Bournemouth and Poole to review ‘spy cars’ after government announces ‘ban’

Bournemouth Echo: The camera car being deployed by Borough of Poole The camera car being deployed by Borough of Poole

PARKING officials are to review the way they hand out tickets after the government announced plans to drastically restrict the use of camera cars.

Communities secretary Eric Pickles announced what he called a ban on the use of the “spy cars” – although they can still be used on bus lanes and around schools.

Bournemouth was thought to be the first council in the country to introduce a CCTV car for parking enforcement in 2009, with Poole following suit in 2011.

Bournemouth said the move was a response to the dangers caused by illegal parking around school gates, which were highlighted in the Daily Echo’s Parking Mad cam-paign.

But by 2012-13, the number of drivers caught parking on school zigzags had fallen to 94 from 138 the previous year, while the total number of tickets issued had risen 66 per cent in a year to 4,922.

Cllr Michael Filer, above, cabinet member for transport, said: “Generally, we have plenty of parking around, especially in the town centre.

“There are areas where people take liberties and cause inconvenience and that’s where the camera cars are used.”

He added: “Eric Pickles has done Bournemouth enormous favours in the past by allocating us over £22million in grant for our cleansing service and, by and large, has done a good job for Bournemouth. I can’t say I’m happy but if this is the situation, we’ll have to abide by it.”

In 2012, Bournemouth taxi drivers threatened a blockade of the town centre over the number of cabbies being booked for stopping in bus stops, and the Daily Echo revealed that 481 innocent motorists had their fines waived in a three-year period.

Poole’s camera car made headlines when a good Samaritan was fined for parking on a pavement to help a man in difficulty in his mobility scooter – and when a driving instructor was fined because his pupil paused on yellow lines to reverse around a corner.

Cllr Ian Potter, cabinet member for transport at the Borough of Poole, said he would be looking at the detail of Mr Pickles’s announcement with officers.

Comments (100)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:27am Mon 23 Jun 14

Chris@Bmouth says...

Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.
Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty. Chris@Bmouth
  • Score: 35

6:10am Mon 23 Jun 14

ShuttleX says...

Chris@Bmouth wrote:
Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.
More like watch the double yellow lines spring up everywhere, forcing people into Council owned car parks (those that are left). Already there are plans to introduce parking charges along Southbourne Overcliff and beyond. Kings Park (Wareham Court end) will have restrictions put in. At least nine residential roads will have yellow lines put in, all in the name of "safety" of course. Between Southbourne and Pokesdown will have double yellow lines, forcing shoppers into the car park, and costing the shop keepers loads. Their business rates won't be cut though. I can foresee quite a few shops along that road shutting over the next year or so. No mention will be made of the amount of money the Council will get in fines.
[quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.[/p][/quote]More like watch the double yellow lines spring up everywhere, forcing people into Council owned car parks (those that are left). Already there are plans to introduce parking charges along Southbourne Overcliff and beyond. Kings Park (Wareham Court end) will have restrictions put in. At least nine residential roads will have yellow lines put in, all in the name of "safety" of course. Between Southbourne and Pokesdown will have double yellow lines, forcing shoppers into the car park, and costing the shop keepers loads. Their business rates won't be cut though. I can foresee quite a few shops along that road shutting over the next year or so. No mention will be made of the amount of money the Council will get in fines. ShuttleX
  • Score: 36

6:28am Mon 23 Jun 14

EGHH says...

Councils will always fill their pockets at the expense of the people they are suppose to represent. All the parking restrictions do is to make shoppers go to out of town retail parks so town centres die. Councils must be stupid if they can't see this!
Councils will always fill their pockets at the expense of the people they are suppose to represent. All the parking restrictions do is to make shoppers go to out of town retail parks so town centres die. Councils must be stupid if they can't see this! EGHH
  • Score: 42

6:59am Mon 23 Jun 14

ol'bag lady says...

Chris@Bmouth wrote:
Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.
Have you not thought how they mean to get "those coffers" filled now? It will be passed onto us residents somehow. Ha ha ha - unlucky us more like!
[quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.[/p][/quote]Have you not thought how they mean to get "those coffers" filled now? It will be passed onto us residents somehow. Ha ha ha - unlucky us more like! ol'bag lady
  • Score: 24

7:14am Mon 23 Jun 14

Phixer says...

ShuttleX wrote:
Chris@Bmouth wrote:
Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.
More like watch the double yellow lines spring up everywhere, forcing people into Council owned car parks (those that are left). Already there are plans to introduce parking charges along Southbourne Overcliff and beyond. Kings Park (Wareham Court end) will have restrictions put in. At least nine residential roads will have yellow lines put in, all in the name of "safety" of course. Between Southbourne and Pokesdown will have double yellow lines, forcing shoppers into the car park, and costing the shop keepers loads. Their business rates won't be cut though. I can foresee quite a few shops along that road shutting over the next year or so. No mention will be made of the amount of money the Council will get in fines.
Southbourne to Pokedown needs double yellows; there is side street parking. If the shopkeepers need the obese and lazy to keep them open then they don't have a particularly good business plan.

Parking charges along Southbourne Overdrive will reduce the number of visitors coming to spend in the council franchised businesses on the beach, hardly good commercial sense, apart from pushing them into the residential roads causing even more grief.
[quote][p][bold]ShuttleX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.[/p][/quote]More like watch the double yellow lines spring up everywhere, forcing people into Council owned car parks (those that are left). Already there are plans to introduce parking charges along Southbourne Overcliff and beyond. Kings Park (Wareham Court end) will have restrictions put in. At least nine residential roads will have yellow lines put in, all in the name of "safety" of course. Between Southbourne and Pokesdown will have double yellow lines, forcing shoppers into the car park, and costing the shop keepers loads. Their business rates won't be cut though. I can foresee quite a few shops along that road shutting over the next year or so. No mention will be made of the amount of money the Council will get in fines.[/p][/quote]Southbourne to Pokedown needs double yellows; there is side street parking. If the shopkeepers need the obese and lazy to keep them open then they don't have a particularly good business plan. Parking charges along Southbourne Overdrive will reduce the number of visitors coming to spend in the council franchised businesses on the beach, hardly good commercial sense, apart from pushing them into the residential roads causing even more grief. Phixer
  • Score: 0

7:23am Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

This is the Tories pandering to their voters, nothing more, nothing less and zero to do with councils "filling their coffers" at the expense of the poor old (voting) motorist. So what if the council use a camera car to enforce parking regulations? No doubt it'll be very popular with Echo readers but they will also be the first to complain if they are delayed due to inconsiderate and illegal parking, or their ambulance can't get through, or their bus home is late and so on. Should the public sector ignore advances in technology that assist other forms of law enforcement too or only this one? Don't want a ticket, don't park where you shouldn't, it's not hard...
This is the Tories pandering to their voters, nothing more, nothing less and zero to do with councils "filling their coffers" at the expense of the poor old (voting) motorist. So what if the council use a camera car to enforce parking regulations? No doubt it'll be very popular with Echo readers but they will also be the first to complain if they are delayed due to inconsiderate and illegal parking, or their ambulance can't get through, or their bus home is late and so on. Should the public sector ignore advances in technology that assist other forms of law enforcement too or only this one? Don't want a ticket, don't park where you shouldn't, it's not hard... Baysider
  • Score: 16

7:47am Mon 23 Jun 14

djd says...

Phixer wrote:
ShuttleX wrote:
Chris@Bmouth wrote:
Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.
More like watch the double yellow lines spring up everywhere, forcing people into Council owned car parks (those that are left). Already there are plans to introduce parking charges along Southbourne Overcliff and beyond. Kings Park (Wareham Court end) will have restrictions put in. At least nine residential roads will have yellow lines put in, all in the name of "safety" of course. Between Southbourne and Pokesdown will have double yellow lines, forcing shoppers into the car park, and costing the shop keepers loads. Their business rates won't be cut though. I can foresee quite a few shops along that road shutting over the next year or so. No mention will be made of the amount of money the Council will get in fines.
Southbourne to Pokedown needs double yellows; there is side street parking. If the shopkeepers need the obese and lazy to keep them open then they don't have a particularly good business plan.

Parking charges along Southbourne Overdrive will reduce the number of visitors coming to spend in the council franchised businesses on the beach, hardly good commercial sense, apart from pushing them into the residential roads causing even more grief.
Most of the parking along Pokesdown to Southbourne is caused by the shop owners and their staff who park right outside their shops/businesses and stay there all day. There's very little parking for customers along there.
[quote][p][bold]Phixer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ShuttleX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.[/p][/quote]More like watch the double yellow lines spring up everywhere, forcing people into Council owned car parks (those that are left). Already there are plans to introduce parking charges along Southbourne Overcliff and beyond. Kings Park (Wareham Court end) will have restrictions put in. At least nine residential roads will have yellow lines put in, all in the name of "safety" of course. Between Southbourne and Pokesdown will have double yellow lines, forcing shoppers into the car park, and costing the shop keepers loads. Their business rates won't be cut though. I can foresee quite a few shops along that road shutting over the next year or so. No mention will be made of the amount of money the Council will get in fines.[/p][/quote]Southbourne to Pokedown needs double yellows; there is side street parking. If the shopkeepers need the obese and lazy to keep them open then they don't have a particularly good business plan. Parking charges along Southbourne Overdrive will reduce the number of visitors coming to spend in the council franchised businesses on the beach, hardly good commercial sense, apart from pushing them into the residential roads causing even more grief.[/p][/quote]Most of the parking along Pokesdown to Southbourne is caused by the shop owners and their staff who park right outside their shops/businesses and stay there all day. There's very little parking for customers along there. djd
  • Score: 14

7:50am Mon 23 Jun 14

Townee says...

I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.
I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police. Townee
  • Score: 22

7:57am Mon 23 Jun 14

tbpoole says...

Townee wrote:
I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.
Trouble is the Police can't enforce zig zag lines, only councils can.
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.[/p][/quote]Trouble is the Police can't enforce zig zag lines, only councils can. tbpoole
  • Score: -9

8:01am Mon 23 Jun 14

Lord Spring says...

Will this affect Cyclist that is my concern

Have a good day folks.
Will this affect Cyclist that is my concern Have a good day folks. Lord Spring
  • Score: -9

8:11am Mon 23 Jun 14

Moro99 says...

Yes they are used outside schools, I see them at mine regularly, it us very effective.
Yes they are used outside schools, I see them at mine regularly, it us very effective. Moro99
  • Score: 10

8:12am Mon 23 Jun 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT. Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: -18

8:32am Mon 23 Jun 14

justme20092009 says...

poole council will need to find new ways to grab ya money
poole council will need to find new ways to grab ya money justme20092009
  • Score: 7

8:38am Mon 23 Jun 14

Chris@Bmouth says...

ol'bag lady wrote:
Chris@Bmouth wrote: Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.
Have you not thought how they mean to get "those coffers" filled now? It will be passed onto us residents somehow. Ha ha ha - unlucky us more like!
I dont live in the UK.....HAHA!!!
[quote][p][bold]ol'bag lady[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.[/p][/quote]Have you not thought how they mean to get "those coffers" filled now? It will be passed onto us residents somehow. Ha ha ha - unlucky us more like![/p][/quote]I dont live in the UK.....HAHA!!! Chris@Bmouth
  • Score: -22

8:45am Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

justme20092009 wrote:
poole council will need to find new ways to grab ya money
...or alternatively local councils will have to continue to cut services because Eric Pickles is pandering to the average Daily Mail reader who thinks they should be allowed to park where they like and gets the hump when they get caught.
[quote][p][bold]justme20092009[/bold] wrote: poole council will need to find new ways to grab ya money[/p][/quote]...or alternatively local councils will have to continue to cut services because Eric Pickles is pandering to the average Daily Mail reader who thinks they should be allowed to park where they like and gets the hump when they get caught. Baysider
  • Score: 0

8:54am Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think... Baysider
  • Score: 11

8:56am Mon 23 Jun 14

BarrHumbug says...

“Generally, we have plenty of parking around, especially in the town centre."

I think Generally translates as be quick before we sell them all off? Car park above the Triangle, sold for development, Winter Gardens and Old bus station, plans in progress for development. Pavilion car park and the one next to the Royal Bath suggested as sites for future development.
“Generally, we have plenty of parking around, especially in the town centre." I think Generally translates as be quick before we sell them all off? Car park above the Triangle, sold for development, Winter Gardens and Old bus station, plans in progress for development. Pavilion car park and the one next to the Royal Bath suggested as sites for future development. BarrHumbug
  • Score: 8

8:57am Mon 23 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

These camera cars were introduced to only catch drivers stopping where they should not. I don't mean parking. Or waiting. But actually stopping. Easy to prove. But like all these things the scope crept. They got greedy. Then there were problems. Typical. Serves them blooming well right!

