any permission to drive this route?
Why should I need special permission to park on any public stretch of highway as long as I aren't causing an obstruction?
The life is being squeezed out of this country by greedy thieving politicians & local councils who seek to control every aspect of everyone's enjoyment of things that should be free for all. Why should I have to pay anything up to 50 quid plus per night just to park my vehicle in an area I don't live in?
The whole system stinks, it has become an affront to all of us who seek only to enjoy our leisure time. Banning everyone just because a few leave a mess is a childish excuse & makes no sense. Why do we all blindly put up with it? The situation is ridiculous & getting worse by the day. Soon our freedom will be gone altogether.
This country is run by greedy corrupt people who care not for the opinions of any of us....
I'm seriously considering ditching the bus altogether, its becoming a source of dismay & frustration & very little joy anymore. Probably just go back to a bike/trike & tent, at least there's a rally every week with no hassle about parking/camping.....
 

Fisherman

Full Member
Posts
3,812
Likes
6,040
Surely the nc500 is just a collective group of public roads? If that is the case, then as the owner of a fully road legal vehicle, why should I need any permission to drive this route?
Why should I need special permission to park on any public stretch of highway as long as I aren't causing an obstruction?
The life is being squeezed out of this country by greedy thieving politicians & local councils who seek to control every aspect of everyone's enjoyment of things that should be free for all. Why should I have to pay anything up to 50 quid plus per night just to park my vehicle in an area I don't live in?
The whole system stinks, it has become an affront to all of us who seek only to enjoy our leisure time. Banning everyone just because a few leave a mess is a childish excuse & makes no sense. Why do we all blindly put up with it? The situation is ridiculous & getting worse by the day. Soon our freedom will be gone altogether.
This country is run by greedy corrupt people who care not for the opinions of any of us....
I'm seriously considering ditching the bus altogether, its becoming a source of dismay & frustration & very little joy anymore. Probably just go back to a bike/trike & tent, at least there's a rally every week with no hassle about parking/camping.....
Gregg you hit a few nails on the head there, and I agree with each and everyone of them. We have to realise that when we are marked out for special treatment that this affects our freedom. Our taxes both past and present have paid for these carparks why should we be treated any different, what’s so special about us. Yes we have numpties amongst us, but then numpties come in all shapes and sizes and they don’t all drive Motorhomes. Why do we put up with it, well we don’t just put up with it, some of us support what’s going on.
And we are not contracted to support local communities, how and where we spend our money is our business. Having the tag freeloader put upon us is wrong, wether or not we try to support local communities, many of whom due to bias reporting from the media, or simple laziness accepting nimbys POV as fact, despise us yet look to us for support.
 

Debroos

Full Member
Posts
728
Likes
595
I was born and raised in Kingston Upon Thames, the average property price for a terraced house is £658,000 and a Semi-D is £756,000....I am a maintenance man and now live in the North, same $h1T different part of the country. All the old mining areas are still depressed and some fishing towns in the North are literally dying with properties lying empty and VERY high unemployment. Its a long way from ideal in Cornwall but personally I think many Cornish moan a little too loudly, if they paid attention to outside of the West country and had a look elsewhere I suspect many would consider themselves to be doing ok

Trouble is the tourists never see the deprived areas....
 

Tookey

Full Member
Posts
771
Likes
936

Trouble is the tourists never see the deprived areas....
Oh no, we've got the classic statistics and source nightmare! o_O

Following links are probably iffy with regards to reliability, Guardian one is probably ok;




As I stated in my post 'its a long way from ideal in Cornwall' and 'consider themselves to be doing ok' (not good/well). My reference too 'shouting a bit too loudly' is over the years and through different forms of media I get the impression Cornwall feels that it is hard done by and deserves more, complaining about second homes where some places have derelict streets . Statistics sources are a nightmare but the following is from a '.gov' site and I feel unemployment is the most reliable indicator for an area that is or soon to be deprived;

'The highest unemployment rate estimate in the UK for September to November 2019 was for the North East at 6.2%, followed by Yorkshire and The Humber, the West Midlands and London, all at 4.3%. The region with the lowest estimated unemployment rate was Northern Ireland at 2.3%. This was followed by the South West, with an unemployment rate of 2.8%. It is also worth noting that Wales had a record low unemployment level and rate at 3.0%.

The South West had the largest increase in the unemployment rate on the previous period (June to August 2019) at 0.5 percentage points, followed by the North East at 0.4 percentage points. Whilst the unemployment rates for most regions have recently been generally flat or falling, the estimate for the North East has been gently increasing.'

