observer Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 - not a traveller? ......... when s/he's static?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 They are all pikeys and all crooks.... (forgive me if I am generalising somewhat, but I would like to see someone put some proof forward to disagree with me!!) They should not be where they are and they have had 10 years to sort themselves out. It is a disgrace that the council have allowed this to go on for so long and a disgrace that the police have allowed every half wit celebrity and swampy sympathiser to descend on the camp and strap themselves to untaxed transit vans..... Get them off and send them to the alternative accomodation they HAVE been offered by the council or back to Ireland to the multi-million pound housing estate they all apparently part-own.... We are just a bunch of bloody mugs in this country (or rather those who represent us are any way....) No time for them, they don't belong there, they are there illegally and should be booted out... Other than that, I'm a bit undecided really Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Sid Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 If these "sympathisers" are so concerned why don't they put them up for a couple of years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 The law should be made absolutely clear so that we have zero tolerance of these illegal camps, and indeed squatters. Police and local authorities should be able to move them at the start rather than jumping through hoops. Would any of the bleeding hearts want an illegal camp near to their own home? Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 Just to play devils advocate Every council has to set aside land for travellers , something this council has not done. So they to are in breach of the law and have been in breach longer than the travellers :!: :!: :!: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 Just to play devils advocate Every council has to set aside land for travellers , something this council has not done. So they to are in breach of the law and have been in breach longer than the travellers :!: :!: :!: you aren't playing devils advocate Kije.... you are a bleeding heart, toga wearing liberal doo gooder who thinks pikeys should be allowed to do what they want in order to satisfy their demands for uuuman rites.... The other half of the land occupied by the pikeys is a legal pikey camp.... they aint travelling they are squatting on the illegal former scrapyard bit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 Their you go again trying to put words in to my mouth that I did not say, I was just pointing out the council are also in breach, which is a fact,. You seem to have a problem with facts when they don't suit you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 Say what you really think Baz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 What Baz said. Peter the poster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 The facts are Kije that a bunch of property owning, tax evading pikeys are stringing everyone along.... why should the council be forced to provide land where the pikeys can park their caravans and untaxed transit vans when honest, law abiding citizens have been patiently waiting on housing waiting lists for years? When do you suppose the last time any of these pikeys ever filled in a tax return form? or even paid any income tax? do you think you would get away with their ways? The self promoted leader of the group was behind a £9million illegal fag racket which evaded over £250,000 in duy alone...these are not nice people living the dreamy roamany lifestyle, they are parasitic scum who should be stuck on the next boat back to Ireland and back to their multi million pound housing develeopment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 I agree with Harry and in a way I actually think it is the council's fault and also the fault of those others who make the rules/regulations that the council have to follow. They have allowed many of them to live and be on there illegally for what 10 years? and now finally they jump in take more severe action. 10 years is a long time and kids will have grown up there knowing little else and no doubt gone to schools or been taught there and all will have lived in their pleasant little community. If action had been taken in the first place then surely those living on the unapproved site would have gone years ago and there would be no problem now or the need for high court action or chances that legal challenges may/may not be upheld? I've not really followed the story of their proposed eviction or the why's etc so maybe I've missed something. I believe the 'static traveller' families have now succeeded in a legal bid to temporarily stop the eviction though so why was this possibility not addressed by the council and other legal authorities sooner on the 'other' side ? Round here everyone knows that the permanent/temporary site at Walton has been just that. Temporary approval all along for many many years...each time it comes under review it is temporarily approved again (probably due to human rights and time already spent on the site). To me that is not temporary it is definately permanent. In all fairness though it is only a small(ish) site and I'm not aware of any particular problems since they took route other than the nearby house prices going down and a few other issues which I will no go into now. Has it expanded though over the years? Then there is the small site up on Daresbury Express Way which falls under Halton Council. I thought they had been removed some time ago but they were certainly there at weekend as were their more permanent building structures. How come? Then of course we also have the now approved site at Grappenhall on Green Belt Land and another new submission for similar at Appleton/Stretton... and yet on the other hand there is the gent who wanted to build a bungalow for his ill wife on his own farm land