Bring back the wardens. We need humans dealing with humans. Not machines dealing with cars.
These camera cars were introduced to only catch drivers stopping where they should not. I don't mean parking. Or waiting. But actually stopping. Easy to prove. But like all these things the scope crept. They got greedy. Then there were problems. Typical. Serves them blooming well right! Bring back the wardens. We need humans dealing with humans. Not machines dealing with cars. PokesdownMark
  • Score: 23

9:22am Mon 23 Jun 14

Redgolfer says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
NO
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]NO Redgolfer
  • Score: 12

9:31am Mon 23 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort.

And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!!

The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort. And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!! The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of. PokesdownMark
  • Score: 12

9:37am Mon 23 Jun 14

BH1 loyal says...

Townee wrote:
I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.
Why should everyone care about hill view school? Because that's the situation that affects your very important life? And let me get this right the head of a school no doubt an under achieving school should take time out of his day to warn people off of zig zags, you do know the head teacher has no power over you don't you? He can't give detention to parents who park on double yellows.
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.[/p][/quote]Why should everyone care about hill view school? Because that's the situation that affects your very important life? And let me get this right the head of a school no doubt an under achieving school should take time out of his day to warn people off of zig zags, you do know the head teacher has no power over you don't you? He can't give detention to parents who park on double yellows. BH1 loyal
  • Score: -6

9:44am Mon 23 Jun 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort.

And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!!

The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.
All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed.

I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.
[quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort. And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!! The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.[/p][/quote]All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed. I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though. Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: -2

9:51am Mon 23 Jun 14

Wackerone says...

tbpoole wrote:
Townee wrote:
I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.
Trouble is the Police can't enforce zig zag lines, only councils can.
Of course the police can enforce zig zag line parking offences and give endorsements. The difference now is that the council can also enforce the parking offence but cannot give endorsements.
[quote][p][bold]tbpoole[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.[/p][/quote]Trouble is the Police can't enforce zig zag lines, only councils can.[/p][/quote]Of course the police can enforce zig zag line parking offences and give endorsements. The difference now is that the council can also enforce the parking offence but cannot give endorsements. Wackerone
  • Score: 7

9:59am Mon 23 Jun 14

Hessenford says...

Baysider wrote:
This is the Tories pandering to their voters, nothing more, nothing less and zero to do with councils "filling their coffers" at the expense of the poor old (voting) motorist. So what if the council use a camera car to enforce parking regulations? No doubt it'll be very popular with Echo readers but they will also be the first to complain if they are delayed due to inconsiderate and illegal parking, or their ambulance can't get through, or their bus home is late and so on. Should the public sector ignore advances in technology that assist other forms of law enforcement too or only this one? Don't want a ticket, don't park where you shouldn't, it's not hard...
If the council hadn't been so over zealous and greedy with their camera car then this wouldn't be happening now, ticketing a driver for stopping to help an injured person, just where do these people come from, camera cars parked illegally to photograph ilegallyl parked driver, photos taken of ambulances on emergency calls, its all got out of hand.
I cant wait for the rest of the proposal which gives residents the right to challenge the painting of yellow lines, which more often than not have been painted to increase the revenue of the camera car.
There are many roads In Bournemouth which have yellow lines when there is no necessity for them, simply put there to either drive people into extortionate council car parks of to obtain yet more photos of drivers simply picking up or dropping off.
These cars are supposedly used to make roads safer, how can this be when they only take a photo but don't move the offending vehicle on, the so called danger still remains, cant wait till the camera car is off our main roads for good.
This is all great new
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: This is the Tories pandering to their voters, nothing more, nothing less and zero to do with councils "filling their coffers" at the expense of the poor old (voting) motorist. So what if the council use a camera car to enforce parking regulations? No doubt it'll be very popular with Echo readers but they will also be the first to complain if they are delayed due to inconsiderate and illegal parking, or their ambulance can't get through, or their bus home is late and so on. Should the public sector ignore advances in technology that assist other forms of law enforcement too or only this one? Don't want a ticket, don't park where you shouldn't, it's not hard...[/p][/quote]If the council hadn't been so over zealous and greedy with their camera car then this wouldn't be happening now, ticketing a driver for stopping to help an injured person, just where do these people come from, camera cars parked illegally to photograph ilegallyl parked driver, photos taken of ambulances on emergency calls, its all got out of hand. I cant wait for the rest of the proposal which gives residents the right to challenge the painting of yellow lines, which more often than not have been painted to increase the revenue of the camera car. There are many roads In Bournemouth which have yellow lines when there is no necessity for them, simply put there to either drive people into extortionate council car parks of to obtain yet more photos of drivers simply picking up or dropping off. These cars are supposedly used to make roads safer, how can this be when they only take a photo but don't move the offending vehicle on, the so called danger still remains, cant wait till the camera car is off our main roads for good. This is all great new Hessenford
  • Score: 9

10:00am Mon 23 Jun 14

sea poole says...

Chris@Bmouth
So you don't live in UK, ha,ha!
Iraq? Zimbabwe? North Korea?
Chris@Bmouth So you don't live in UK, ha,ha! Iraq? Zimbabwe? North Korea? sea poole
  • Score: 1

10:06am Mon 23 Jun 14

Hessenford says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
Don't you know, the waste of money happened when these things were purchased and no they don't catch drivers without tax insurance or MOT, why don't you brush up a little as a prospecting UKIP member.
You're no relation to the late Marty Caine are you, she was a comedian as well.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]Don't you know, the waste of money happened when these things were purchased and no they don't catch drivers without tax insurance or MOT, why don't you brush up a little as a prospecting UKIP member. You're no relation to the late Marty Caine are you, she was a comedian as well. Hessenford
  • Score: 6

10:07am Mon 23 Jun 14

justsayithowitis says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort.

And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!!

The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.
All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed.

I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.
How will it be a waste of money. Councils will still be able to use them for the things they originally bought them for. This will surely be good as they will be where they were meant to be not where there is the best chance of making lots of money. Surely a good thing for safety around schools
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort. And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!! The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.[/p][/quote]All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed. I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.[/p][/quote]How will it be a waste of money. Councils will still be able to use them for the things they originally bought them for. This will surely be good as they will be where they were meant to be not where there is the best chance of making lots of money. Surely a good thing for safety around schools justsayithowitis
  • Score: 10

10:12am Mon 23 Jun 14

Hessenford says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort.

And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!!

The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.
All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed.

I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.
I quite like UKIP mainly because of their opposition to the European bully boys who run our lives these days but if they recruit complete dipsticks such as yourself who cant tell the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car they will rapidly lose my support in their campaign.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort. And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!! The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.[/p][/quote]All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed. I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.[/p][/quote]I quite like UKIP mainly because of their opposition to the European bully boys who run our lives these days but if they recruit complete dipsticks such as yourself who cant tell the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car they will rapidly lose my support in their campaign. Hessenford
  • Score: 6

10:18am Mon 23 Jun 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

Hessenford wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
Don't you know, the waste of money happened when these things were purchased and no they don't catch drivers without tax insurance or MOT, why don't you brush up a little as a prospecting UKIP member.
You're no relation to the late Marty Caine are you, she was a comedian as well.
Well actually Marti Caine the comedienne started using my name sometime after I was born but don't let facts stop you making a fool of yourself. ;)
[quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]Don't you know, the waste of money happened when these things were purchased and no they don't catch drivers without tax insurance or MOT, why don't you brush up a little as a prospecting UKIP member. You're no relation to the late Marty Caine are you, she was a comedian as well.[/p][/quote]Well actually Marti Caine the comedienne started using my name sometime after I was born but don't let facts stop you making a fool of yourself. ;) Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: -2

10:21am Mon 23 Jun 14

Hessenford says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
Hessenford wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
Don't you know, the waste of money happened when these things were purchased and no they don't catch drivers without tax insurance or MOT, why don't you brush up a little as a prospecting UKIP member.
You're no relation to the late Marty Caine are you, she was a comedian as well.
Well actually Marti Caine the comedienne started using my name sometime after I was born but don't let facts stop you making a fool of yourself. ;)
Doesn't really matter, you are still a much bigger comedienne than she was and it's you who have made a fool of yourself today.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]Don't you know, the waste of money happened when these things were purchased and no they don't catch drivers without tax insurance or MOT, why don't you brush up a little as a prospecting UKIP member. You're no relation to the late Marty Caine are you, she was a comedian as well.[/p][/quote]Well actually Marti Caine the comedienne started using my name sometime after I was born but don't let facts stop you making a fool of yourself. ;)[/p][/quote]Doesn't really matter, you are still a much bigger comedienne than she was and it's you who have made a fool of yourself today. Hessenford
  • Score: 3

10:26am Mon 23 Jun 14

Minty Fresh says...

These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres. Minty Fresh
  • Score: 9

10:39am Mon 23 Jun 14

Chris@Bmouth says...

sea poole wrote:
Chris@Bmouth So you don't live in UK, ha,ha! Iraq? Zimbabwe? North Korea?
Clearly not North Korea. Keep guessing.
[quote][p][bold]sea poole[/bold] wrote: Chris@Bmouth So you don't live in UK, ha,ha! Iraq? Zimbabwe? North Korea?[/p][/quote]Clearly not North Korea. Keep guessing. Chris@Bmouth
  • Score: -2

10:45am Mon 23 Jun 14

sea poole says...

Chris@Bmouth
Getting close? Nigeria? Afghanistan? South Sudan?
Chris@Bmouth Getting close? Nigeria? Afghanistan? South Sudan? sea poole
  • Score: -2

10:57am Mon 23 Jun 14

Lord Spring says...

Chris@Bmouth wrote:
sea poole wrote:
Chris@Bmouth So you don't live in UK, ha,ha! Iraq? Zimbabwe? North Korea?
Clearly not North Korea. Keep guessing.
Ha Seoul then South of the 38th parallel .
[quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sea poole[/bold] wrote: Chris@Bmouth So you don't live in UK, ha,ha! Iraq? Zimbabwe? North Korea?[/p][/quote]Clearly not North Korea. Keep guessing.[/p][/quote]Ha Seoul then South of the 38th parallel . Lord Spring
  • Score: 4

11:01am Mon 23 Jun 14

Azphreal says...

Lets see if it comes into force before the next election shall we? I personally think that if anyone breaks the law (including myself) then you pay for it and if you have been caught parking illegally then its your own fault (or breaking any other laws). At a time when there is a general election coming up i do wonder about anything a government releases as too many times they have made a 'promise' that never appears such as the vote on the EU.
Lets see if it comes into force before the next election shall we? I personally think that if anyone breaks the law (including myself) then you pay for it and if you have been caught parking illegally then its your own fault (or breaking any other laws). At a time when there is a general election coming up i do wonder about anything a government releases as too many times they have made a 'promise' that never appears such as the vote on the EU. Azphreal
  • Score: 5

11:53am Mon 23 Jun 14

Tango Charlie says...

Interesting, People are now being encouraged by the government to break the law. Has this ever happened before?
I can think of loads of advantages here, just imagine what it can lead too...
Interesting, People are now being encouraged by the government to break the law. Has this ever happened before? I can think of loads of advantages here, just imagine what it can lead too... Tango Charlie
  • Score: 3

11:58am Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
[quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety. Baysider
  • Score: -7

12:42pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Hessenford says...

Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
What like repairing pot hole you mean, yea right, pull the other one.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]What like repairing pot hole you mean, yea right, pull the other one. Hessenford
  • Score: 0

12:43pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Sir Beachy Head says...

I saw one these futhermucking cars zooming around durley road area at 9PM on saturday. Obviously no schools open then, so he was just on the hunt for the holiday makers who may have stopped on a double yellow.

The sooner the get scrapped the better.
I saw one these futhermucking cars zooming around durley road area at 9PM on saturday. Obviously no schools open then, so he was just on the hunt for the holiday makers who may have stopped on a double yellow. The sooner the get scrapped the better. Sir Beachy Head
  • Score: 6

12:51pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Professor Zaroff says...

BH1 loyal wrote:
Townee wrote:
I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.
Why should everyone care about hill view school? Because that's the situation that affects your very important life? And let me get this right the head of a school no doubt an under achieving school should take time out of his day to warn people off of zig zags, you do know the head teacher has no power over you don't you? He can't give detention to parents who park on double yellows.
Explain how a a school judged by OfSTED to be 'Good' be "no doubt an under achieving school"?
[quote][p][bold]BH1 loyal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.[/p][/quote]Why should everyone care about hill view school? Because that's the situation that affects your very important life? And let me get this right the head of a school no doubt an under achieving school should take time out of his day to warn people off of zig zags, you do know the head teacher has no power over you don't you? He can't give detention to parents who park on double yellows.[/p][/quote]Explain how a a school judged by OfSTED to be 'Good' be "no doubt an under achieving school"? Professor Zaroff
  • Score: 2

12:58pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Hessenford says...

Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Mr Pickles said: ‘CCTV spy cars can be seen lurking on every street raking in cash for greedy councils and breaking the rules that clearly state that fines should not be used to generate profit for town halls.

'Over-zealous parking enforcement and unreasonable stealth fines undermine the high street, push up the cost of living and cost local authorities more in the long term.

That's good enough for me and he echo's what most have been saying for the last few years.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Mr Pickles said: ‘CCTV spy cars can be seen lurking on every street raking in cash for greedy councils and breaking the rules that clearly state that fines should not be used to generate profit for town halls. 'Over-zealous parking enforcement and unreasonable stealth fines undermine the high street, push up the cost of living and cost local authorities more in the long term. That's good enough for me and he echo's what most have been saying for the last few years. Hessenford
  • Score: 4

1:12pm Mon 23 Jun 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first! fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 1

1:29pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Cordite says...

Best thing to do with these cars is rip the camera off the roof, mount it on the front bumper with the lens pointing down and go 'pothole spotting'
Best thing to do with these cars is rip the camera off the roof, mount it on the front bumper with the lens pointing down and go 'pothole spotting' Cordite
  • Score: 6

1:42pm Mon 23 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort.

And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!!

The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.
All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed.

I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.
And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this?
I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort. And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!! The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.[/p][/quote]All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed. I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.[/p][/quote]And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this? I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope? PokesdownMark
  • Score: 8

1:42pm Mon 23 Jun 14

NickTheGreekinBmth says...

I know i'l be in the minority, but I really don't get the problem with them. Yellow lines are there for a reason, to keep traffic flowing and stop people parking where its dangerous, on bends etc.. Because people are basically selfish and lazy and will get away with blocking the road / getting in the way of traffic flow if it means they don't have to walk for 5 minutes to pop to a shop or something like that. If you risk it by parking on them you know your risking a ticket. just park where your allowed to and you wont get a fine, its not that difficult to do in my mind.
I know i'l be in the minority, but I really don't get the problem with them. Yellow lines are there for a reason, to keep traffic flowing and stop people parking where its dangerous, on bends etc.. Because people are basically selfish and lazy and will get away with blocking the road / getting in the way of traffic flow if it means they don't have to walk for 5 minutes to pop to a shop or something like that. If you risk it by parking on them you know your risking a ticket. just park where your allowed to and you wont get a fine, its not that difficult to do in my mind. NickTheGreekinBmth
  • Score: 7

1:49pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Mike R-B says...

Great news, non compliant vehicles should be towed away as in many European Towns.
Use the Camera cars to monitor anti-social behaviour and dossers.
Great news, non compliant vehicles should be towed away as in many European Towns. Use the Camera cars to monitor anti-social behaviour and dossers. Mike R-B
  • Score: 6

1:50pm Mon 23 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

Azphreal wrote:
Lets see if it comes into force before the next election shall we? I personally think that if anyone breaks the law (including myself) then you pay for it and if you have been caught parking illegally then its your own fault (or breaking any other laws). At a time when there is a general election coming up i do wonder about anything a government releases as too many times they have made a 'promise' that never appears such as the vote on the EU.
No that is not the problem. You are assuming they are infallible! The problem is they catch people who are NOT breaking the law. Like learner drivers at the side of the road preparing for a reversing round a corner. There have been many cases such as this.
Things have been worse in other local authority areas. In London there was a particularly tricky road with one of those one lane wide narrow points. You give way to cars coming from one direction. The council had a fixed, post mounted CCTV camera and were issuing fines in very dubious situations. Such as when the car with priority was waving he other car on because it was stopping. That is the reality that the govt has rightly decided to clamp down on. Driven by genuine public grievances raised through local MPs.
[quote][p][bold]Azphreal[/bold] wrote: Lets see if it comes into force before the next election shall we? I personally think that if anyone breaks the law (including myself) then you pay for it and if you have been caught parking illegally then its your own fault (or breaking any other laws). At a time when there is a general election coming up i do wonder about anything a government releases as too many times they have made a 'promise' that never appears such as the vote on the EU.[/p][/quote]No that is not the problem. You are assuming they are infallible! The problem is they catch people who are NOT breaking the law. Like learner drivers at the side of the road preparing for a reversing round a corner. There have been many cases such as this. Things have been worse in other local authority areas. In London there was a particularly tricky road with one of those one lane wide narrow points. You give way to cars coming from one direction. The council had a fixed, post mounted CCTV camera and were issuing fines in very dubious situations. Such as when the car with priority was waving he other car on because it was stopping. That is the reality that the govt has rightly decided to clamp down on. Driven by genuine public grievances raised through local MPs. PokesdownMark
  • Score: 4

1:55pm Mon 23 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

Cordite wrote:
Best thing to do with these cars is rip the camera off the roof, mount it on the front bumper with the lens pointing down and go 'pothole spotting'
Now that is a great idea. It is likely that the council pays out a lot in compensation for damage caused by pot holes.
We should give credit also for the councils recent smartphone app that let's you report potholes. Fairs fair.
[quote][p][bold]Cordite[/bold] wrote: Best thing to do with these cars is rip the camera off the roof, mount it on the front bumper with the lens pointing down and go 'pothole spotting'[/p][/quote]Now that is a great idea. It is likely that the council pays out a lot in compensation for damage caused by pot holes. We should give credit also for the councils recent smartphone app that let's you report potholes. Fairs fair. PokesdownMark
  • Score: 3

1:59pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Minty Fresh says...

Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too. Minty Fresh
  • Score: 3

1:59pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Hessenford says...

Cordite wrote:
Best thing to do with these cars is rip the camera off the roof, mount it on the front bumper with the lens pointing down and go 'pothole spotting'
Or park them at traffic lights to fine all the cyclists who go through on red, they would make a fortune, waiting for all the lycra clad moaners now, bring it on.
[quote][p][bold]Cordite[/bold] wrote: Best thing to do with these cars is rip the camera off the roof, mount it on the front bumper with the lens pointing down and go 'pothole spotting'[/p][/quote]Or park them at traffic lights to fine all the cyclists who go through on red, they would make a fortune, waiting for all the lycra clad moaners now, bring it on. Hessenford
  • Score: 4

2:06pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Minty Fresh says...

NickTheGreekinBmth wrote:
I know i'l be in the minority, but I really don't get the problem with them. Yellow lines are there for a reason, to keep traffic flowing and stop people parking where its dangerous, on bends etc.. Because people are basically selfish and lazy and will get away with blocking the road / getting in the way of traffic flow if it means they don't have to walk for 5 minutes to pop to a shop or something like that. If you risk it by parking on them you know your risking a ticket. just park where your allowed to and you wont get a fine, its not that difficult to do in my mind.
Utter rubbish. Double yellow lines have ALWAYS been in place in dangerous locations, now they're slapped all over the place to force people to pay to park. Take Bourne Avenue near the Town Hall for example. You used to be able to park there for free and walk a relatively short way into the town centre. Now it's lined with parking meters. No change to traffic flow, danger or anything else. Just the greedy Council shafting locals and visitors alike for a few extra quid.
[quote][p][bold]NickTheGreekinBmth[/bold] wrote: I know i'l be in the minority, but I really don't get the problem with them. Yellow lines are there for a reason, to keep traffic flowing and stop people parking where its dangerous, on bends etc.. Because people are basically selfish and lazy and will get away with blocking the road / getting in the way of traffic flow if it means they don't have to walk for 5 minutes to pop to a shop or something like that. If you risk it by parking on them you know your risking a ticket. just park where your allowed to and you wont get a fine, its not that difficult to do in my mind.[/p][/quote]Utter rubbish. Double yellow lines have ALWAYS been in place in dangerous locations, now they're slapped all over the place to force people to pay to park. Take Bourne Avenue near the Town Hall for example. You used to be able to park there for free and walk a relatively short way into the town centre. Now it's lined with parking meters. No change to traffic flow, danger or anything else. Just the greedy Council shafting locals and visitors alike for a few extra quid. Minty Fresh
  • Score: 5

2:06pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort.

And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!!

The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.
All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed.

I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.
And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this?
I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?
Well I may know a little more than you, from April 2012 to March 2013 the camera cars were responsible for 2,423 NPC's issued for ZigZags, Loading bans and bus stop infringements in Poole alone.1,822 were paid and 336 got cancelled.

I did have a little chuckle at the comment that someone made saying I do not know the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car. Well a police car has an ANPR camera fitted inside the vehicle, the council car just like the DVLA camera vans have them roof mounted so they can check park vehicles while passing them. I am also fairly sure that any untaxed vehicles found by the council camera car do get reported.

I wasn't aware of the high court case so thanks for that bit of info.
[quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort. And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!! The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.[/p][/quote]All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed. I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.[/p][/quote]And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this? I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?[/p][/quote]Well I may know a little more than you, from April 2012 to March 2013 the camera cars were responsible for 2,423 NPC's issued for ZigZags, Loading bans and bus stop infringements in Poole alone.1,822 were paid and 336 got cancelled. I did have a little chuckle at the comment that someone made saying I do not know the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car. Well a police car has an ANPR camera fitted inside the vehicle, the council car just like the DVLA camera vans have them roof mounted so they can check park vehicles while passing them. I am also fairly sure that any untaxed vehicles found by the council camera car do get reported. I wasn't aware of the high court case so thanks for that bit of info. Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: -1

2:20pm Mon 23 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort.

And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!!

The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.
All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed.

I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.
And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this?
I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?
Well I may know a little more than you, from April 2012 to March 2013 the camera cars were responsible for 2,423 NPC's issued for ZigZags, Loading bans and bus stop infringements in Poole alone.1,822 were paid and 336 got cancelled.

I did have a little chuckle at the comment that someone made saying I do not know the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car. Well a police car has an ANPR camera fitted inside the vehicle, the council car just like the DVLA camera vans have them roof mounted so they can check park vehicles while passing them. I am also fairly sure that any untaxed vehicles found by the council camera car do get reported.

I wasn't aware of the high court case so thanks for that bit of info.
Ah you have discovered google. Happy days!

336 out of 1822 loading and bus stop cases were cancelled. Does that seem ok to you? I don't think that is a sign of a healthy system. Now if they council has to pay £60 when they lost a case. Paid to the person issues with a ticket. Would that make the system sharper? I wonder?
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort. And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!! The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.[/p][/quote]All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed. I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.[/p][/quote]And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this? I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?[/p][/quote]Well I may know a little more than you, from April 2012 to March 2013 the camera cars were responsible for 2,423 NPC's issued for ZigZags, Loading bans and bus stop infringements in Poole alone.1,822 were paid and 336 got cancelled. I did have a little chuckle at the comment that someone made saying I do not know the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car. Well a police car has an ANPR camera fitted inside the vehicle, the council car just like the DVLA camera vans have them roof mounted so they can check park vehicles while passing them. I am also fairly sure that any untaxed vehicles found by the council camera car do get reported. I wasn't aware of the high court case so thanks for that bit of info.[/p][/quote]Ah you have discovered google. Happy days! 336 out of 1822 loading and bus stop cases were cancelled. Does that seem ok to you? I don't think that is a sign of a healthy system. Now if they council has to pay £60 when they lost a case. Paid to the person issues with a ticket. Would that make the system sharper? I wonder? PokesdownMark
  • Score: 5

2:30pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort.

And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!!

The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.
All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed.

I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.
And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this?
I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?
Well I may know a little more than you, from April 2012 to March 2013 the camera cars were responsible for 2,423 NPC's issued for ZigZags, Loading bans and bus stop infringements in Poole alone.1,822 were paid and 336 got cancelled.

I did have a little chuckle at the comment that someone made saying I do not know the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car. Well a police car has an ANPR camera fitted inside the vehicle, the council car just like the DVLA camera vans have them roof mounted so they can check park vehicles while passing them. I am also fairly sure that any untaxed vehicles found by the council camera car do get reported.

I wasn't aware of the high court case so thanks for that bit of info.
Ah you have discovered google. Happy days!

