Dizzy Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Wouldn't you like to know Lt So come on back to my question... how are the council breaking the law ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Yes I would like to know Diz, And I have answered your post, I was editing my first post as you were replying to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 You haven't really replied Lt K as you say they "do provide traveller sites but not enough to comply with the law" and yet they say they "provide more approved traveller sites than any other local authority area in Essex and among the greatest number in any area in the country" Maybe that means that although they provide more than they should it is not enough according to the 'law of whoever' so you could be right. But .... the Department for Communities and Local Government have said: "The British courts have found that the developments at Dale Farm are in breach of planning law and Basildon District Council is within its rights to evict travellers from the site." Sorry if I am repeating myself there. So what exactly is the law or should we all ask the 'travellers' solicitors and the travellers themselves as they seem to understand and know better than those who make the said laws these days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 I am in no way sticking up for the reidents of Dale farm, it is an illegal site, but if Basildon had complied with the law it might never of existed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Ok I'll ask again.... "In what way has Basildon Council not comploed with the laws" in either you opinion or legally Lt K ? Gosh this is harder than retrieveing masses of gold from earth worms or garden slugs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 It does not have enough sites Dizzy, now you tell how you no they all have houses Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 How many sites should they have then Lt K ?? Do you know ? So tell me how many do Basildon Council have and how many should they have. Or would it be easier if I asked how many traveller/gypsy familes they should cater for... or should I say 'traveller/gypsy people in total' as it's sometimes hard to know who belongs to which family as they are so close and community minded. No disrespect meant to travellers there of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Think you need to read the requirements in the planning legislation, which I believe specified "a site" not a number of sites or size of sites. In any case, I think that requirement has been repealed in favour of allowing the pikeys to purchase their own land and then apply for planning permission for it's use as a camp site. IF these people were real "travellers", I would assume they would be moving from one site to another on a regular basis - the fact that they appear static suggests they are not "travellers". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Just some info http://www.sustainablegov.co.uk/local-government/built-environment-local-government/pressure-on-councils-to-deal-with-travellers http://www.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/planning/spatial_planning/idoc.ashx?docid=03756d6d-243f-4852-972d-168277829403&version=-1 Dizzy how do you know they have houses in Ireland Gosh this is harder than retrieving masses of gold from earth worms and garden slugs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Just why do UK councils have to provide camp sites for all these IRISH travellers when the same councils do not have to provide accomodation for all the BRITISH homeless people? If I were to buy up a load of old caravans and rent them out to the homeless, could I then demand that the council find a plot to park them all on as the homeless people have now become travellers? Kije, have a look at this BBC video http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-14975103 And these newspaper articles on the subject shiowing that some of the Pikeys even appear as names on deeds and planning applications for property back in Ireland... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8752704/Travellers-facing-eviction-from-Dale-Farm-gipsy-camp-have-their-own-homes-in-Ireland.html Here you go, check out the call to arms by the Pikeys.... (got to love the bit about charging all the swampy types for the vegan kitchen food to cover their costs) http://dalefarm.wordpress.com/activity/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Good links Lt K and Baz I noticed that the travellers actually own the unauthorised land ie they bought the old scrap yard. How much did they pay for it ? I also read that they had asked the council for £6 million, and said if they were paid they release the land back to the council and would go and buy some land elsewhere outside of Basildon and set up a legal camp. It probably would have been the cheaper option for the council considering the costs involved now but I'm glad they didn't pay them off. However on this link the deputy leader has actually commented under the story about the payoff. Here is what he says about the request for £6 million "I don't know where this 'spent six months considering the [£6 million] offer' comes from. When the Travellers made this offer, and others in the past as well, the answer from senior Councillors when it has been put to us has always been an immediate 'no', though usually in rather stronger terms than that The idea that we would hand over millions of taxpayers cash to a group that has illegally occupied Green Belt land is simply simply absurd. It would be paying a form of ransom to stop people breaking the law and would set a precedent for anyone to occupy Green Belt, cause trouble and then get a payoff. Not in Basildon and not on our watch. This does illustrate part of this story that has not really made the headlines though. There is a lot of money to this. The illegal part of Dale Farm is worth about £30 thousand as Green Belt. If it were to be approved as a Traveller site then it would be worth about £150,000 per pitch, and there are over fifty on Dale Farm. So, it would suddenly be worth millions. When the Travellers ask the Council for another site with planning permission, what they are actually asking is for an asset that is worth millions. Steve Horgan Deputy Leader Basildon Borough Council” I don't get that... does it mean that an authorised/legal pitch would be worth £150,000 to the main site owner or pitch owner if they then wanted to sell it to another traveller family? That seems an awful lot of money for a hardstanding and a caravan They must be loaded if they can afford to pay that Saying that one of the travellers from Walton who was in my lads class at junior school is now driving around here in a brand new convertable BMW aged 17/18. Really nice kid though and always friendly and polite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Just shows, there's money in selling clothes pegs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 In that case I may apply for a street stall selling clothes pegs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 You have to include the threat of casting a spell on folk who don't buy them! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 You don't apply for a street stall Cleo as that is legal. You go door to door and you also need some little pieces of heather with silver foil around the bottom. You sell these as 'good luck' heather pointing out that if they are not bought then you are sorry if anything bad happens to the person or their family. Yes I've still got my little bit of heather sold in just that way. Cost me £1 over 10 years ago and I'm scared of throwing it away as the gypsy lady who knocked on my door was a bit scarey and she said it had to be on display or we'd be doomed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Once had a gypsy knock on my door. Asked me to buy a lucky rabbit's foot to bring me good luck. "Why is it lucky?" I asked her adding, "The rabbit had four and they didn't bring him any luck. It died so you could sell it's feet. How unlucky was that!?" Before she could utter another word I closed the door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 I think I would have said the same if she had tried to sell me a poor little bunnies foot Opps I think I have managed to take this topic of track... or did Obs do it ? Sooooo.... tomorrow is the next hearing for the Dale Farm issue. The static travellers must be pretty sure that they will be ok as they have all moved back on while they await their individual itinery of eviction. Just a question though... those against the travellers keep referring to it as 'green belt' land but as it was a former scrap yard isn't that actially 'brown belt' land ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Not if it was placed in the Green Belt in their Local Plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted September 22, 2011 Report Share Posted September 22, 2011 Local plans are being replaced... or are they 'replacing'? God only knows what's going on these days now Obs as it's hard to keep up and maybe all the Noah's are already building their new arcs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2011 Back to the pikeys - when does life-style become a culture, which then becomes a racial grouping? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
algy Posted September 24, 2011 Report Share Posted September 24, 2011 I think I would have said the same if she had tried to sell me a poor little bunnies foot Opps I think I have managed to take this topic of track... or did Obs do it ? Sooooo.... tomorrow is the next hearing for the Dale Farm issue. The static travellers must be pretty sure that they will be ok as they have all moved back on while they await their individual itinery of eviction. Just a question though... those against the travellers keep referring to it as 'green belt' land but as it was a former scrap yard isn't that actially 'brown belt' land ? What is a brownfield site? A brownfield site is any land, which has previously been used for any commercial purpose and is no longer in use for that purpose. A site does not have to be contaminated, although contaminated land will automatically be brownfield. What is a greenfield site? Land which has not previously been developed. As this land would have been contaminated from fluids such as engine oils and brake fluids etc from it's previous use as a scrapyard it will be designated as a a 'Brownfield' site and consequently without removal of the contaminants (not practicable) could never return to it's 'Greenfield' status. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wireboy Posted September 24, 2011 Report Share Posted September 24, 2011 It was my understanding that the original site which was an old scrap yard had the gypsies on but the land adjacent was a Greenfield/untouched site and they illegally expanded onto this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
algy Posted September 24, 2011 Report Share Posted September 24, 2011 It was my understanding that the original site which was an old scrap yard had the gypsies on but the land adjacent was a Greenfield/untouched site and they illegally expanded onto this. I have no strong feelings one way nor' t'other regarding traveling people, there is a site on Cartridge Lane bordering Grappenhall and Thelwall and they seem to get on with life without causing any problems in the locality. If and when that situation changes, and I sincerely hope it never does, then perhaps my view point may change. There is also quite a large community at Walton village not too far from where Dizzy lives perhaps she could shed some light on whether the locals have had problems with the residents of that particular site - or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2011 The Green Belt is where the local Authority have decided it will be, in their Local Plan, regardless of previous site usage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted September 25, 2011 Report Share Posted September 25, 2011 The Green Belt is where the local Authority have decided it will be.. Unless it's WBC, they're rubbish at this kind of stuff: Land at Peel Hall Farm south of the M62 in Poulton North. The UDP process culminated in this area being included within the Green Belt, but this was successfully challenged by the landowner. In 2007 the High Court ruled that the UDP Proposals Map in so far as it designated the Peel Hall Farm area as Green belt should be quashed. The Core Strategy of the LDF will therefore need to re-assess the appropriate policy approach for this area. http://warrington.limehouse.co.uk/portal/planning/cs/background/backgroundarea/backareanw?pointId=1228128772962 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.