Cornwall has deprived neighbourhoods but areas of Uk have deprived regions. Unfortunately we have no way of quantifying whether or not Cornwall 'moans too loudly' but I guess most of these regions are a long way from Westminster so unfortunately they all need to shout pretty loudly just to be heard!!
 

in h

Full Member
Posts
821
Likes
566
I have never felt welcome in Cornwall.
It's like Whitby writ large: they resent the tourists who keep their economy afloat.
They just want visitors to pay money and go away.
Whether or not people personally gain from tourism, if their local economy depends on it, driving tourists away won't do them any good.
 

GeoffL

Full Member
Posts
606
Likes
530
I have never felt welcome in Cornwall.
It's like Whitby writ large: they resent the tourists who keep their economy afloat.
They just want visitors to pay money and go away.
Whether or not people personally gain from tourism, if their local economy depends on it, driving tourists away won't do them any good.
'Local economy depends on tourism' is a fallacy. Locals aren't gaining as most of the money from tourism goes to outsiders. Many seasonal jobs go to outsiders, and so don't benefit locals. Essential shops (e.g. supermarkets and the high street) can and do operate just the same with or without tourism. While we might think that spending a few quid on supplies in Sainsburys contributes to the local economy, it doesn't -- the profit goes into the coffers of a national company. You are not keeping the indigenous local economy afloat.

Tourism of a few decades ago was a good thing, but today it's destroying communities, depressing local economies, and driving everything but tourism away. Many locals don't just want visitors to pay money and go away -- they want visitors not to come in the first place.

Note that this doesn't just apply to Cornwall -- I'm just using the county as an example because I know it well. A quick search of the 'net shows the same issues exist in the Highlands. Today, I drove to a local beauty spot to find nowhere to park. Of over 300 cars/vans parked over the area only about a dozen had local ('W') registrations.

That said, tourism per se is not the issue (even if objections to industry are often on the grounds that it'll spoil the area for tourism). The real problem is the removal of affordable housing from the property market. Obviously, we (motorhomers) are entirely neutral here -- but our mainly white, large vehicles are obvious and make an attractive avatar against which threatened communities can rail. Rather than trying to hit motorhomers with a congestion charge, more effect would be gained by doubling council tax on second homes (something the law allows). Unfortunately, that would be difficult in areas most likely to benefit as the majority of those eligible to vote are second home owners...
... just saying...
 

in h

Full Member
Posts
821
Likes
566
Yes, that's what many people think. Sorry, but it isn't true.
The primary economic driver in that area (and in Whitby) is tourism. It is what keeps the economy afloat.
The point I was making is that even if you are not directly benefiting from tourist spend, if you live in a tourist area you are dependent on that spend.
All you are doing is demonstrating that you don't understand.
 

Tookey

Full Member
Posts
771
Likes
936
'Local economy depends on tourism' is a fallacy. Locals aren't gaining as most of the money from tourism goes to outsiders. Many seasonal jobs go to outsiders, and so don't benefit locals. Essential shops (e.g. supermarkets and the high street) can and do operate just the same with or without tourism. While we might think that spending a few quid on supplies in Sainsburys contributes to the local economy, it doesn't -- the profit goes into the coffers of a national company. You are not keeping the indigenous local economy afloat.

Tourism of a few decades ago was a good thing, but today it's destroying communities, depressing local economies, and driving everything but tourism away. Many locals don't just want visitors to pay money and go away -- they want visitors not to come in the first place.

Note that this doesn't just apply to Cornwall -- I'm just using the county as an example because I know it well. A quick search of the 'net shows the same issues exist in the Highlands. Today, I drove to a local beauty spot to find nowhere to park. Of over 300 cars/vans parked over the area only about a dozen had local ('W') registrations.

That said, tourism per se is not the issue (even if objections to industry are often on the grounds that it'll spoil the area for tourism). The real problem is the removal of affordable housing from the property market. Obviously, we (motorhomers) are entirely neutral here -- but our mainly white, large vehicles are obvious and make an attractive avatar against which threatened communities can rail. Rather than trying to hit motorhomers with a congestion charge, more effect would be gained by doubling council tax on second homes (something the law allows). Unfortunately, that would be difficult in areas most likely to benefit as the majority of those eligible to vote are second home owners...
... just saying...
Geoff, we are completely hi jacking this NC 500 thread. If you want to copy your post and start a new thread that would be good as it's an interesting topic to discuss
 

rabW

Full Member
Posts
46
Likes
68
'Local economy depends on tourism' is a fallacy. Locals aren't gaining as most of the money from tourism goes to outsiders. Many seasonal jobs go to outsiders, and so don't benefit locals. Essential shops (e.g. supermarkets and the high street) can and do operate just the same with or without tourism. While we might think that spending a few quid on supplies in Sainsburys contributes to the local economy, it doesn't -- the profit goes into the coffers of a national company. You are not keeping the indigenous local economy afloat.