336 out of 1822 loading and bus stop cases were cancelled. Does that seem ok to you? I don't think that is a sign of a healthy system. Now if they council has to pay £60 when they lost a case. Paid to the person issues with a ticket. Would that make the system sharper? I wonder?
Might make you a bit sharper if you realise its actually 336 out of the 2,423. The 1,822 simply admitted they had illegally parked and paid the fine and I do doubt that anyone forced them to park illegally
[quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort. And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!! The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.[/p][/quote]All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed. I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.[/p][/quote]And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this? I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?[/p][/quote]Well I may know a little more than you, from April 2012 to March 2013 the camera cars were responsible for 2,423 NPC's issued for ZigZags, Loading bans and bus stop infringements in Poole alone.1,822 were paid and 336 got cancelled. I did have a little chuckle at the comment that someone made saying I do not know the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car. Well a police car has an ANPR camera fitted inside the vehicle, the council car just like the DVLA camera vans have them roof mounted so they can check park vehicles while passing them. I am also fairly sure that any untaxed vehicles found by the council camera car do get reported. I wasn't aware of the high court case so thanks for that bit of info.[/p][/quote]Ah you have discovered google. Happy days! 336 out of 1822 loading and bus stop cases were cancelled. Does that seem ok to you? I don't think that is a sign of a healthy system. Now if they council has to pay £60 when they lost a case. Paid to the person issues with a ticket. Would that make the system sharper? I wonder?[/p][/quote]Might make you a bit sharper if you realise its actually 336 out of the 2,423. The 1,822 simply admitted they had illegally parked and paid the fine and I do doubt that anyone forced them to park illegally Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: 0

2:33pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.
No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect!
[quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.[/p][/quote]No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect! Baysider
  • Score: 5

2:38pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal... Baysider
  • Score: 4

2:43pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Sir Beachy Head says...

Eric Pickles takes a lot of stick for being obese, and sure, he'd wallop me in a pizza eating showdown, but, that aside, I like him.
Whenever I see him interviewed on the Marr show or Daily Politics he comes over as a decent chap and speaks a lot of sence.
I am a pickles fan. A ukip voter but a Pickles fan. A rare combination I expect.
Eric Pickles takes a lot of stick for being obese, and sure, he'd wallop me in a pizza eating showdown, but, that aside, I like him. Whenever I see him interviewed on the Marr show or Daily Politics he comes over as a decent chap and speaks a lot of sence. I am a pickles fan. A ukip voter but a Pickles fan. A rare combination I expect. Sir Beachy Head
  • Score: 2

2:47pm Mon 23 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort.

And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!!

The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.
All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed.

I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.
And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this?
I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?
Well I may know a little more than you, from April 2012 to March 2013 the camera cars were responsible for 2,423 NPC's issued for ZigZags, Loading bans and bus stop infringements in Poole alone.1,822 were paid and 336 got cancelled.

I did have a little chuckle at the comment that someone made saying I do not know the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car. Well a police car has an ANPR camera fitted inside the vehicle, the council car just like the DVLA camera vans have them roof mounted so they can check park vehicles while passing them. I am also fairly sure that any untaxed vehicles found by the council camera car do get reported.

I wasn't aware of the high court case so thanks for that bit of info.
Ah you have discovered google. Happy days!

336 out of 1822 loading and bus stop cases were cancelled. Does that seem ok to you? I don't think that is a sign of a healthy system. Now if they council has to pay £60 when they lost a case. Paid to the person issues with a ticket. Would that make the system sharper? I wonder?
Might make you a bit sharper if you realise its actually 336 out of the 2,423. The 1,822 simply admitted they had illegally parked and paid the fine and I do doubt that anyone forced them to park illegally
Yes you are correct on that point of maths. But still there were 336 cases dropped. Knowing if a vehicle is stationary on a bus stop seems very easy. So were those 336 mostly loading bay cases? Why did they report those two categories together when they seem quite different in nature? One is absolute. The other depends on different times for different places.

Be careful of that black and white "if they paid the fine they must be guilty" thinking too. I don't want to sound patronising but that is an assumption. I suspect reality may be different with people being surprised and unsure, or simply not wanting to go through the risk of the higher fine. You know, the fine doubles if you ask questions?
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort. And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!! The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.[/p][/quote]All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed. I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.[/p][/quote]And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this? I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?[/p][/quote]Well I may know a little more than you, from April 2012 to March 2013 the camera cars were responsible for 2,423 NPC's issued for ZigZags, Loading bans and bus stop infringements in Poole alone.1,822 were paid and 336 got cancelled. I did have a little chuckle at the comment that someone made saying I do not know the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car. Well a police car has an ANPR camera fitted inside the vehicle, the council car just like the DVLA camera vans have them roof mounted so they can check park vehicles while passing them. I am also fairly sure that any untaxed vehicles found by the council camera car do get reported. I wasn't aware of the high court case so thanks for that bit of info.[/p][/quote]Ah you have discovered google. Happy days! 336 out of 1822 loading and bus stop cases were cancelled. Does that seem ok to you? I don't think that is a sign of a healthy system. Now if they council has to pay £60 when they lost a case. Paid to the person issues with a ticket. Would that make the system sharper? I wonder?[/p][/quote]Might make you a bit sharper if you realise its actually 336 out of the 2,423. The 1,822 simply admitted they had illegally parked and paid the fine and I do doubt that anyone forced them to park illegally[/p][/quote]Yes you are correct on that point of maths. But still there were 336 cases dropped. Knowing if a vehicle is stationary on a bus stop seems very easy. So were those 336 mostly loading bay cases? Why did they report those two categories together when they seem quite different in nature? One is absolute. The other depends on different times for different places. Be careful of that black and white "if they paid the fine they must be guilty" thinking too. I don't want to sound patronising but that is an assumption. I suspect reality may be different with people being surprised and unsure, or simply not wanting to go through the risk of the higher fine. You know, the fine doubles if you ask questions? PokesdownMark
  • Score: 4

3:15pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort.

And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!!

The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.
All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed.

I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.
And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this?
I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?
Well I may know a little more than you, from April 2012 to March 2013 the camera cars were responsible for 2,423 NPC's issued for ZigZags, Loading bans and bus stop infringements in Poole alone.1,822 were paid and 336 got cancelled.

I did have a little chuckle at the comment that someone made saying I do not know the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car. Well a police car has an ANPR camera fitted inside the vehicle, the council car just like the DVLA camera vans have them roof mounted so they can check park vehicles while passing them. I am also fairly sure that any untaxed vehicles found by the council camera car do get reported.

I wasn't aware of the high court case so thanks for that bit of info.
Ah you have discovered google. Happy days!

336 out of 1822 loading and bus stop cases were cancelled. Does that seem ok to you? I don't think that is a sign of a healthy system. Now if they council has to pay £60 when they lost a case. Paid to the person issues with a ticket. Would that make the system sharper? I wonder?
Might make you a bit sharper if you realise its actually 336 out of the 2,423. The 1,822 simply admitted they had illegally parked and paid the fine and I do doubt that anyone forced them to park illegally
Yes you are correct on that point of maths. But still there were 336 cases dropped. Knowing if a vehicle is stationary on a bus stop seems very easy. So were those 336 mostly loading bay cases? Why did they report those two categories together when they seem quite different in nature? One is absolute. The other depends on different times for different places.

Be careful of that black and white "if they paid the fine they must be guilty" thinking too. I don't want to sound patronising but that is an assumption. I suspect reality may be different with people being surprised and unsure, or simply not wanting to go through the risk of the higher fine. You know, the fine doubles if you ask questions?
The fine doesn't double if you ask questions, it only increases if you don't pay it. So spouting nonsense like that is hardly sounding patronising now is it.

If we have the camera cars then we should use them and anyone who does not want to be caught parking illegally the best advice there is, don't park illegally. Simple really isn't it.
[quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]If you are active in politics you shouldn't publicly make assumptions and ask questions that you can answer online with a bit of effort. And why should the public put up with these cars simply because of a cost? Talk about putting people second?!!! The govt has simply said they shouldn't be used to enforce no-waiting and no-parking restrictions. Only no-stopping ones plus bus lane infringements. This was their original scope. End of.[/p][/quote]All I am saying is that as they have already been paid for they should be used or are you in favour of wasting money, if people park illegally simply for their own convenience and they get caught that is their fault and no one elses. As the article shows in situations where there have been mitigating circumstance the fines have been squashed. I asked about the Tax etc because I do recall someone getting done for no tax on a vehicle and they were caught by a camera car, maybe that is a different kind of camera car though.[/p][/quote]And you think in an area with a predominantly elderly population people would not pay instead of putting themselves through the appeals process? I think you need to think very carefully about edge cases for automated prosecution systems. You seem to be saying issuing penalties for several hundred innocent motorists is fine? What does it cost to process all of those appeal cases? Do you know how many hours of council time is involved? Do you know enough about this? I don't know myself. But I suspect the real costs for these cars are very finely balanced cost versus income. What the council gets the council spends. You are aware of the high court case about councils spending excess parking revenue on non-transport things I hope?[/p][/quote]Well I may know a little more than you, from April 2012 to March 2013 the camera cars were responsible for 2,423 NPC's issued for ZigZags, Loading bans and bus stop infringements in Poole alone.1,822 were paid and 336 got cancelled. I did have a little chuckle at the comment that someone made saying I do not know the difference between a council camera car and a police ANPR camera car. Well a police car has an ANPR camera fitted inside the vehicle, the council car just like the DVLA camera vans have them roof mounted so they can check park vehicles while passing them. I am also fairly sure that any untaxed vehicles found by the council camera car do get reported. I wasn't aware of the high court case so thanks for that bit of info.[/p][/quote]Ah you have discovered google. Happy days! 336 out of 1822 loading and bus stop cases were cancelled. Does that seem ok to you? I don't think that is a sign of a healthy system. Now if they council has to pay £60 when they lost a case. Paid to the person issues with a ticket. Would that make the system sharper? I wonder?[/p][/quote]Might make you a bit sharper if you realise its actually 336 out of the 2,423. The 1,822 simply admitted they had illegally parked and paid the fine and I do doubt that anyone forced them to park illegally[/p][/quote]Yes you are correct on that point of maths. But still there were 336 cases dropped. Knowing if a vehicle is stationary on a bus stop seems very easy. So were those 336 mostly loading bay cases? Why did they report those two categories together when they seem quite different in nature? One is absolute. The other depends on different times for different places. Be careful of that black and white "if they paid the fine they must be guilty" thinking too. I don't want to sound patronising but that is an assumption. I suspect reality may be different with people being surprised and unsure, or simply not wanting to go through the risk of the higher fine. You know, the fine doubles if you ask questions?[/p][/quote]The fine doesn't double if you ask questions, it only increases if you don't pay it. So spouting nonsense like that is hardly sounding patronising now is it. If we have the camera cars then we should use them and anyone who does not want to be caught parking illegally the best advice there is, don't park illegally. Simple really isn't it. Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: -5

3:43pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

Sir Beachy Head wrote:
Eric Pickles takes a lot of stick for being obese, and sure, he'd wallop me in a pizza eating showdown, but, that aside, I like him.
Whenever I see him interviewed on the Marr show or Daily Politics he comes over as a decent chap and speaks a lot of sence.
I am a pickles fan. A ukip voter but a Pickles fan. A rare combination I expect.
If ever there was a case for not voting UKIP and not being a fan of Eric Pickles you make a very persuasive argument...
[quote][p][bold]Sir Beachy Head[/bold] wrote: Eric Pickles takes a lot of stick for being obese, and sure, he'd wallop me in a pizza eating showdown, but, that aside, I like him. Whenever I see him interviewed on the Marr show or Daily Politics he comes over as a decent chap and speaks a lot of sence. I am a pickles fan. A ukip voter but a Pickles fan. A rare combination I expect.[/p][/quote]If ever there was a case for not voting UKIP and not being a fan of Eric Pickles you make a very persuasive argument... Baysider
  • Score: 4

4:23pm Mon 23 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

Hessenford wrote:
Cordite wrote: Best thing to do with these cars is rip the camera off the roof, mount it on the front bumper with the lens pointing down and go 'pothole spotting'
Or park them at traffic lights to fine all the cyclists who go through on red, they would make a fortune, waiting for all the lycra clad moaners now, bring it on.
I had the same thought funnily enough LOL! Great minds think alike! (I can hear the clatter of the LL's keyboards...........
....)
[quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cordite[/bold] wrote: Best thing to do with these cars is rip the camera off the roof, mount it on the front bumper with the lens pointing down and go 'pothole spotting'[/p][/quote]Or park them at traffic lights to fine all the cyclists who go through on red, they would make a fortune, waiting for all the lycra clad moaners now, bring it on.[/p][/quote]I had the same thought funnily enough LOL! Great minds think alike! (I can hear the clatter of the LL's keyboards........... ....) suzigirl
  • Score: 1

5:08pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Dorset Logic says...

Hessenford wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
Hessenford wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
Don't you know, the waste of money happened when these things were purchased and no they don't catch drivers without tax insurance or MOT, why don't you brush up a little as a prospecting UKIP member.
You're no relation to the late Marty Caine are you, she was a comedian as well.
Well actually Marti Caine the comedienne started using my name sometime after I was born but don't let facts stop you making a fool of yourself. ;)
Doesn't really matter, you are still a much bigger comedienne than she was and it's you who have made a fool of yourself today.
but who has the biggest dad?
[quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]Don't you know, the waste of money happened when these things were purchased and no they don't catch drivers without tax insurance or MOT, why don't you brush up a little as a prospecting UKIP member. You're no relation to the late Marty Caine are you, she was a comedian as well.[/p][/quote]Well actually Marti Caine the comedienne started using my name sometime after I was born but don't let facts stop you making a fool of yourself. ;)[/p][/quote]Doesn't really matter, you are still a much bigger comedienne than she was and it's you who have made a fool of yourself today.[/p][/quote]but who has the biggest dad? Dorset Logic
  • Score: 0

5:15pm Mon 23 Jun 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
So no counter argument, just name calling!
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...[/p][/quote]So no counter argument, just name calling! fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: -1

5:20pm Mon 23 Jun 14

sprintervanman says...