recently which is also greenbelt and it was refused by planners. I just don't know anymore as there are certainly contradictory rules but then again maybe that is because travellers pay in to employ high cost 'specialist solicitors' to fight their causes. Surely if any static based travellers are removed though they will just go somewhere else or buy land under a disguise and so the circle rotates and rolls on. I don't think the offers of government funding to councils to 'provide' or the regulations which say the 'must provide' in addition to the new rules and regulations helps at all though. I'd finally like to add that I was actually pleased that Paddy D won that Big Brother show as he was the best one in it... the rest were brainless, glorified, silly, rude, predictable, premeditated .... celeb idiots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 tax evading That would may them Tories Baz, you should love them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 Diz, it takes 10 years, cos we've got a bunch of toga wearing judges and mercenary human rights lawyers milking these situations for every penny of public money. My only reservation with this case, is the fact that the offending half of this scrapyard lies in Green Belt - which seems an oxymoron. They could have surrounded the whole site with trees (to hide it) and ensured that the whole tribe was registered for and paid Council tax and all the other costs that go with a "static" lifestyle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wireboy Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 What can you do? It is a difficult solution due to the bleeding heart brigade. If you evict them they will only go somewhere else and make the locals life’s a misery. If they don't want to move make them pay tax/rates like everyone else. I'm sure they would up sticks if they were made to pay. But I also agree they should not be on green belt land. I remember when they went into Orford in the early/mid 90's and it made the place very intimidating. The mess they left behind is completely unacceptable. The locals suffered with them being there and were then made to pay for the clean up after they left. And they do this everywhere they go. No wonder there is so much resentment against them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 How much has all the legal stuff over the 10 years cost the council and tax payers ? I just read this from June too where the Essex police said the "worst case scenario" cost of evicting the travellers was estimated by the police at £9.5 MILLION. The Home Office announced it would pay up to £4.65m towards the cost of eviction and the Department for Communities and Local Government said it would contribute £1.2m . http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-13644347 How on earth can it cost that much to remove 50 families (or however many there are) ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 Didn't cost that much in Germany in WW2, I'm sure! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 Police overtime Dizzy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted September 20, 2011 Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 Kije..... seeing as you are the pikeys friend..... what would you do with them? Bear in mind that there are other people in the area who are waiting for somewhere to live and who pay tax etc.... I would just be interested to know.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2011 You mean he hasn't invited them round to his house yet?! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Why are you assuming I am their friend Baz? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted September 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Must be the toga and sandals - that give you away! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Why are you assuming I am their friend Baz? Because you are a toga wearing liberal doo-gooding softy.... it fits the bill that you would stand up for the rights of the poor downtrodden pikey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 Not at all Baz, I was just pointing out that the council were breaking the law as well, which is a fact Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 How exactly are the council breaking the law Lt K ? As already mentioned on here they have allowed an authorised/legal site but then 51 'static traveller' families have taken up residence on an unauthorised site adjacent to the other one. Some reports say there are far more of them though. Basildon Council is also reported as having provided "more approved traveller sites than any other local authority area in Essex and among the greatest number in any area in the country" ....and also 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." So who is telling fibs then... it's getting a bit complocated eh ? Anyway apart from all that apparently they have all started moving their vans back onto the unauthorised site, baricades have come down (as conditioned by the high court)... so the unlawfull 'static travelers' seem pretty sure that they will be allowed to stay after all. Why would they want to stay though as it seems many of them own OTHER homes back in Ireland. They say they don't and have nowhere to go but odd that their names are listed on property deeds, planning applications to build property and are lon the electoral roll. Maybe they do own property and rent it out to people to make money.. who knows. Well I'm going to hitch my caravan up at weekend and go and find myself a nice little plot of land. I may even put a few statics on there eventually if anyone fancies joining me. Do the Welsh have any views on traveller invasion ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted September 21, 2011 Report Share Posted September 21, 2011 How do you know many of them own homes in Ireland Basildon council does provide traveller sites but not enough to comply with the law 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.