Tourism of a few decades ago was a good thing, but today it's destroying communities, depressing local economies, and driving everything but tourism away. Many locals don't just want visitors to pay money and go away -- they want visitors not to come in the first place.

Note that this doesn't just apply to Cornwall -- I'm just using the county as an example because I know it well. A quick search of the 'net shows the same issues exist in the Highlands. Today, I drove to a local beauty spot to find nowhere to park. Of over 300 cars/vans parked over the area only about a dozen had local ('W') registrations.

That said, tourism per se is not the issue (even if objections to industry are often on the grounds that it'll spoil the area for tourism). The real problem is the removal of affordable housing from the property market. Obviously, we (motorhomers) are entirely neutral here -- but our mainly white, large vehicles are obvious and make an attractive avatar against which threatened communities can rail. Rather than trying to hit motorhomers with a congestion charge, more effect would be gained by doubling council tax on second homes (something the law allows). Unfortunately, that would be difficult in areas most likely to benefit as the majority of those eligible to vote are second home owners...
... just saying...
I couldn't agree more Geoff; I'm from the Highlands, it's getting difficult to catalogue the numbskull behaviour.

 

GeoffL

Full Member
Posts
606
Likes
530
Geoff, we are completely hi jacking this NC 500 thread. If you want to copy your post and start a new thread that would be good as it's an interesting topic to discuss
Thanks for pointing that out -- it certainly wasn't my intention to hijack this thread. All I'm trying to do is put forward an alternative POV that helps explain why locals in tourist areas (including the Highlands) might have anti-motorhome tendencies. Having done that, I suspect it's time for me to take your hint and leave the rest of the thread to discussion on how to counter what I certainly perceive as an unreasonable stance on the part of Jamie Stone MP...
 

barge1914

Full Member
Posts
1,363
Likes
2,115
'Local economy depends on tourism' is a fallacy. Locals aren't gaining as most of the money from tourism goes to outsiders. Many seasonal jobs go to outsiders, and so don't benefit locals. Essential shops (e.g. supermarkets and the high street) can and do operate just the same with or without tourism. While we might think that spending a few quid on supplies in Sainsburys contributes to the local economy, it doesn't -- the profit goes into the coffers of a national company. You are not keeping the indigenous local economy afloat.

Tourism of a few decades ago was a good thing, but today it's destroying communities, depressing local economies, and driving everything but tourism away. Many locals don't just want visitors to pay money and go away -- they want visitors not to come in the first place.

Note that this doesn't just apply to Cornwall -- I'm just using the county as an example because I know it well. A quick search of the 'net shows the same issues exist in the Highlands. Today, I drove to a local beauty spot to find nowhere to park. Of over 300 cars/vans parked over the area only about a dozen had local ('W') registrations.

That said, tourism per se is not the issue (even if objections to industry are often on the grounds that it'll spoil the area for tourism). The real problem is the removal of affordable housing from the property market. Obviously, we (motorhomers) are entirely neutral here -- but our mainly white, large vehicles are obvious and make an attractive avatar against which threatened communities can rail. Rather than trying to hit motorhomers with a congestion charge, more effect would be gained by doubling council tax on second homes (something the law allows). Unfortunately, that would be difficult in areas most likely to benefit as the majority of those eligible to vote are second home owners...
... just saying...
The 22 staff which our local pub in a tourist area supports would somewhat disagree with some of your points, without tourists during lockdown they’ve had no work.
 

GeoffL

Full Member
Posts
606
Likes
530
The 22 staff which our local pub in a tourist area supports would somewhat disagree with some of your points, without tourists during lockdown they’ve had no work.
Non-sequitur. The lockdown, not lack of tourists, closed the pubs -- even those that rely solely on local trade. That said, you're missing the point. What matters here is not cold hard facts but perception and where public perception leads to strong opinion, action on the part of authorities is likely. I suspect the reason Jamie Stone MP has got on his high horse is that his local constituents have expressed dispeasure and he's just trying to retain his seat. He's engaged in 'placebo politics'; i.e. appearing to do something while skirting around the real issue. Unfortunately, we're a visible and relatively easy target even though we're not the real issue. The public sees a motorhome but not the queue in front of it and assumes the motorhome is responsible for holding up the traffic. They see three motorhomes in a row and we're the scourge of the Highlands but three coaches in a row (or twenty cars)?...
 

in h

Full Member
Posts
821
Likes
566
I can't see how it is hijacking an NC500 thread. The nub of the issue is that the tourist industry and covid-19 have drawn in a lot of tourists, putting strains on the infrastructure and getting in the way of the locals, who can't see that they depend on tourism.
This is as true and as relevant in NC500 land as it is in Cornwall or Whitby.
 