Hessenford wrote:
Cordite wrote:
Best thing to do with these cars is rip the camera off the roof, mount it on the front bumper with the lens pointing down and go 'pothole spotting'
Or park them at traffic lights to fine all the cyclists who go through on red, they would make a fortune, waiting for all the lycra clad moaners now, bring it on.
Do feel your pain regarding cyclists in a non cycling article.Pretty much fed up now with the constant killing of motorists by illegal cyclists and they never seem to face proper justice.It's the drunk/drugged/un licenced /un insured mobile phone using motorist i feel the most sorry for.As if they have ever hurt anyone and yet they get all the blame for rising motoring costs for some strange reason.Your guess is as good as mine on that one sigh.
[quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cordite[/bold] wrote: Best thing to do with these cars is rip the camera off the roof, mount it on the front bumper with the lens pointing down and go 'pothole spotting'[/p][/quote]Or park them at traffic lights to fine all the cyclists who go through on red, they would make a fortune, waiting for all the lycra clad moaners now, bring it on.[/p][/quote]Do feel your pain regarding cyclists in a non cycling article.Pretty much fed up now with the constant killing of motorists by illegal cyclists and they never seem to face proper justice.It's the drunk/drugged/un licenced /un insured mobile phone using motorist i feel the most sorry for.As if they have ever hurt anyone and yet they get all the blame for rising motoring costs for some strange reason.Your guess is as good as mine on that one sigh. sprintervanman
  • Score: 0

5:24pm Mon 23 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
PThere is a clear incentive to pay up at an early opportunity. Although starting an appeal freezes the fined amount at the lower level, this is not clear. Hence there is a clear incentive to pay up rather than appeal. Ask the council for a sample letter and then read it through the eyes of an elderly person.

Or don't bother. That's ok. You continue to argue the council's line without questions. Good luck at the polls.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PThere is a clear incentive to pay up at an early opportunity. Although starting an appeal freezes the fined amount at the lower level, this is not clear. Hence there is a clear incentive to pay up rather than appeal. Ask the council for a sample letter and then read it through the eyes of an elderly person. Or don't bother. That's ok. You continue to argue the council's line without questions. Good luck at the polls. PokesdownMark
  • Score: 1

5:29pm Mon 23 Jun 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

Sir Beachy Head wrote:
I saw one these futhermucking cars zooming around durley road area at 9PM on saturday. Obviously no schools open then, so he was just on the hunt for the holiday makers who may have stopped on a double yellow.

The sooner the get scrapped the better.
I have seen the camera car operating on a Sunday evening in the side roads of Winton ,,,, the trouble is our Councils lack the integrity to use the their powers sensibly ,,, just look how they abused RIPA!
[quote][p][bold]Sir Beachy Head[/bold] wrote: I saw one these futhermucking cars zooming around durley road area at 9PM on saturday. Obviously no schools open then, so he was just on the hunt for the holiday makers who may have stopped on a double yellow. The sooner the get scrapped the better.[/p][/quote]I have seen the camera car operating on a Sunday evening in the side roads of Winton ,,,, the trouble is our Councils lack the integrity to use the their powers sensibly ,,, just look how they abused RIPA! fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 1

5:32pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Tig says...

Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.
Of course it's a purely money making exercise by local councils. Even the government has now come out and said so, hence the ban they are bringing in in the autumn.
.
From then you will only get a Penalty Charge Notice if you're parked in a bus lane, outside a school, or on a red route. Any other parking misdemeanours will be dealt with by parking wardens.
[quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.[/p][/quote]Of course it's a purely money making exercise by local councils. Even the government has now come out and said so, hence the ban they are bringing in in the autumn. . From then you will only get a Penalty Charge Notice if you're parked in a bus lane, outside a school, or on a red route. Any other parking misdemeanours will be dealt with by parking wardens. Tig
  • Score: 1

5:56pm Mon 23 Jun 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Why with all the technology of police helicopters ,traffic e police ,and spy cars do the Irish caravan club manage to sneak into town and pitch up wherever ,but the locals are persecuted is this racist ? This is a serious posting
Why with all the technology of police helicopters ,traffic e police ,and spy cars do the Irish caravan club manage to sneak into town and pitch up wherever ,but the locals are persecuted is this racist ? This is a serious posting kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 4

6:16pm Mon 23 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

Chris@Bmouth wrote:
ol'bag lady wrote:
Chris@Bmouth wrote: Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.
Have you not thought how they mean to get "those coffers" filled now? It will be passed onto us residents somehow. Ha ha ha - unlucky us more like!
I dont live in the UK.....HAHA!!!
Some good news today then :-)
[quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ol'bag lady[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.[/p][/quote]Have you not thought how they mean to get "those coffers" filled now? It will be passed onto us residents somehow. Ha ha ha - unlucky us more like![/p][/quote]I dont live in the UK.....HAHA!!![/p][/quote]Some good news today then :-) breamoreboy
  • Score: 1

6:23pm Mon 23 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
Hessenford wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
Don't you know, the waste of money happened when these things were purchased and no they don't catch drivers without tax insurance or MOT, why don't you brush up a little as a prospecting UKIP member.
You're no relation to the late Marty Caine are you, she was a comedian as well.
Well actually Marti Caine the comedienne started using my name sometime after I was born but don't let facts stop you making a fool of yourself. ;)
That's ripe coming from a UKIP supporter, with the heavy winter rainfall having been put down to gay marriage by one of your own. I'll save some of the revolting quotes from the revolting Roger Helmer for another day.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]Don't you know, the waste of money happened when these things were purchased and no they don't catch drivers without tax insurance or MOT, why don't you brush up a little as a prospecting UKIP member. You're no relation to the late Marty Caine are you, she was a comedian as well.[/p][/quote]Well actually Marti Caine the comedienne started using my name sometime after I was born but don't let facts stop you making a fool of yourself. ;)[/p][/quote]That's ripe coming from a UKIP supporter, with the heavy winter rainfall having been put down to gay marriage by one of your own. I'll save some of the revolting quotes from the revolting Roger Helmer for another day. breamoreboy
  • Score: 3

6:25pm Mon 23 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

Chris@Bmouth wrote:
sea poole wrote:
Chris@Bmouth So you don't live in UK, ha,ha! Iraq? Zimbabwe? North Korea?
Clearly not North Korea. Keep guessing.
Rockall?
[quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sea poole[/bold] wrote: Chris@Bmouth So you don't live in UK, ha,ha! Iraq? Zimbabwe? North Korea?[/p][/quote]Clearly not North Korea. Keep guessing.[/p][/quote]Rockall? breamoreboy
  • Score: -1

6:36pm Mon 23 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
In the same way that Gordon Brown didn't sell off our gold reserves? Yes, if you want facts read the Mirror, Guardian or New Statesman.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...[/p][/quote]In the same way that Gordon Brown didn't sell off our gold reserves? Yes, if you want facts read the Mirror, Guardian or New Statesman. breamoreboy
  • Score: 2

6:40pm Mon 23 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

Sir Beachy Head wrote:
Eric Pickles takes a lot of stick for being obese, and sure, he'd wallop me in a pizza eating showdown, but, that aside, I like him.
Whenever I see him interviewed on the Marr show or Daily Politics he comes over as a decent chap and speaks a lot of sence.
I am a pickles fan. A ukip voter but a Pickles fan. A rare combination I expect.
How apt, another voter for the United Kingdom Idiots Party.
[quote][p][bold]Sir Beachy Head[/bold] wrote: Eric Pickles takes a lot of stick for being obese, and sure, he'd wallop me in a pizza eating showdown, but, that aside, I like him. Whenever I see him interviewed on the Marr show or Daily Politics he comes over as a decent chap and speaks a lot of sence. I am a pickles fan. A ukip voter but a Pickles fan. A rare combination I expect.[/p][/quote]How apt, another voter for the United Kingdom Idiots Party. breamoreboy
  • Score: 3

6:51pm Mon 23 Jun 14

bobthedestroyer says...

Chris@Bmouth wrote:
Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.
Council tax increase for all
[quote][p][bold]Chris@Bmouth[/bold] wrote: Hahaha unlucky Bournemouth and Poole. See those coffers suddenly empty.[/p][/quote]Council tax increase for all bobthedestroyer
  • Score: -1

7:03pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Minty Fresh says...

Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.
No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect!
You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.[/p][/quote]No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect![/p][/quote]You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you. Minty Fresh
  • Score: -2

7:50pm Mon 23 Jun 14

ashleycross says...

I wish this paper would stop persecuting the council for enforcing parking laws. These cameras will probably be going from schools now that they are one of the few places left they can be used. I wish you made as much fuss about children injured outside schools by bad drivers instead of just bleating on about not being able to park illegally. Park legally and walk to wherever you are reporting on and stop being such a bunch of spoilt babies over having to put one foot in front of the other for a few hundred yards!
I wish this paper would stop persecuting the council for enforcing parking laws. These cameras will probably be going from schools now that they are one of the few places left they can be used. I wish you made as much fuss about children injured outside schools by bad drivers instead of just bleating on about not being able to park illegally. Park legally and walk to wherever you are reporting on and stop being such a bunch of spoilt babies over having to put one foot in front of the other for a few hundred yards! ashleycross
  • Score: 5

7:54pm Mon 23 Jun 14

ashleycross says...

Townee wrote:
I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.
Phone the council every time you see parents parking badly. The car will come eventually. Just don't think that grizzling to everyone you see and not telling the council will work.Everyone carries mobiles these days so there is no excuse not to phone to report dangerous parking around a school as soon as you see it.
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: I wonder how many readers have seen the camera car outside a school? It' should try going outside HillVeiw school at drop off or pick up times, the parking of some parents is so bad. I have seen mums/dads parked on the zigzag lines, perhaps the head should come out just before home time and ask these selfish people to move or they will call the police.[/p][/quote]Phone the council every time you see parents parking badly. The car will come eventually. Just don't think that grizzling to everyone you see and not telling the council will work.Everyone carries mobiles these days so there is no excuse not to phone to report dangerous parking around a school as soon as you see it. ashleycross
  • Score: 4

8:19pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.
No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect!
You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.
Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.
[quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.[/p][/quote]No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect![/p][/quote]You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.[/p][/quote]Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings. Baysider
  • Score: 1

8:39pm Mon 23 Jun 14

BIGTONE says...

Cllr Ian Potter, cabinet member for transport at the Borough of Poole, said he would be looking at the detail of Mr Pickles’s announcement with officers.
Means.......
We shall have to find another way to nail motorists.
Cllr Ian Potter, cabinet member for transport at the Borough of Poole, said he would be looking at the detail of Mr Pickles’s announcement with officers. Means....... We shall have to find another way to nail motorists. BIGTONE
  • Score: -1

8:47pm Mon 23 Jun 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.
No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect!
You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.
Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.
Pity they are not more efficient fining travellers who park illegally then ,,,,
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.[/p][/quote]No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect![/p][/quote]You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.[/p][/quote]Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.[/p][/quote]Pity they are not more efficient fining travellers who park illegally then ,,,, fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 0

8:51pm Mon 23 Jun 14

BIGTONE says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money.

Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.
Indirectly yes.
They request details of the vehicles ownership from the DVLA.
The DVLA then instigate proceedings if no tax/insurance/Mot pings up.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: As these cars are not cheap, I think I would prefer to see them in use rather than not or it will just be even more wastage of taxpayers money. Don't these vehicles also catch those who drive without Tax, Insurance or MOT.[/p][/quote]Indirectly yes. They request details of the vehicles ownership from the DVLA. The DVLA then instigate proceedings if no tax/insurance/Mot pings up. BIGTONE
  • Score: 4

9:07pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
So no counter argument, just name calling!
The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...[/p][/quote]So no counter argument, just name calling![/p][/quote]The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems. Baysider
  • Score: 4

9:16pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

breamoreboy wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
In the same way that Gordon Brown didn't sell off our gold reserves? Yes, if you want facts read the Mirror, Guardian or New Statesman.
Nope. Never purchased a single edition of any of them in my life. FYI I take the Telegraph but I am acutely aware when it is trying to feed me back what it thinks my opinions should be as as right wing reader. You should try thinking independently once in a while. How's that post office privatisation working out for you btw? How many billions has the taxpayer been had for?
[quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...[/p][/quote]In the same way that Gordon Brown didn't sell off our gold reserves? Yes, if you want facts read the Mirror, Guardian or New Statesman.[/p][/quote]Nope. Never purchased a single edition of any of them in my life. FYI I take the Telegraph but I am acutely aware when it is trying to feed me back what it thinks my opinions should be as as right wing reader. You should try thinking independently once in a while. How's that post office privatisation working out for you btw? How many billions has the taxpayer been had for? Baysider
  • Score: 0

9:30pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Peroni says...

PokesdownMark wrote:
These camera cars were introduced to only catch drivers stopping where they should not. I don't mean parking. Or waiting. But actually stopping. Easy to prove. But like all these things the scope crept. They got greedy. Then there were problems. Typical. Serves them blooming well right!

Bring back the wardens. We need humans dealing with humans. Not machines dealing with cars.
'Humans' ....give over !
I was at Baiter the other day ,the owner of the burger bar ,who has been at that site for 9 years was being hassled by a ' human' to buy a ticket ,because he had not affixed his permit to the screen that day,he asked her to phone the office to confirm that he held a yearly permit,she flatly refused and said the council supplied phone does not allow outgoing calls hmmm !
She was what ...over zealous .....power trip or what !
I asked why she didn't go and put tickets on the'Travellers' in the car park over the road a few weeks back....she refused to talk about that lol.
I was given a ticket by a 'Human' on Ashley road , trying to remove furniture from a shut down company premises ,no stopping at all outside ,so fair enough went to the nearest side street ,it was yellow lines but one way and very quiet , we had to carry heavy desks so not wanting to cross the main road or haul far.I left a note on dash explaining and if a problem to see me at the named premise .......the 'Human' just put a ticket on the van ........I had a chat with several shop owners who confirmed that female ' Human' was not well thought of........something very wrong with these people !
[quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: These camera cars were introduced to only catch drivers stopping where they should not. I don't mean parking. Or waiting. But actually stopping. Easy to prove. But like all these things the scope crept. They got greedy. Then there were problems. Typical. Serves them blooming well right! Bring back the wardens. We need humans dealing with humans. Not machines dealing with cars.[/p][/quote]'Humans' ....give over ! I was at Baiter the other day ,the owner of the burger bar ,who has been at that site for 9 years was being hassled by a ' human' to buy a ticket ,because he had not affixed his permit to the screen that day,he asked her to phone the office to confirm that he held a yearly permit,she flatly refused and said the council supplied phone does not allow outgoing calls hmmm ! She was what ...over zealous .....power trip or what ! I asked why she didn't go and put tickets on the'Travellers' in the car park over the road a few weeks back....she refused to talk about that lol. I was given a ticket by a 'Human' on Ashley road , trying to remove furniture from a shut down company premises ,no stopping at all outside ,so fair enough went to the nearest side street ,it was yellow lines but one way and very quiet , we had to carry heavy desks so not wanting to cross the main road or haul far.I left a note on dash explaining and if a problem to see me at the named premise .......the 'Human' just put a ticket on the van ........I had a chat with several shop owners who confirmed that female ' Human' was not well thought of........something very wrong with these people ! Peroni
  • Score: 1

10:11pm Mon 23 Jun 14

sprintervanman says...

Peroni wrote:
PokesdownMark wrote:
These camera cars were introduced to only catch drivers stopping where they should not. I don't mean parking. Or waiting. But actually stopping. Easy to prove. But like all these things the scope crept. They got greedy. Then there were problems. Typical. Serves them blooming well right!

Bring back the wardens. We need humans dealing with humans. Not machines dealing with cars.
'Humans' ....give over !
I was at Baiter the other day ,the owner of the burger bar ,who has been at that site for 9 years was being hassled by a ' human' to buy a ticket ,because he had not affixed his permit to the screen that day,he asked her to phone the office to confirm that he held a yearly permit,she flatly refused and said the council supplied phone does not allow outgoing calls hmmm !
She was what ...over zealous .....power trip or what !
I asked why she didn't go and put tickets on the'Travellers' in the car park over the road a few weeks back....she refused to talk about that lol.
I was given a ticket by a 'Human' on Ashley road , trying to remove furniture from a shut down company premises ,no stopping at all outside ,so fair enough went to the nearest side street ,it was yellow lines but one way and very quiet , we had to carry heavy desks so not wanting to cross the main road or haul far.I left a note on dash explaining and if a problem to see me at the named premise .......the 'Human' just put a ticket on the van ........I had a chat with several shop owners who confirmed that female ' Human' was not well thought of........something very wrong with these people !
To think on Friday a large Lorry Delivered a Grand Piano to a house in our street.The lorry blocked one lane and the strangest thing is no one cared or made a fussThe traffic just waited and moved as and when it was safe to do so. No blaring of horns or angry tempers.Of cause i am talking about a French road .As a French Gent said 'why get stressed for a moment of nothing of importance in a day'
[quote][p][bold]Peroni[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: These camera cars were introduced to only catch drivers stopping where they should not. I don't mean parking. Or waiting. But actually stopping. Easy to prove. But like all these things the scope crept. They got greedy. Then there were problems. Typical. Serves them blooming well right! Bring back the wardens. We need humans dealing with humans. Not machines dealing with cars.[/p][/quote]'Humans' ....give over ! I was at Baiter the other day ,the owner of the burger bar ,who has been at that site for 9 years was being hassled by a ' human' to buy a ticket ,because he had not affixed his permit to the screen that day,he asked her to phone the office to confirm that he held a yearly permit,she flatly refused and said the council supplied phone does not allow outgoing calls hmmm ! She was what ...over zealous .....power trip or what ! I asked why she didn't go and put tickets on the'Travellers' in the car park over the road a few weeks back....she refused to talk about that lol. I was given a ticket by a 'Human' on Ashley road , trying to remove furniture from a shut down company premises ,no stopping at all outside ,so fair enough went to the nearest side street ,it was yellow lines but one way and very quiet , we had to carry heavy desks so not wanting to cross the main road or haul far.I left a note on dash explaining and if a problem to see me at the named premise .......the 'Human' just put a ticket on the van ........I had a chat with several shop owners who confirmed that female ' Human' was not well thought of........something very wrong with these people ![/p][/quote]To think on Friday a large Lorry Delivered a Grand Piano to a house in our street.The lorry blocked one lane and the strangest thing is no one cared or made a fussThe traffic just waited and moved as and when it was safe to do so. No blaring of horns or angry tempers.Of cause i am talking about a French road .As a French Gent said 'why get stressed for a moment of nothing of importance in a day' sprintervanman
  • Score: 5

10:42pm Mon 23 Jun 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
So no counter argument, just name calling!
The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.
So insults again father than rational argument, if the Tories doubled tax previously as well as labour how can you possibly argue about the recent cuts ,,,, should be plenty of slack to cut without effecting front line services ,,,,,,
Please try to put you case without resorting to insults!
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...[/p][/quote]So no counter argument, just name calling![/p][/quote]The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.[/p][/quote]So insults again father than rational argument, if the Tories doubled tax previously as well as labour how can you possibly argue about the recent cuts ,,,, should be plenty of slack to cut without effecting front line services ,,,,,, Please try to put you case without resorting to insults! fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 1

11:02pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Yankee1 says...

Looks like both town's mayors won't get new limousines.

Tough.
Looks like both town's mayors won't get new limousines. Tough. Yankee1
  • Score: 0

11:20pm Mon 23 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

Baysider wrote:
breamoreboy wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
In the same way that Gordon Brown didn't sell off our gold reserves? Yes, if you want facts read the Mirror, Guardian or New Statesman.
Nope. Never purchased a single edition of any of them in my life. FYI I take the Telegraph but I am acutely aware when it is trying to feed me back what it thinks my opinions should be as as right wing reader. You should try thinking independently once in a while. How's that post office privatisation working out for you btw? How many billions has the taxpayer been had for?
How would I know, I don't read any of the national newspapers as they're all pretty much biased one way or another. Besides I can't afford them. I could use a search engine to find about the Post Office but as it's happened there isn't much I can do about it. Maybe in the medium to long term it'll keep all the moaners on this site happy as they're not paying into yet another pension fund that's not their own. Blow you postie, I'm all right. Which is a pity in a way, as my local postie is a smashing bloke.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]breamoreboy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...[/p][/quote]In the same way that Gordon Brown didn't sell off our gold reserves? Yes, if you want facts read the Mirror, Guardian or New Statesman.[/p][/quote]Nope. Never purchased a single edition of any of them in my life. FYI I take the Telegraph but I am acutely aware when it is trying to feed me back what it thinks my opinions should be as as right wing reader. You should try thinking independently once in a while. How's that post office privatisation working out for you btw? How many billions has the taxpayer been had for?[/p][/quote]How would I know, I don't read any of the national newspapers as they're all pretty much biased one way or another. Besides I can't afford them. I could use a search engine to find about the Post Office but as it's happened there isn't much I can do about it. Maybe in the medium to long term it'll keep all the moaners on this site happy as they're not paying into yet another pension fund that's not their own. Blow you postie, I'm all right. Which is a pity in a way, as my local postie is a smashing bloke. breamoreboy
  • Score: 0

11:23pm Mon 23 Jun 14

Baysider says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
So no counter argument, just name calling!
The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.
So insults again father than rational argument, if the Tories doubled tax previously as well as labour how can you possibly argue about the recent cuts ,,,, should be plenty of slack to cut without effecting front line services ,,,,,,
Please try to put you case without resorting to insults!
See. What you don't get is that Labour inherited public services (or what was left of them after the Tories had privatised what they could) that needed massive reinvestment to make them fit for purpose. That's why for example schools got repaired or extended, schools could take on classroom assistants to reduce the burden on teachers and help struggling kids, carers were recruited for the elderly, refuse carts that were 10 years beyond their serviceable life were replaced and no longer broke down regularly, capital projects were finally pushed through to infrastructure and a 1000 other examples of the 'sod all' you got to show for your money (what you mean of course is that YOU personally didn't a gold plated wheelie bin delivered in person by the Chief Executive). Enough of a response for you? And I'll stop pointing out how utterly lacking in reasoned thought you are when you stop characterising everyone in the public sector as a "jobsworth", only in it for themselves...
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...[/p][/quote]So no counter argument, just name calling![/p][/quote]The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.[/p][/quote]So insults again father than rational argument, if the Tories doubled tax previously as well as labour how can you possibly argue about the recent cuts ,,,, should be plenty of slack to cut without effecting front line services ,,,,,, Please try to put you case without resorting to insults![/p][/quote]See. What you don't get is that Labour inherited public services (or what was left of them after the Tories had privatised what they could) that needed massive reinvestment to make them fit for purpose. That's why for example schools got repaired or extended, schools could take on classroom assistants to reduce the burden on teachers and help struggling kids, carers were recruited for the elderly, refuse carts that were 10 years beyond their serviceable life were replaced and no longer broke down regularly, capital projects were finally pushed through to infrastructure and a 1000 other examples of the 'sod all' you got to show for your money (what you mean of course is that YOU personally didn't a gold plated wheelie bin delivered in person by the Chief Executive). Enough of a response for you? And I'll stop pointing out how utterly lacking in reasoned thought you are when you stop characterising everyone in the public sector as a "jobsworth", only in it for themselves... Baysider
  • Score: 1

11:26pm Mon 23 Jun 14

breamoreboy says...

Yankee1 wrote:
Looks like both town's mayors won't get new limousines.

Tough.
Once all the cycle routes across the three towns are complete I look forward to all local politicians saving the tax payer money by getting on their bikes. This would also help fight global warming. What do you mean, pigs might fly?
[quote][p][bold]Yankee1[/bold] wrote: Looks like both town's mayors won't get new limousines. Tough.[/p][/quote]Once all the cycle routes across the three towns are complete I look forward to all local politicians saving the tax payer money by getting on their bikes. This would also help fight global warming. What do you mean, pigs might fly? breamoreboy
  • Score: 1

11:27pm Mon 23 Jun 14

ragj195 says...

Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.
No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect!
You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.
Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.
I live near AFC Bournemouth .in a controlled zone that prevents weekday parking from 2:30>3:30. This was put in place when Chase/JP Morgan moved close by to prevent staff cars clogging up local roads, no other reason. I rarely see a traffic warden patrolling the area, probably because JP Morgan staff aren't stupid enough to risk getting a ticket,.

On Good Friday this year JP Morgan was closed. What was unusual about that day was that AFCB were playing at home on a weekday during the day. At around 2:15pm around eight parking officers were dropped off on Littledown Ave. They took photo's of the controlled zone sign then proceed to issue tickets to as many cars as possible. The same cars that are allowed to park there legally on a weekend match day. The council knew that fans who normally parked on the roads on a Saturday match day would be unaware of the restrictions or simply forgot that it was indeed Friday and not the weekend.