Tookey

Full Member
Posts
771
Likes
936
I can't see how it is hijacking an NC500 thread. The nub of the issue is that the tourist industry and covid-19 have drawn in a lot of tourists, putting strains on the infrastructure and getting in the way of the locals, who can't see that they depend on tourism.
This is as true and as relevant in NC500 land as it is in Cornwall or Whitby.
Fair enough;

Did some web trawling and in they end turned to DEFRA as everything else was a bit weak. (apologies but I am unsure how to do a link to a PDF, Title is ' Tourism and Local Rural Communities' DEFRA if interested.

Summary statement on report;

The scale of economic impact of tourism in rural areas is determined by a range of factors. While a great deal of information is available at the international and national level on the economic benefits and costs of tourism, based on national and international surveys, much less information is available at the sub-national level and for rural areas. There is no definitive account in the literature of the contribution of tourism to rural economies, most notably the extent to which it generates income, employment and entrepreneurial activity, much less the extent to which this impacts on local rural economies. There are very few analyses of indirect and induced impacts of tourism on local rural economies and few linkages made to the flows of income to and from urban areas. Accurate measures of tourist expenditure in rural areas are difficult to make – it is a fragmented and complex industry - and it is not a requirement that local authorities report on tourism (i.e. tourism is not included in the recently reviewed list of 198 indicators that local authorities are required to use). It may be necessary to undertake specific tourist expenditure surveys to establish tourist spend in particular rural areas. In Annex 2 and 3 we review the available evidence and highlight where data is available at a local level and for rural areas.

But an accurate survey was also written about;

Whilst a national level visitor profile provides an overview of the issues, it does little to enable the development of an understanding of expenditure by visitor type in one rural locality as compared to another, or to the surrounding non-rural areas. We were however able to identify examples of local studies where more detailed estimates of economic impact were applied. One such example is a study in Windermere and Bowness in South Lakeland, Cumbria, as part of a broader study commissioned by the North West Development Agency to develop their understanding of rural tourism on local economies.24 ▪ It was estimated that in 2007 South Lakeland had £510.1m of tourism revenue (44.6% of the Cumbria total), 10.2m tourist days (36.2% of the Cumbria total), and 3.8m tourists. A significant proportion of this tourism reflected the broader offer of the area, alongside Lake Windermere (centred on Windermere, Bowness and Ambleside). It is further estimated that tourism spend in 2007 was associated with 8,843 full time equivalent jobs (42.2% of the Cumbria total) and with this translating to a total of 15,210 jobs supported by tourism. As in other parts of the UK, tourism in the area supports a relatively large number of part time employment opportunities. ▪ In terms of visitor profile in 2007, it was estimated that around 17.3% used serviced accommodation, 10.4% non services accommodation, and with 67.4% representing day visitors, and the small balance as tourists staying with friends and relations. In the context of economic impact linked to tourism consumption the proportion of staying visitors is a key factor. Moreover, higher numbers of day visitors can be connected to higher environmental costs linked to tourism consumption: for example, a higher proportion of total trip time in likely to be spent travelling, with implications for congestion on often limited road space.

Which suggests tourism is vital to some UK local economies but it is the long stay tourist and not the day visitor which is key to the community benefiting, which seems to be confirmed by the fact that Blackpool economically is on its arse but gets thousands of tourists...........but the wrong kind.
 

garydavidson83

Free Member
Posts
2
Likes
2
I suppose he, and they, would be a lot happier if we rebuilt Hadrian's Wall and prevented anyone in a motorised vehicle from crossing the border into Scotland at all. :mad:
You might actually be onto something there. All for English independence, would solve many issues but if little England gets too much we are always willing to accept refugees up here in Scotland.

What about the highlanders venturing south adding to the congestion in towns and cities, lets charge them for the privilege of entering civilisation.
I think your own words sum up your post well enough "The mans a prat."
 

Tookey

Full Member
Posts
771
Likes
936
So with regards to our community I don't believe the expression 'freeloader' is justified but neither to we have any significant impact on an economy unless the stay is an extended one. Looking at the figures involved I suggest that basically our community has a negligible effect as the numbers involved are so small.

So surprisingly this does bring us back to the NC500 as it seems that in reality the number of tourers involved, that we are frequently moving, it passes through so many local economies and that on the whole we are self contained means our support of local economies does exist but is very limited. Quite simply I suggest that whether we exist or not simply makes no difference so we should not be targeted or particularly embraced.

Just left alone would the most appropriate action for all parties and 2020 and 2021 should simply be written off as extenuating circumstances
 
Last edited:
Top