The whole reason for the controlled zone is to prevent JP Morgan staff repeatedly parking in the area. Whether they should be allowed or not is another debate but this is a clear example of how someone in the Town Hall made a decision to financially exploit the public they are meant to represent. No tin foil or FOI request needed. They can't even argue that it's to keep traffic flowing because the official reason for the zone has nothing to do with traffic flow. So, if it wasn't to make money why did the council send eight wardens to the area that day?
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.[/p][/quote]No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect![/p][/quote]You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.[/p][/quote]Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.[/p][/quote]I live near AFC Bournemouth .in a controlled zone that prevents weekday parking from 2:30>3:30. This was put in place when Chase/JP Morgan moved close by to prevent staff cars clogging up local roads, no other reason. I rarely see a traffic warden patrolling the area, probably because JP Morgan staff aren't stupid enough to risk getting a ticket,. On Good Friday this year JP Morgan was closed. What was unusual about that day was that AFCB were playing at home on a weekday during the day. At around 2:15pm around eight parking officers were dropped off on Littledown Ave. They took photo's of the controlled zone sign then proceed to issue tickets to as many cars as possible. The same cars that are allowed to park there legally on a weekend match day. The council knew that fans who normally parked on the roads on a Saturday match day would be unaware of the restrictions or simply forgot that it was indeed Friday and not the weekend. The whole reason for the controlled zone is to prevent JP Morgan staff repeatedly parking in the area. Whether they should be allowed or not is another debate but this is a clear example of how someone in the Town Hall made a decision to financially exploit the public they are meant to represent. No tin foil or FOI request needed. They can't even argue that it's to keep traffic flowing because the official reason for the zone has nothing to do with traffic flow. So, if it wasn't to make money why did the council send eight wardens to the area that day? ragj195
  • Score: 3

2:55am Tue 24 Jun 14

Hessenford says...

ashleycross wrote:
I wish this paper would stop persecuting the council for enforcing parking laws. These cameras will probably be going from schools now that they are one of the few places left they can be used. I wish you made as much fuss about children injured outside schools by bad drivers instead of just bleating on about not being able to park illegally. Park legally and walk to wherever you are reporting on and stop being such a bunch of spoilt babies over having to put one foot in front of the other for a few hundred yards!
If the cars were used where they were supposed to be instead of pursuing revenue else where there would be no children injured outside schools.
These cars do not enforce illegal parking, they take photos indiscriminately of people dropping off passengers for a split second, just because a car stops for a second does not justify prosecution, even traffic wardens would let drivers stop to drop off and pick up passengers councils have dug their own graves here because of their love of revenue.
[quote][p][bold]ashleycross[/bold] wrote: I wish this paper would stop persecuting the council for enforcing parking laws. These cameras will probably be going from schools now that they are one of the few places left they can be used. I wish you made as much fuss about children injured outside schools by bad drivers instead of just bleating on about not being able to park illegally. Park legally and walk to wherever you are reporting on and stop being such a bunch of spoilt babies over having to put one foot in front of the other for a few hundred yards![/p][/quote]If the cars were used where they were supposed to be instead of pursuing revenue else where there would be no children injured outside schools. These cars do not enforce illegal parking, they take photos indiscriminately of people dropping off passengers for a split second, just because a car stops for a second does not justify prosecution, even traffic wardens would let drivers stop to drop off and pick up passengers councils have dug their own graves here because of their love of revenue. Hessenford
  • Score: 0

6:31am Tue 24 Jun 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
So no counter argument, just name calling!
The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.
So insults again father than rational argument, if the Tories doubled tax previously as well as labour how can you possibly argue about the recent cuts ,,,, should be plenty of slack to cut without effecting front line services ,,,,,,
Please try to put you case without resorting to insults!
See. What you don't get is that Labour inherited public services (or what was left of them after the Tories had privatised what they could) that needed massive reinvestment to make them fit for purpose. That's why for example schools got repaired or extended, schools could take on classroom assistants to reduce the burden on teachers and help struggling kids, carers were recruited for the elderly, refuse carts that were 10 years beyond their serviceable life were replaced and no longer broke down regularly, capital projects were finally pushed through to infrastructure and a 1000 other examples of the 'sod all' you got to show for your money (what you mean of course is that YOU personally didn't a gold plated wheelie bin delivered in person by the Chief Executive). Enough of a response for you? And I'll stop pointing out how utterly lacking in reasoned thought you are when you stop characterising everyone in the public sector as a "jobsworth", only in it for themselves...
The reason we have to have these cuts is that labour wrecked the economy, squandered the countries wealth and we are now all paying the price. Remember labour doubled the national debt in little more than 10 years! The same incompetent politicians who caused now blame everyone else.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...[/p][/quote]So no counter argument, just name calling![/p][/quote]The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.[/p][/quote]So insults again father than rational argument, if the Tories doubled tax previously as well as labour how can you possibly argue about the recent cuts ,,,, should be plenty of slack to cut without effecting front line services ,,,,,, Please try to put you case without resorting to insults![/p][/quote]See. What you don't get is that Labour inherited public services (or what was left of them after the Tories had privatised what they could) that needed massive reinvestment to make them fit for purpose. That's why for example schools got repaired or extended, schools could take on classroom assistants to reduce the burden on teachers and help struggling kids, carers were recruited for the elderly, refuse carts that were 10 years beyond their serviceable life were replaced and no longer broke down regularly, capital projects were finally pushed through to infrastructure and a 1000 other examples of the 'sod all' you got to show for your money (what you mean of course is that YOU personally didn't a gold plated wheelie bin delivered in person by the Chief Executive). Enough of a response for you? And I'll stop pointing out how utterly lacking in reasoned thought you are when you stop characterising everyone in the public sector as a "jobsworth", only in it for themselves...[/p][/quote]The reason we have to have these cuts is that labour wrecked the economy, squandered the countries wealth and we are now all paying the price. Remember labour doubled the national debt in little more than 10 years! The same incompetent politicians who caused now blame everyone else. fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: -5

7:04am Tue 24 Jun 14

Baysider says...

ragj195 wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.
No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect!
You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.
Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.
I live near AFC Bournemouth .in a controlled zone that prevents weekday parking from 2:30>3:30. This was put in place when Chase/JP Morgan moved close by to prevent staff cars clogging up local roads, no other reason. I rarely see a traffic warden patrolling the area, probably because JP Morgan staff aren't stupid enough to risk getting a ticket,.

On Good Friday this year JP Morgan was closed. What was unusual about that day was that AFCB were playing at home on a weekday during the day. At around 2:15pm around eight parking officers were dropped off on Littledown Ave. They took photo's of the controlled zone sign then proceed to issue tickets to as many cars as possible. The same cars that are allowed to park there legally on a weekend match day. The council knew that fans who normally parked on the roads on a Saturday match day would be unaware of the restrictions or simply forgot that it was indeed Friday and not the weekend.

The whole reason for the controlled zone is to prevent JP Morgan staff repeatedly parking in the area. Whether they should be allowed or not is another debate but this is a clear example of how someone in the Town Hall made a decision to financially exploit the public they are meant to represent. No tin foil or FOI request needed. They can't even argue that it's to keep traffic flowing because the official reason for the zone has nothing to do with traffic flow. So, if it wasn't to make money why did the council send eight wardens to the area that day?
Probably because the residents complained.
[quote][p][bold]ragj195[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.[/p][/quote]No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect![/p][/quote]You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.[/p][/quote]Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.[/p][/quote]I live near AFC Bournemouth .in a controlled zone that prevents weekday parking from 2:30>3:30. This was put in place when Chase/JP Morgan moved close by to prevent staff cars clogging up local roads, no other reason. I rarely see a traffic warden patrolling the area, probably because JP Morgan staff aren't stupid enough to risk getting a ticket,. On Good Friday this year JP Morgan was closed. What was unusual about that day was that AFCB were playing at home on a weekday during the day. At around 2:15pm around eight parking officers were dropped off on Littledown Ave. They took photo's of the controlled zone sign then proceed to issue tickets to as many cars as possible. The same cars that are allowed to park there legally on a weekend match day. The council knew that fans who normally parked on the roads on a Saturday match day would be unaware of the restrictions or simply forgot that it was indeed Friday and not the weekend. The whole reason for the controlled zone is to prevent JP Morgan staff repeatedly parking in the area. Whether they should be allowed or not is another debate but this is a clear example of how someone in the Town Hall made a decision to financially exploit the public they are meant to represent. No tin foil or FOI request needed. They can't even argue that it's to keep traffic flowing because the official reason for the zone has nothing to do with traffic flow. So, if it wasn't to make money why did the council send eight wardens to the area that day?[/p][/quote]Probably because the residents complained. Baysider
  • Score: -1

7:13am Tue 24 Jun 14

Baysider says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
So no counter argument, just name calling!
The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.
So insults again father than rational argument, if the Tories doubled tax previously as well as labour how can you possibly argue about the recent cuts ,,,, should be plenty of slack to cut without effecting front line services ,,,,,,
Please try to put you case without resorting to insults!
See. What you don't get is that Labour inherited public services (or what was left of them after the Tories had privatised what they could) that needed massive reinvestment to make them fit for purpose. That's why for example schools got repaired or extended, schools could take on classroom assistants to reduce the burden on teachers and help struggling kids, carers were recruited for the elderly, refuse carts that were 10 years beyond their serviceable life were replaced and no longer broke down regularly, capital projects were finally pushed through to infrastructure and a 1000 other examples of the 'sod all' you got to show for your money (what you mean of course is that YOU personally didn't a gold plated wheelie bin delivered in person by the Chief Executive). Enough of a response for you? And I'll stop pointing out how utterly lacking in reasoned thought you are when you stop characterising everyone in the public sector as a "jobsworth", only in it for themselves...
The reason we have to have these cuts is that labour wrecked the economy, squandered the countries wealth and we are now all paying the price. Remember labour doubled the national debt in little more than 10 years! The same incompetent politicians who caused now blame everyone else.
No. The economy was doing okay until the WORLDWIDE banking fiasco came home to roost in reality and George Osborne has already borrowed more than Labour did in 13 years. But you've done your usual and moved on to what you think is safer ground by spewing out another Daily Mail inspire cliché fest instead of responding to my examples of where that money was spent.
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...[/p][/quote]So no counter argument, just name calling![/p][/quote]The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.[/p][/quote]So insults again father than rational argument, if the Tories doubled tax previously as well as labour how can you possibly argue about the recent cuts ,,,, should be plenty of slack to cut without effecting front line services ,,,,,, Please try to put you case without resorting to insults![/p][/quote]See. What you don't get is that Labour inherited public services (or what was left of them after the Tories had privatised what they could) that needed massive reinvestment to make them fit for purpose. That's why for example schools got repaired or extended, schools could take on classroom assistants to reduce the burden on teachers and help struggling kids, carers were recruited for the elderly, refuse carts that were 10 years beyond their serviceable life were replaced and no longer broke down regularly, capital projects were finally pushed through to infrastructure and a 1000 other examples of the 'sod all' you got to show for your money (what you mean of course is that YOU personally didn't a gold plated wheelie bin delivered in person by the Chief Executive). Enough of a response for you? And I'll stop pointing out how utterly lacking in reasoned thought you are when you stop characterising everyone in the public sector as a "jobsworth", only in it for themselves...[/p][/quote]The reason we have to have these cuts is that labour wrecked the economy, squandered the countries wealth and we are now all paying the price. Remember labour doubled the national debt in little more than 10 years! The same incompetent politicians who caused now blame everyone else.[/p][/quote]No. The economy was doing okay until the WORLDWIDE banking fiasco came home to roost in reality and George Osborne has already borrowed more than Labour did in 13 years. But you've done your usual and moved on to what you think is safer ground by spewing out another Daily Mail inspire cliché fest instead of responding to my examples of where that money was spent. Baysider
  • Score: 5

7:56am Tue 24 Jun 14

ragj195 says...

Baysider wrote:
ragj195 wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.
No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect!
You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.
Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.
I live near AFC Bournemouth .in a controlled zone that prevents weekday parking from 2:30>3:30. This was put in place when Chase/JP Morgan moved close by to prevent staff cars clogging up local roads, no other reason. I rarely see a traffic warden patrolling the area, probably because JP Morgan staff aren't stupid enough to risk getting a ticket,.

On Good Friday this year JP Morgan was closed. What was unusual about that day was that AFCB were playing at home on a weekday during the day. At around 2:15pm around eight parking officers were dropped off on Littledown Ave. They took photo's of the controlled zone sign then proceed to issue tickets to as many cars as possible. The same cars that are allowed to park there legally on a weekend match day. The council knew that fans who normally parked on the roads on a Saturday match day would be unaware of the restrictions or simply forgot that it was indeed Friday and not the weekend.

The whole reason for the controlled zone is to prevent JP Morgan staff repeatedly parking in the area. Whether they should be allowed or not is another debate but this is a clear example of how someone in the Town Hall made a decision to financially exploit the public they are meant to represent. No tin foil or FOI request needed. They can't even argue that it's to keep traffic flowing because the official reason for the zone has nothing to do with traffic flow. So, if it wasn't to make money why did the council send eight wardens to the area that day?
Probably because the residents complained.
Take off the tin foil. You really think the council have a bunker in the town hall with a hot line that allows complaining residents to call in a workforce of traffic wardens? Try again.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ragj195[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.[/p][/quote]No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect![/p][/quote]You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.[/p][/quote]Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.[/p][/quote]I live near AFC Bournemouth .in a controlled zone that prevents weekday parking from 2:30>3:30. This was put in place when Chase/JP Morgan moved close by to prevent staff cars clogging up local roads, no other reason. I rarely see a traffic warden patrolling the area, probably because JP Morgan staff aren't stupid enough to risk getting a ticket,. On Good Friday this year JP Morgan was closed. What was unusual about that day was that AFCB were playing at home on a weekday during the day. At around 2:15pm around eight parking officers were dropped off on Littledown Ave. They took photo's of the controlled zone sign then proceed to issue tickets to as many cars as possible. The same cars that are allowed to park there legally on a weekend match day. The council knew that fans who normally parked on the roads on a Saturday match day would be unaware of the restrictions or simply forgot that it was indeed Friday and not the weekend. The whole reason for the controlled zone is to prevent JP Morgan staff repeatedly parking in the area. Whether they should be allowed or not is another debate but this is a clear example of how someone in the Town Hall made a decision to financially exploit the public they are meant to represent. No tin foil or FOI request needed. They can't even argue that it's to keep traffic flowing because the official reason for the zone has nothing to do with traffic flow. So, if it wasn't to make money why did the council send eight wardens to the area that day?[/p][/quote]Probably because the residents complained.[/p][/quote]Take off the tin foil. You really think the council have a bunker in the town hall with a hot line that allows complaining residents to call in a workforce of traffic wardens? Try again. ragj195
  • Score: -1

8:18am Tue 24 Jun 14

BIGTONE says...

Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...
Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first!
The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...
So no counter argument, just name calling!
The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.
So insults again father than rational argument, if the Tories doubled tax previously as well as labour how can you possibly argue about the recent cuts ,,,, should be plenty of slack to cut without effecting front line services ,,,,,,
Please try to put you case without resorting to insults!
See. What you don't get is that Labour inherited public services (or what was left of them after the Tories had privatised what they could) that needed massive reinvestment to make them fit for purpose. That's why for example schools got repaired or extended, schools could take on classroom assistants to reduce the burden on teachers and help struggling kids, carers were recruited for the elderly, refuse carts that were 10 years beyond their serviceable life were replaced and no longer broke down regularly, capital projects were finally pushed through to infrastructure and a 1000 other examples of the 'sod all' you got to show for your money (what you mean of course is that YOU personally didn't a gold plated wheelie bin delivered in person by the Chief Executive). Enough of a response for you? And I'll stop pointing out how utterly lacking in reasoned thought you are when you stop characterising everyone in the public sector as a "jobsworth", only in it for themselves...
The reason we have to have these cuts is that labour wrecked the economy, squandered the countries wealth and we are now all paying the price. Remember labour doubled the national debt in little more than 10 years! The same incompetent politicians who caused now blame everyone else.
No. The economy was doing okay until the WORLDWIDE banking fiasco came home to roost in reality and George Osborne has already borrowed more than Labour did in 13 years. But you've done your usual and moved on to what you think is safer ground by spewing out another Daily Mail inspire cliché fest instead of responding to my examples of where that money was spent.
Quilted toilet rolls and duck houses,fiddling mortgage payments and expenses etc for the flat snouted robbing MP's.
That's just what was found out.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Of course the more interesting aspect to this story is that Cllr Filer appears to be under the impression that Eric Pickles and this government have been good for Bournemouth. Really??? On what planet does he live where Cameron and Pickles 'slash and burn' public funding policy is seen as a good thing. The ability of our public sector to deliver high quality public services to our young people, the sick and the elderly for example has been pared back beyond sustainable levels yet he thinks this government has been good for Bournemouth. Cllr Filer needs to get himself out there and speak to the staff delivering these services and their service users a little more I think...[/p][/quote]Under Labour our Council tax doubled and we saw sod all in return, most of the money was wasted on non-jobs and filling the pension black hole. The Council wastes our money hand over fist, (Surf Reef, IMAX etc.). Time to axe the final pension scheme, charge staff to park at the Town Hall and start putting the people of Bournemouth first![/p][/quote]The usual cliché ridden, ignorant, right wing media inspired rubbish being spouted as fact as normal...[/p][/quote]So no counter argument, just name calling![/p][/quote]The trouble is it's a bit like trying to explain string theory to a five year old having a sensible discussion with you. For instance you state that council taxes rose under the 13 years of Labour which is true but ignores the 17 years of massive underinvestment in our local services that preceded it. Council tax is also of course set locally so, in fact, your council tax in Bournemouth actually doubled under the Tory and Lib Dems.[/p][/quote]So insults again father than rational argument, if the Tories doubled tax previously as well as labour how can you possibly argue about the recent cuts ,,,, should be plenty of slack to cut without effecting front line services ,,,,,, Please try to put you case without resorting to insults![/p][/quote]See. What you don't get is that Labour inherited public services (or what was left of them after the Tories had privatised what they could) that needed massive reinvestment to make them fit for purpose. That's why for example schools got repaired or extended, schools could take on classroom assistants to reduce the burden on teachers and help struggling kids, carers were recruited for the elderly, refuse carts that were 10 years beyond their serviceable life were replaced and no longer broke down regularly, capital projects were finally pushed through to infrastructure and a 1000 other examples of the 'sod all' you got to show for your money (what you mean of course is that YOU personally didn't a gold plated wheelie bin delivered in person by the Chief Executive). Enough of a response for you? And I'll stop pointing out how utterly lacking in reasoned thought you are when you stop characterising everyone in the public sector as a "jobsworth", only in it for themselves...[/p][/quote]The reason we have to have these cuts is that labour wrecked the economy, squandered the countries wealth and we are now all paying the price. Remember labour doubled the national debt in little more than 10 years! The same incompetent politicians who caused now blame everyone else.[/p][/quote]No. The economy was doing okay until the WORLDWIDE banking fiasco came home to roost in reality and George Osborne has already borrowed more than Labour did in 13 years. But you've done your usual and moved on to what you think is safer ground by spewing out another Daily Mail inspire cliché fest instead of responding to my examples of where that money was spent.[/p][/quote]Quilted toilet rolls and duck houses,fiddling mortgage payments and expenses etc for the flat snouted robbing MP's. That's just what was found out. BIGTONE
  • Score: 0

1:09pm Tue 24 Jun 14

Dibbles2 says...

Why do taxis need to park in bus stops anyway? if your catching a bus your catching a bus not a taxi?

As for parking outside of schools. I don't care who or what they are they should not be parking on the zig zags end of! The zig zags are there for a reason and at my childs school they are a huge hazard.
Why do taxis need to park in bus stops anyway? if your catching a bus your catching a bus not a taxi? As for parking outside of schools. I don't care who or what they are they should not be parking on the zig zags end of! The zig zags are there for a reason and at my childs school they are a huge hazard. Dibbles2
  • Score: 0

2:33pm Tue 24 Jun 14

davecook says...

Minty Fresh wrote:
NickTheGreekinBmth wrote:
I know i'l be in the minority, but I really don't get the problem with them. Yellow lines are there for a reason, to keep traffic flowing and stop people parking where its dangerous, on bends etc.. Because people are basically selfish and lazy and will get away with blocking the road / getting in the way of traffic flow if it means they don't have to walk for 5 minutes to pop to a shop or something like that. If you risk it by parking on them you know your risking a ticket. just park where your allowed to and you wont get a fine, its not that difficult to do in my mind.
Utter rubbish. Double yellow lines have ALWAYS been in place in dangerous locations, now they're slapped all over the place to force people to pay to park. Take Bourne Avenue near the Town Hall for example. You used to be able to park there for free and walk a relatively short way into the town centre. Now it's lined with parking meters. No change to traffic flow, danger or anything else. Just the greedy Council shafting locals and visitors alike for a few extra quid.
Yellow lines were introduced as a result of the 1960 Road Traffic Act, so they have been around in some form for 54 years, that's not "always", as you wrongfully state. I do agree with the rest of what you have said. Basically, the spread has got to the point where it is getting more and more difficult for some people to legally carry out trades in town, so no wonder many people now go shopping out of town. It is not superstores that killed off the High Street, it's lazy money grabbing councils. Might as well make everything illegal, and then fine everybody all the time for breaking the law.
[quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]NickTheGreekinBmth[/bold] wrote: I know i'l be in the minority, but I really don't get the problem with them. Yellow lines are there for a reason, to keep traffic flowing and stop people parking where its dangerous, on bends etc.. Because people are basically selfish and lazy and will get away with blocking the road / getting in the way of traffic flow if it means they don't have to walk for 5 minutes to pop to a shop or something like that. If you risk it by parking on them you know your risking a ticket. just park where your allowed to and you wont get a fine, its not that difficult to do in my mind.[/p][/quote]Utter rubbish. Double yellow lines have ALWAYS been in place in dangerous locations, now they're slapped all over the place to force people to pay to park. Take Bourne Avenue near the Town Hall for example. You used to be able to park there for free and walk a relatively short way into the town centre. Now it's lined with parking meters. No change to traffic flow, danger or anything else. Just the greedy Council shafting locals and visitors alike for a few extra quid.[/p][/quote]Yellow lines were introduced as a result of the 1960 Road Traffic Act, so they have been around in some form for 54 years, that's not "always", as you wrongfully state. I do agree with the rest of what you have said. Basically, the spread has got to the point where it is getting more and more difficult for some people to legally carry out trades in town, so no wonder many people now go shopping out of town. It is not superstores that killed off the High Street, it's lazy money grabbing councils. Might as well make everything illegal, and then fine everybody all the time for breaking the law. davecook
  • Score: 0

11:22pm Tue 24 Jun 14

Minty Fresh says...

Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Minty Fresh wrote:
These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.
Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.
Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.
No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect!
You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.
Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.
Prat. Nuff said.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Minty Fresh[/bold] wrote: These disgusting money making contraptions should never have been allowed onto the road in the first place. At every opportunity the authorities try to make money from the soft target motorist and I'm delighted we will soon see an end to the way they have been misused. Of course, there are some who say if you don't park illegally you won't get fined. Fair enough, but those who say that are totally missing the point. Councils have deliberately slapped double yellow lines just about everywhere anyone needs to get to! Businesses in many parts of Bournemouth and Poole, especially the town centres, are suffering because those who would use them are not bothering because they can't park for free anywhere within walking distance. No wonder Castlepoint is so busy. Wise up Councils. You're killing the town centres.[/p][/quote]Deary me. Listen to yourself why don't you? This conspiracy theory that there is a room somewhere where council staff sit around with a big map trying to work out the best place to raise money out of double yellow lines is up there with the best of the crackpot ideas. There's a lot more cars on the roads than there used to be therefore there's a lot more traffic flow to manage through restricting parking at pinch points, etc. Nothing whatsoever to do with raising money which remember can only be reinvested back into road safety.[/p][/quote]Are you listening to YOURSELF? If you seriously think for one minute that your argument has one shred of credibility then I would advise you to seek out your nearest mental health clinic ok. Slapping double yellow lines all over the place and/or parking meters has nothing to do with traffic flow and everything to do with revenue generation. If you can't see what the Council's been doing for years then you need an optician too.[/p][/quote]No you and the voices in your head are 100% right. I was forgetting about that bunker at the Town Hall with all those £ signs stuck in that map and the real time read outs of the fines sorry revenue generated that day. If listen carefully sometimes you can here the cheering and champagne corks popping on a Bank Holiday. That's a far more likely explanation than mine that there's just a lot more traffic to manage these says and people are less considerate about where they park. Fair play to them in keeping their sneeky plans out of the press and any official documents. That must have taken some doing I expect![/p][/quote]You sir are a complete buffoon. If you can't see that the Council have actively pursued the motorist for profit on an increasing basis in recent years there's something wrong with you.[/p][/quote]Good use of the insult buffoon sir I salute you however you haven't really explained how this is all supposed to be organised without it once being committed to any form of paper trail, official decision, councillor scrutiny, whistleblowing or just a simple press FOI Act request? In every local authority in the UK? Or is it more likely that councils have just incorporated technology and got more efficient at finding people who are after all breaking the law? I'll leave you to ponder but you might find it easier if you take off your tin foil helmet...they're not really all that interested in your ramblings.[/p][/quote]Prat. Nuff said. Minty Fresh
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree