UPDATE: Travellers access private road and pitch up on clifftop behind BIC

UPDATE: Travellers access private road and pitch up on clifftop behind BIC

Travellers gain access to private road and pitch up on clifftop behind BIC

Travellers gain access to private road and pitch up on clifftop behind BIC

First published in News
Last updated

AS holiday sites go, there are worse locations.

Three motor homes belonging to Irish travellers have made camp on the clifftop right behind the Bournemouth International Centre.

They gained access to the private road because of an insecure barrier.

One of the travellers, enjoying the morning sunshine overlooking the beach and pier said: “We are over from Ireland for a few days on our holiday.

“It’s a lovely spot here and we are not causing a problem to anyone.

“We’ll probably stay until the weekend and then head off to Torquay and Paignton.”

He added: “The sunset was very nice here last night.”

A spokesman for Bournemouth Borough Council said: “Our council officers are aware of the recent unauthorised encampment on the West Slope behind the BIC. They are doing all they can, taking the necessary legal action to move them on as soon as possible.

“A needs assessment has been carried out and in the meantime, our council officers are visiting the site on a regular basis to monitor the situation.”

Security guards were put in place.

After a lengthy process to try and identify a suitable location for a travellers’ site within Bournemouth, the council has now ruled out this possibility and has instead decided to deter travellers by defending its public open spaces.

In response to a recent Freedom of Information request, the council revealed it paid £33,000 to Insight Security in 2013/14 to bolster defences at Kings Park.

Similar security measures are put in place at Pelhams Park and other potentially vulnerable locations as and when needed.

Comments (140)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:27am Fri 13 Jun 14

whataboutthat says...

Cue fuming...
Cue fuming... whataboutthat
  • Score: 32

9:30am Fri 13 Jun 14

boardsandphotos says...

So you can call them travellers if you like but they are essentially just holiday makers who have decided to park where they like.

Come on now Bournemouth Council, move them on please it's not a great advert for our fantastic beach town is it. Why should others bother to pay?
So you can call them travellers if you like but they are essentially just holiday makers who have decided to park where they like. Come on now Bournemouth Council, move them on please it's not a great advert for our fantastic beach town is it. Why should others bother to pay? boardsandphotos
  • Score: 210

9:31am Fri 13 Jun 14

boardsandphotos says...

.....and what does "gained access" actually mean? Is there a gate and was it locked?
.....and what does "gained access" actually mean? Is there a gate and was it locked? boardsandphotos
  • Score: 92

9:38am Fri 13 Jun 14

billy bumble says...

What interests me is how UKIP , when they gain control of Christchurch Council ( and they certainly will next year ) , pursue this particular agenda

btw I notice that the Echo still have not published the local ( as distinct from the electoral region ) European vote count results although it is freely available - they make interesting reading
What interests me is how UKIP , when they gain control of Christchurch Council ( and they certainly will next year ) , pursue this particular agenda btw I notice that the Echo still have not published the local ( as distinct from the electoral region ) European vote count results although it is freely available - they make interesting reading billy bumble
  • Score: 16

9:39am Fri 13 Jun 14

nobull says...

They are taking the urine!
They are taking the urine! nobull
  • Score: 53

9:48am Fri 13 Jun 14

muscliffman says...

So who precisely says these people are 'ethnic Irish Travellers' and not just freeloading holidaymakers who happen to be from the Republic (unusually on this occasion the van number plate pictured really is Irish!) taking the mickey out of the rest of us - and especially our completely hapless Authorities.

An overhaul of the law in this matter is beyond overdue.
So who precisely says these people are 'ethnic Irish Travellers' and not just freeloading holidaymakers who happen to be from the Republic (unusually on this occasion the van number plate pictured really is Irish!) taking the mickey out of the rest of us - and especially our completely hapless Authorities. An overhaul of the law in this matter is beyond overdue. muscliffman
  • Score: 141

9:51am Fri 13 Jun 14

iseestupidpeople says...

So let me get this right. If we buy ourselves a big motorhome/caravan, put on an Irish accent and call ourselves 'gypsies' we are allowed to park anywhere?

Cool


*off to practise Irish accent*
So let me get this right. If we buy ourselves a big motorhome/caravan, put on an Irish accent and call ourselves 'gypsies' we are allowed to park anywhere? Cool *off to practise Irish accent* iseestupidpeople
  • Score: -23

10:07am Fri 13 Jun 14

Pawnstrar says...

If they are over from Ireland on holiday, then they should be clamped until they pay several hundred pounds in fees. They are not travellers, just freeloaders taking the p*$$
If they are over from Ireland on holiday, then they should be clamped until they pay several hundred pounds in fees. They are not travellers, just freeloaders taking the p*$$ Pawnstrar
  • Score: 157

10:09am Fri 13 Jun 14

High Treason says...

I do not care if they are ethnic Irish Travellers, just a load of spongers and all down to Blair and his mates at the EU and the human rights act. With all the other problems in the UK, housing shortage, weak justice, immigration with an overloaded NHS it is only a matter of time before we end up with civil unrest.
I do not care if they are ethnic Irish Travellers, just a load of spongers and all down to Blair and his mates at the EU and the human rights act. With all the other problems in the UK, housing shortage, weak justice, immigration with an overloaded NHS it is only a matter of time before we end up with civil unrest. High Treason
  • Score: 105

10:15am Fri 13 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

Encampment my 'farce'. This is simply illegal parking! I think a few of the scruffiness council trucks should turn up for routine hill start and three point turn training. It is important that council employees know how to safely drive council vehicles of all types.

If the council doesn't show the ability to act this will become more frequent and serious.
Encampment my 'farce'. This is simply illegal parking! I think a few of the scruffiness council trucks should turn up for routine hill start and three point turn training. It is important that council employees know how to safely drive council vehicles of all types. If the council doesn't show the ability to act this will become more frequent and serious. PokesdownMark
  • Score: 105

10:18am Fri 13 Jun 14

ben111 says...

I dont really let stories like this anger me in any way. Yes i pay my taxes etc etc , yes we cn all complain. the bottom line is they are beating the system and just laughing at the rest of us all, My question beeing , who are the mugs!
I dont really let stories like this anger me in any way. Yes i pay my taxes etc etc , yes we cn all complain. the bottom line is they are beating the system and just laughing at the rest of us all, My question beeing , who are the mugs! ben111
  • Score: 94

10:18am Fri 13 Jun 14

Controversial But True says...

I'll try and be a little compassionate, show empathy and even sympathy to this group of people - but I just can't!!

SCUM!!!!!
I'll try and be a little compassionate, show empathy and even sympathy to this group of people - but I just can't!! SCUM!!!!! Controversial But True
  • Score: 73

10:31am Fri 13 Jun 14

nobbythesheep says...

They will be on the phone to their mates.... I give it a day before we see another 5 caravans. there is a simple solution... they are parked on a cliff top, bulldozer anyone?
They will be on the phone to their mates.... I give it a day before we see another 5 caravans. there is a simple solution... they are parked on a cliff top, bulldozer anyone? nobbythesheep
  • Score: 69

10:37am Fri 13 Jun 14

pac31 says...

Well i say block of the walk way furher up pass the gate and send in a JCB and a jack hammer.Start to dig the path up add a nice smokey gen on top and make them move off due to the noise and dirty smoke.
Well i say block of the walk way furher up pass the gate and send in a JCB and a jack hammer.Start to dig the path up add a nice smokey gen on top and make them move off due to the noise and dirty smoke. pac31
  • Score: 62

10:38am Fri 13 Jun 14

Lord Spring says...

Conveniently close to the lamp post is that a hook up point, if it is they taking more than the Michael
Conveniently close to the lamp post is that a hook up point, if it is they taking more than the Michael Lord Spring
  • Score: 63

10:39am Fri 13 Jun 14

folkprotector says...

What exactly are the parking regulations at that location? Is camping disallowed?
If the regulations say No Parking then surely the regulations need to be upheld.
Isn't it as simple as that?

I invite anyone in authority and with the relevant knowledge to respond with a definitive answer, anonymously if you want.
What exactly are the parking regulations at that location? Is camping disallowed? If the regulations say No Parking then surely the regulations need to be upheld. Isn't it as simple as that? I invite anyone in authority and with the relevant knowledge to respond with a definitive answer, anonymously if you want. folkprotector
  • Score: 75

10:54am Fri 13 Jun 14

Orb says...

"Not doing any harm" what's the betting there's a shed-load of litter and human waste left behind upon their departure.

Move them on immediately - as previously mentioned there's no overnight camping allowed in these areas. Are they breaching any other parking regs?
"Not doing any harm" what's the betting there's a shed-load of litter and human waste left behind upon their departure. Move them on immediately - as previously mentioned there's no overnight camping allowed in these areas. Are they breaching any other parking regs? Orb
  • Score: 52

11:06am Fri 13 Jun 14

boyerboy says...

Surely not Travellers.....in motor homes ? Where are the skew lads etc etc ? All these"people" need is another venue then truly they will be Pair o sites
Surely not Travellers.....in motor homes ? Where are the skew lads etc etc ? All these"people" need is another venue then truly they will be Pair o sites boyerboy
  • Score: 33

11:08am Fri 13 Jun 14

The Liberal says...

Somebody better warn Torquay and Paignton that theses freeloaders are on the way!
Somebody better warn Torquay and Paignton that theses freeloaders are on the way! The Liberal
  • Score: 45

11:09am Fri 13 Jun 14

The Liberal says...

Seriously, if Bournemouth council allow these people to camp there without any penalty, it surely sets a legal precedent for anyone else (no matter what their ethnic background) to do the same?
Seriously, if Bournemouth council allow these people to camp there without any penalty, it surely sets a legal precedent for anyone else (no matter what their ethnic background) to do the same? The Liberal
  • Score: 81

11:14am Fri 13 Jun 14

TheDistrict says...

Travellers, my backside, and Bournemouth Council must know this, and have the right to move them on immediately. They have admitted they are from Ireland and on holiday. Get rid of them.

They are probably a couple of the convoy of Irish Mobile Homes traveller down the road from Cherbourg and St. Malo on the 31st May. 48 of them in total heading south for their "holidays". I suspect that these "holiday makers" are part of that group returning via Poole, ready for their south coast raid on free locations.

I think I will cancel my next France holiday, and park up on the cliff tops of Bournemouth, maybe during the Air Show. What is the betting I will be dragged off with immediate effect.

How can the Echo say no racialist comments, when we are the one who are being treated in that why, not being able to do what they bummers do.
Travellers, my backside, and Bournemouth Council must know this, and have the right to move them on immediately. They have admitted they are from Ireland and on holiday. Get rid of them. They are probably a couple of the convoy of Irish Mobile Homes traveller down the road from Cherbourg and St. Malo on the 31st May. 48 of them in total heading south for their "holidays". I suspect that these "holiday makers" are part of that group returning via Poole, ready for their south coast raid on free locations. I think I will cancel my next France holiday, and park up on the cliff tops of Bournemouth, maybe during the Air Show. What is the betting I will be dragged off with immediate effect. How can the Echo say no racialist comments, when we are the one who are being treated in that why, not being able to do what they bummers do. TheDistrict
  • Score: 85

11:17am Fri 13 Jun 14

TheDistrict says...

The Liberal wrote:
Somebody better warn Torquay and Paignton that theses freeloaders are on the way!
Good idea................
........
[quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: Somebody better warn Torquay and Paignton that theses freeloaders are on the way![/p][/quote]Good idea................ ........ TheDistrict
  • Score: 18

11:20am Fri 13 Jun 14

dorsettech says...

"not causing any harm" Well in that case I'll be popping down later with my Winnie and expect to be left alone except for an Echo reporter with a camera
"not causing any harm" Well in that case I'll be popping down later with my Winnie and expect to be left alone except for an Echo reporter with a camera dorsettech
  • Score: 46

11:25am Fri 13 Jun 14

susi.m says...

Are their vehicles taxed and insured?
Bet the police haven't even bothered to check.
One rule for us and another for the freeloaders.
The tax paying public have had enough.
Are their vehicles taxed and insured? Bet the police haven't even bothered to check. One rule for us and another for the freeloaders. The tax paying public have had enough. susi.m
  • Score: 57

11:29am Fri 13 Jun 14

Carolyn43 says...

Can anyone tell me the difference between an Irish traveller on holiday in a huge motor home and an English engineer on holiday on a huge motor home? That is apart from the Irish traveller not getting clamped, charged for parking, being allowed to stay overnight, etc, while treatment of the English engineer will be the exact opposite.
Can anyone tell me the difference between an Irish traveller on holiday in a huge motor home and an English engineer on holiday on a huge motor home? That is apart from the Irish traveller not getting clamped, charged for parking, being allowed to stay overnight, etc, while treatment of the English engineer will be the exact opposite. Carolyn43
  • Score: 64

11:40am Fri 13 Jun 14

NickTheGreekinBmth says...

PokesdownMark wrote:
Encampment my 'farce'. This is simply illegal parking! I think a few of the scruffiness council trucks should turn up for routine hill start and three point turn training. It is important that council employees know how to safely drive council vehicles of all types.

If the council doesn't show the ability to act this will become more frequent and serious.
Bmth council usually seems more on the ball than most around here, with security, lock down and all sorts to make these intruders feel as unwelcome as possible. I hope that they are applying the same pressure behind the scenes in this case, they probably just arent allowed to say so because of the PC brigade.
[quote][p][bold]PokesdownMark[/bold] wrote: Encampment my 'farce'. This is simply illegal parking! I think a few of the scruffiness council trucks should turn up for routine hill start and three point turn training. It is important that council employees know how to safely drive council vehicles of all types. If the council doesn't show the ability to act this will become more frequent and serious.[/p][/quote]Bmth council usually seems more on the ball than most around here, with security, lock down and all sorts to make these intruders feel as unwelcome as possible. I hope that they are applying the same pressure behind the scenes in this case, they probably just arent allowed to say so because of the PC brigade. NickTheGreekinBmth
  • Score: 16

11:58am Fri 13 Jun 14

afcb-mark says...

Block it off whilst they are there. The thought of not being able to get out to meet the other free loaders in Torquay might be enough to shift them. It's about time the council started playing them at their own game and block them in to any site they invade.
Block it off whilst they are there. The thought of not being able to get out to meet the other free loaders in Torquay might be enough to shift them. It's about time the council started playing them at their own game and block them in to any site they invade. afcb-mark
  • Score: 49

12:04pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Bob49 says...

High Treason wrote:
I do not care if they are ethnic Irish Travellers, just a load of spongers and all down to Blair and his mates at the EU and the human rights act. With all the other problems in the UK, housing shortage, weak justice, immigration with an overloaded NHS it is only a matter of time before we end up with civil unrest.
oh dear

whereas in reality this is due to a ruling made in an ENGLISH court

any wonder these folk know they can get away with this kind of stuff when there is this level of ignorance

however, can the council tell us what checks have been made to verify these people are genuine 'Traveller's

and will the Daily Echo ask the council ?
[quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: I do not care if they are ethnic Irish Travellers, just a load of spongers and all down to Blair and his mates at the EU and the human rights act. With all the other problems in the UK, housing shortage, weak justice, immigration with an overloaded NHS it is only a matter of time before we end up with civil unrest.[/p][/quote]oh dear whereas in reality this is due to a ruling made in an ENGLISH court any wonder these folk know they can get away with this kind of stuff when there is this level of ignorance however, can the council tell us what checks have been made to verify these people are genuine 'Traveller's and will the Daily Echo ask the council ? Bob49
  • Score: 26

12:07pm Fri 13 Jun 14

afcb-mark says...

Hey ECHO. Every time I open your sports section a message comes up on my computer saying a virus has just been blocked. It doesn't happen on any other sites I visit so can you check it out pleases.
Hey ECHO. Every time I open your sports section a message comes up on my computer saying a virus has just been blocked. It doesn't happen on any other sites I visit so can you check it out pleases. afcb-mark
  • Score: 6

12:20pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Michael French says...

I really like that people live in vans and drive around free as birds, there are plenty of people that are doing this now i have a few friends not labelled as 'travellers'... . These guys are in nice mobile vans like any other holiday maker. I have just travelled europe in my van and it is so much better set up for vans to park up. One great site you paid 8 euros a night to be in a secure car park with an electric barrier and basic toilet facilities... most other places you could just park up for free in service stations, car parks etc... i think there need to be designated places, i really think Bournemouth needs something like this... maybe on the east cliff car park near Boscombe gardens (near where i live)... :) That way vans and cars can be monitored, i know a polish couple with two dogs who lived in a volvo on the east cliff for a fair while... they were great :) Live and let live i say :)
I really like that people live in vans and drive around free as birds, there are plenty of people that are doing this now i have a few friends not labelled as 'travellers'... . These guys are in nice mobile vans like any other holiday maker. I have just travelled europe in my van and it is so much better set up for vans to park up. One great site you paid 8 euros a night to be in a secure car park with an electric barrier and basic toilet facilities... most other places you could just park up for free in service stations, car parks etc... i think there need to be designated places, i really think Bournemouth needs something like this... maybe on the east cliff car park near Boscombe gardens (near where i live)... :) That way vans and cars can be monitored, i know a polish couple with two dogs who lived in a volvo on the east cliff for a fair while... they were great :) Live and let live i say :) Michael French
  • Score: -52

12:26pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Minty Fresh says...

Time for these free loading misfits to be forced to abide by the same laws the rest of us have to. As such, when is this joke of a paper and it's totally anonymous Editor actually going to start a high profile campaign that backs what us locals - YOUR readers - want? To lobby the local MP's, Council, Councillors etc for a law change that stops travellers being treated differently from the rest of us. This is not being racist. We are just sick and tired of having to pay to clear up after these undesirables and them being exempt from any form of punishment. I want the Police and local authorities to have the power to fine them, impound their vehicles and arrest them if necessary. So come on Echo, get behind the people who buy your paper for a change! Enough is enough ok!
Time for these free loading misfits to be forced to abide by the same laws the rest of us have to. As such, when is this joke of a paper and it's totally anonymous Editor actually going to start a high profile campaign that backs what us locals - YOUR readers - want? To lobby the local MP's, Council, Councillors etc for a law change that stops travellers being treated differently from the rest of us. This is not being racist. We are just sick and tired of having to pay to clear up after these undesirables and them being exempt from any form of punishment. I want the Police and local authorities to have the power to fine them, impound their vehicles and arrest them if necessary. So come on Echo, get behind the people who buy your paper for a change! Enough is enough ok! Minty Fresh
  • Score: 29

12:36pm Fri 13 Jun 14

topofall says...

What a joke, 50 grand plus motor homes and they just run rings the idiot council that sends employees to check on their needs. Just hitching up my caravan to go down and join them to enjoy the sun and views and get my free parking!
What a joke, 50 grand plus motor homes and they just run rings the idiot council that sends employees to check on their needs. Just hitching up my caravan to go down and join them to enjoy the sun and views and get my free parking! topofall
  • Score: 33

12:43pm Fri 13 Jun 14

truthhurts!! says...

Couldn't of picked a better spot myself amazing views :) hope the council are ready to clear there s**t up when they decide to leave??
Couldn't of picked a better spot myself amazing views :) hope the council are ready to clear there s**t up when they decide to leave?? truthhurts!!
  • Score: 21

12:57pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

iseestupidpeople wrote:
So let me get this right. If we buy ourselves a big motorhome/caravan, put on an Irish accent and call ourselves 'gypsies' we are allowed to park anywhere?

Cool


*off to practise Irish accent*
To be sure..........
[quote][p][bold]iseestupidpeople[/bold] wrote: So let me get this right. If we buy ourselves a big motorhome/caravan, put on an Irish accent and call ourselves 'gypsies' we are allowed to park anywhere? Cool *off to practise Irish accent*[/p][/quote]To be sure.......... Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: 19

12:58pm Fri 13 Jun 14

M0Z says...

The law needs changing. We should all be equal. It’s simply not right that one set of people has been given a status that puts them beyond the reach of laws that should, in my view, be applied equally to everyone. The legislation was no doubt well intentioned, but goes way beyond what’s needed for anti-discrimination. With such high levels of ethnic diversity in the UK today, this lot don’t particularly stand out as a special case in need of so many legal exemptions. The police ought to have powers to order any illegally parked vehicles to move instantly – not just mine or yours!!
The law needs changing. We should all be equal. It’s simply not right that one set of people has been given a status that puts them beyond the reach of laws that should, in my view, be applied equally to everyone. The legislation was no doubt well intentioned, but goes way beyond what’s needed for anti-discrimination. With such high levels of ethnic diversity in the UK today, this lot don’t particularly stand out as a special case in need of so many legal exemptions. The police ought to have powers to order any illegally parked vehicles to move instantly – not just mine or yours!! M0Z
  • Score: 28

1:00pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
Can anyone tell me the difference between an Irish traveller on holiday in a huge motor home and an English engineer on holiday on a huge motor home? That is apart from the Irish traveller not getting clamped, charged for parking, being allowed to stay overnight, etc, while treatment of the English engineer will be the exact opposite.
Yes, the difference is one chooses to abide by the law and the other doesn't.

The problem is not with the laws, but with the weak, spineless, vote-grabbing, but unfortunately, elected chicken-****s that run our towns.....
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: Can anyone tell me the difference between an Irish traveller on holiday in a huge motor home and an English engineer on holiday on a huge motor home? That is apart from the Irish traveller not getting clamped, charged for parking, being allowed to stay overnight, etc, while treatment of the English engineer will be the exact opposite.[/p][/quote]Yes, the difference is one chooses to abide by the law and the other doesn't. The problem is not with the laws, but with the weak, spineless, vote-grabbing, but unfortunately, elected chicken-****s that run our towns..... Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: 27

1:02pm Fri 13 Jun 14

60plus says...

They are not genuine travellers they don't have motor homes .
They are not genuine travellers they don't have motor homes . 60plus
  • Score: 3

1:18pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth says...

Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-)

The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same.

(Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.)

So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??"

Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen.

UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year.

I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter.

But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though!
Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though! Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth
  • Score: 42

1:23pm Fri 13 Jun 14

pooleresident60 says...

We were walking along there last night, and I thought they were travellers, lovely new camper vans, one with a personalised number plate the others were Irish plates. They had their washing hanging out and were enjoying sitting out around their tables enjoying the view. As we walked up we checked the access gates which were firmly locked with large padlocks, so was someone local lax on locking it behind them or do they have skeleton/master keys/picks?
I don't understand why this ethnic minority are segregated by our government, when other ethnic minorities have to follow our transport regulations. They would be welcome to come on holiday to Dorset but to use the many camping sites that are already in situ. Why do we have to provide a segregated camp for them - surely this would violate their human rights?
We were walking along there last night, and I thought they were travellers, lovely new camper vans, one with a personalised number plate the others were Irish plates. They had their washing hanging out and were enjoying sitting out around their tables enjoying the view. As we walked up we checked the access gates which were firmly locked with large padlocks, so was someone local lax on locking it behind them or do they have skeleton/master keys/picks? I don't understand why this ethnic minority are segregated by our government, when other ethnic minorities have to follow our transport regulations. They would be welcome to come on holiday to Dorset but to use the many camping sites that are already in situ. Why do we have to provide a segregated camp for them - surely this would violate their human rights? pooleresident60
  • Score: 28

1:25pm Fri 13 Jun 14

BarrHumbug says...

What a joke. The worst thing is we will have an even greater traveller problem this year. Now that Dorset County Council have set up a site at Piddlehinton they have the powers to move them on straight away, whereas if the travellers just continue on to Bournemouth and Poole the council have no powers as they have not provided a site for them so where do you think they are all going to end up this year, in a field behind security fencing like some sort of concentration camp or on the seafront?
What a joke. The worst thing is we will have an even greater traveller problem this year. Now that Dorset County Council have set up a site at Piddlehinton they have the powers to move them on straight away, whereas if the travellers just continue on to Bournemouth and Poole the council have no powers as they have not provided a site for them so where do you think they are all going to end up this year, in a field behind security fencing like some sort of concentration camp or on the seafront? BarrHumbug
  • Score: 14

1:33pm Fri 13 Jun 14

pooleresident60 says...

pac31 wrote:
Well i say block of the walk way furher up pass the gate and send in a JCB and a jack hammer.Start to dig the path up add a nice smokey gen on top and make them move off due to the noise and dirty smoke.
As we walked up that access road we did notice that it could do with repairing so better to spend money that would cause them to move on 'peacefully' and repair the road - two birds one stone!
[quote][p][bold]pac31[/bold] wrote: Well i say block of the walk way furher up pass the gate and send in a JCB and a jack hammer.Start to dig the path up add a nice smokey gen on top and make them move off due to the noise and dirty smoke.[/p][/quote]As we walked up that access road we did notice that it could do with repairing so better to spend money that would cause them to move on 'peacefully' and repair the road - two birds one stone! pooleresident60
  • Score: 5

1:34pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Mudefordman says...

I wish I could afford to run a motorhome like the ones in the picture, being on a state pension now, I may have to give up running my motor car
I wish I could afford to run a motorhome like the ones in the picture, being on a state pension now, I may have to give up running my motor car Mudefordman
  • Score: 23

1:42pm Fri 13 Jun 14

smhinto says...

Yes and if a a member of Joe Public parked his vehicles there I wonder how long it would take before the Police and Council would be on your back. However, the 'Diddley's' are just left alone for a prolonged period.
.
I wonder why !!
Yes and if a a member of Joe Public parked his vehicles there I wonder how long it would take before the Police and Council would be on your back. However, the 'Diddley's' are just left alone for a prolonged period. . I wonder why !! smhinto
  • Score: 21

1:48pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Wackerone says...

If any or all of the moaners on here had the guts, then they would take their caravans, motor homes or even cars down to join the free loaders. Then, with the right legal team, you could all test the equality and human rights laws that exist in this country. Unless you all want to stand up and be counted, stop moaning. Personally, I'm just fed up with the same old drivel every time these events happen. BAND TOGETHER, STRENGTH IN UNITY.
If any or all of the moaners on here had the guts, then they would take their caravans, motor homes or even cars down to join the free loaders. Then, with the right legal team, you could all test the equality and human rights laws that exist in this country. Unless you all want to stand up and be counted, stop moaning. Personally, I'm just fed up with the same old drivel every time these events happen. BAND TOGETHER, STRENGTH IN UNITY. Wackerone
  • Score: 20

1:52pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Bob49 says...

"Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-)

The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. "

Now aside from why the government seems unwilling to change what is only case law, why are we not told what checks are made to ensure that these folk are genuine Travellers within the remit of that ruling.

they should be turfed out IMMEDIATEDLY and the onus put on them to prove that firstly they are Travellers, and secondly that there is not adequate space elsewhere.

Sadly the council are NEVER put on the spot because of the number of ill informed numpties who keep bleating out about the EU. Get your head out of the Daily Mail and check what CAN be done to stop this gross misuse of public land. Maybe then we might see some action.


And there we have it - yet continously we get these nonsensical bleats about the EU and human rights.

It is a ruling by an English judge in an Eenglish court !
"Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. " Now aside from why the government seems unwilling to change what is only case law, why are we not told what checks are made to ensure that these folk are genuine Travellers within the remit of that ruling. they should be turfed out IMMEDIATEDLY and the onus put on them to prove that firstly they are Travellers, and secondly that there is not adequate space elsewhere. Sadly the council are NEVER put on the spot because of the number of ill informed numpties who keep bleating out about the EU. Get your head out of the Daily Mail and check what CAN be done to stop this gross misuse of public land. Maybe then we might see some action. And there we have it - yet continously we get these nonsensical bleats about the EU and human rights. It is a ruling by an English judge in an Eenglish court ! Bob49
  • Score: 9

1:58pm Fri 13 Jun 14

DemonDiva says...

boardsandphotos wrote:
So you can call them travellers if you like but they are essentially just holiday makers who have decided to park where they like.

Come on now Bournemouth Council, move them on please it's not a great advert for our fantastic beach town is it. Why should others bother to pay?
I have genuinely never understood why they aren't moved on immediately when they park up wherever they fancy. If I had parked my car there, I'm **** sure it would have been moved on within 20 mins!
[quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: So you can call them travellers if you like but they are essentially just holiday makers who have decided to park where they like. Come on now Bournemouth Council, move them on please it's not a great advert for our fantastic beach town is it. Why should others bother to pay?[/p][/quote]I have genuinely never understood why they aren't moved on immediately when they park up wherever they fancy. If I had parked my car there, I'm **** sure it would have been moved on within 20 mins! DemonDiva
  • Score: 26

1:59pm Fri 13 Jun 14

pauls55 says...

Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth wrote:
Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though!
Good God I think I'm going to faint, a UKIP spokesman who is honest for a change and who, on this particular point, is fair and reasonable (you still wont ever get my vote though,sorry!)
[quote][p][bold]Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth[/bold] wrote: Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though![/p][/quote]Good God I think I'm going to faint, a UKIP spokesman who is honest for a change and who, on this particular point, is fair and reasonable (you still wont ever get my vote though,sorry!) pauls55
  • Score: -9

2:07pm Fri 13 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

To be fair to the council, this isn't over until it is over. I don't fancy their changes of getting prompt service when they need to leave and they will need to ask. I think they are going to find it very difficult. He who laughs last and all that.
To be fair to the council, this isn't over until it is over. I don't fancy their changes of getting prompt service when they need to leave and they will need to ask. I think they are going to find it very difficult. He who laughs last and all that. PokesdownMark
  • Score: 6

2:12pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

So why can't the Council simply go to them and say in 3 hours time this area will be locked for the next 6 months. They can't say the council is restricting their right to travel after giving them the opportunity to do so and they've declined. If they can bend the laws of the land to suit themselves why can't we?
So why can't the Council simply go to them and say in 3 hours time this area will be locked for the next 6 months. They can't say the council is restricting their right to travel after giving them the opportunity to do so and they've declined. If they can bend the laws of the land to suit themselves why can't we? Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: 18

2:15pm Fri 13 Jun 14

PokesdownMark says...

Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth wrote:
Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-)

The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same.

(Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.)

So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??"

Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen.

UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year.

I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter.

But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though!
So how, when presented with a human being, does one determine if they are a real Romany or a pretend Romany? See that's the problem. Making sure wishful thinking can work in practice.

Any thanks, UKIP, for voting against removing the ludicrously expensive mobile/data roaming charges. Well done you. Thanks for that. We all like paying outrageous amounts of money for keeping in touch with loved ones whilst away from home on our holidays. And we don't mind getting lost or straying into dangerous areas because we can't afford to use our phones sat nav maps.
[quote][p][bold]Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth[/bold] wrote: Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though![/p][/quote]So how, when presented with a human being, does one determine if they are a real Romany or a pretend Romany? See that's the problem. Making sure wishful thinking can work in practice. Any thanks, UKIP, for voting against removing the ludicrously expensive mobile/data roaming charges. Well done you. Thanks for that. We all like paying outrageous amounts of money for keeping in touch with loved ones whilst away from home on our holidays. And we don't mind getting lost or straying into dangerous areas because we can't afford to use our phones sat nav maps. PokesdownMark
  • Score: -2

2:40pm Fri 13 Jun 14

BIGTONE says...

Nice motors. £50K+
Room with a view.
Nice motors. £50K+ Room with a view. BIGTONE
  • Score: 12

2:43pm Fri 13 Jun 14

podgie says...

Hello.Hello,Hello to be sure.
Would you no like a cup of tea...
De diddly diddly diddly diddly
Hello.Hello,Hello to be sure. Would you no like a cup of tea... De diddly diddly diddly diddly podgie
  • Score: 1

2:46pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Frogmarch2 says...

nobull wrote:
They are taking the urine!
I was there when they drove in, parked up and placed wedges under their tyres. The gate was wide open to all and sundry to park up next to the BIC.
[quote][p][bold]nobull[/bold] wrote: They are taking the urine![/p][/quote]I was there when they drove in, parked up and placed wedges under their tyres. The gate was wide open to all and sundry to park up next to the BIC. Frogmarch2
  • Score: 12

2:47pm Fri 13 Jun 14

hamworthygirl says...

Much as I agree and sympathise with peoples comments regarding "travellers" they will move on at some point. Unlike a family in a near vicinity to our house, whos garden is a tip and fences are falling down, and despite promises to repair it after 2 years its still the same. They do not work havent done since they moved in about 10 years ago. Have 2 young children so dont pay council house rent or council tax or NI or income tax, have dogs that bark. Sometimes i wonder of thats worse than travellers being parked for a week.
Much as I agree and sympathise with peoples comments regarding "travellers" they will move on at some point. Unlike a family in a near vicinity to our house, whos garden is a tip and fences are falling down, and despite promises to repair it after 2 years its still the same. They do not work havent done since they moved in about 10 years ago. Have 2 young children so dont pay council house rent or council tax or NI or income tax, have dogs that bark. Sometimes i wonder of thats worse than travellers being parked for a week. hamworthygirl
  • Score: 30

2:49pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Frogmarch2 says...

boardsandphotos wrote:
.....and what does "gained access" actually mean? Is there a gate and was it locked?
I was there when they drove in, parked up and placed wedges under their tyres. The gate was wide open to all and sundry to park up next to the BIC.
[quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: .....and what does "gained access" actually mean? Is there a gate and was it locked?[/p][/quote]I was there when they drove in, parked up and placed wedges under their tyres. The gate was wide open to all and sundry to park up next to the BIC. Frogmarch2
  • Score: 7

3:19pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Guernsey84 says...

Why all the moaning you morons. Why not let them enjoy the nice views for the weekend, maybe next weekend you'll be just as smart and bag yourselves the prime Sea view free camping spot. If not I will
Why all the moaning you morons. Why not let them enjoy the nice views for the weekend, maybe next weekend you'll be just as smart and bag yourselves the prime Sea view free camping spot. If not I will Guernsey84
  • Score: 8

3:30pm Fri 13 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

Wackerone wrote:
If any or all of the moaners on here had the guts, then they would take their caravans, motor homes or even cars down to join the free loaders. Then, with the right legal team, you could all test the equality and human rights laws that exist in this country. Unless you all want to stand up and be counted, stop moaning. Personally, I'm just fed up with the same old drivel every time these events happen. BAND TOGETHER, STRENGTH IN UNITY.
After you!
[quote][p][bold]Wackerone[/bold] wrote: If any or all of the moaners on here had the guts, then they would take their caravans, motor homes or even cars down to join the free loaders. Then, with the right legal team, you could all test the equality and human rights laws that exist in this country. Unless you all want to stand up and be counted, stop moaning. Personally, I'm just fed up with the same old drivel every time these events happen. BAND TOGETHER, STRENGTH IN UNITY.[/p][/quote]After you! suzigirl
  • Score: 9

3:32pm Fri 13 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

podgie wrote:
Hello.Hello,Hello to be sure. Would you no like a cup of tea... De diddly diddly diddly diddly
Probably Fenians!
[quote][p][bold]podgie[/bold] wrote: Hello.Hello,Hello to be sure. Would you no like a cup of tea... De diddly diddly diddly diddly[/p][/quote]Probably Fenians! suzigirl
  • Score: 3

3:43pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Wackerone says...

suzigirl wrote:
Wackerone wrote:
If any or all of the moaners on here had the guts, then they would take their caravans, motor homes or even cars down to join the free loaders. Then, with the right legal team, you could all test the equality and human rights laws that exist in this country. Unless you all want to stand up and be counted, stop moaning. Personally, I'm just fed up with the same old drivel every time these events happen. BAND TOGETHER, STRENGTH IN UNITY.
After you!
Before you comment on my post suzigirl, you might note that I am not the one moaning and groaning on here. I was just forwarding a suggestion, other than that I don't care as there are more concerns in the world today other than a few Irish residents pitching on the cliffs.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wackerone[/bold] wrote: If any or all of the moaners on here had the guts, then they would take their caravans, motor homes or even cars down to join the free loaders. Then, with the right legal team, you could all test the equality and human rights laws that exist in this country. Unless you all want to stand up and be counted, stop moaning. Personally, I'm just fed up with the same old drivel every time these events happen. BAND TOGETHER, STRENGTH IN UNITY.[/p][/quote]After you![/p][/quote]Before you comment on my post suzigirl, you might note that I am not the one moaning and groaning on here. I was just forwarding a suggestion, other than that I don't care as there are more concerns in the world today other than a few Irish residents pitching on the cliffs. Wackerone
  • Score: 2

3:44pm Fri 13 Jun 14

baxi says...

HOW STUPID CAN THE COUNCIL AND THE POLICE GET ????? I am certain that if I and a friend did the same thing with our campers we would soon be made to move!!!!!!
How are these people allowed to get away with it ??????????
HOW STUPID CAN THE COUNCIL AND THE POLICE GET ????? I am certain that if I and a friend did the same thing with our campers we would soon be made to move!!!!!! How are these people allowed to get away with it ?????????? baxi
  • Score: 11

3:45pm Fri 13 Jun 14

overthehills says...

Some brilliant advertising on this article's webpage:

"Static Caravans For Sale
Superb Range of New & Used Luxury Caravans Starting From Only £7,995"

and "Holiday Home Ownership in Poole"
Some brilliant advertising on this article's webpage: "Static Caravans For Sale Superb Range of New & Used Luxury Caravans Starting From Only £7,995" and "Holiday Home Ownership in Poole" overthehills
  • Score: 8

4:02pm Fri 13 Jun 14

NickTheGreekinBmth says...

BarrHumbug wrote:
What a joke. The worst thing is we will have an even greater traveller problem this year. Now that Dorset County Council have set up a site at Piddlehinton they have the powers to move them on straight away, whereas if the travellers just continue on to Bournemouth and Poole the council have no powers as they have not provided a site for them so where do you think they are all going to end up this year, in a field behind security fencing like some sort of concentration camp or on the seafront?
Who will actually move them on? Ill believe it when I see it!
[quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: What a joke. The worst thing is we will have an even greater traveller problem this year. Now that Dorset County Council have set up a site at Piddlehinton they have the powers to move them on straight away, whereas if the travellers just continue on to Bournemouth and Poole the council have no powers as they have not provided a site for them so where do you think they are all going to end up this year, in a field behind security fencing like some sort of concentration camp or on the seafront?[/p][/quote]Who will actually move them on? Ill believe it when I see it! NickTheGreekinBmth
  • Score: 6

4:30pm Fri 13 Jun 14

suzigirl says...

Wackerone wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Wackerone wrote: If any or all of the moaners on here had the guts, then they would take their caravans, motor homes or even cars down to join the free loaders. Then, with the right legal team, you could all test the equality and human rights laws that exist in this country. Unless you all want to stand up and be counted, stop moaning. Personally, I'm just fed up with the same old drivel every time these events happen. BAND TOGETHER, STRENGTH IN UNITY.
After you!
Before you comment on my post suzigirl, you might note that I am not the one moaning and groaning on here. I was just forwarding a suggestion, other than that I don't care as there are more concerns in the world today other than a few Irish residents pitching on the cliffs.
So why are you commenting?
[quote][p][bold]Wackerone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wackerone[/bold] wrote: If any or all of the moaners on here had the guts, then they would take their caravans, motor homes or even cars down to join the free loaders. Then, with the right legal team, you could all test the equality and human rights laws that exist in this country. Unless you all want to stand up and be counted, stop moaning. Personally, I'm just fed up with the same old drivel every time these events happen. BAND TOGETHER, STRENGTH IN UNITY.[/p][/quote]After you![/p][/quote]Before you comment on my post suzigirl, you might note that I am not the one moaning and groaning on here. I was just forwarding a suggestion, other than that I don't care as there are more concerns in the world today other than a few Irish residents pitching on the cliffs.[/p][/quote]So why are you commenting? suzigirl
  • Score: -5

4:34pm Fri 13 Jun 14

ben111 says...

baxi wrote:
HOW STUPID CAN THE COUNCIL AND THE POLICE GET ????? I am certain that if I and a friend did the same thing with our campers we would soon be made to move!!!!!!
How are these people allowed to get away with it ??????????
They are laughing at us, the law obiding public are the MUGS, I dont blame the so called ravellers, as they are playing the system and winning, we are being made fools of, year in year out paying our taxes and being fined as and when if your little toe is out of line !
[quote][p][bold]baxi[/bold] wrote: HOW STUPID CAN THE COUNCIL AND THE POLICE GET ????? I am certain that if I and a friend did the same thing with our campers we would soon be made to move!!!!!! How are these people allowed to get away with it ??????????[/p][/quote]They are laughing at us, the law obiding public are the MUGS, I dont blame the so called ravellers, as they are playing the system and winning, we are being made fools of, year in year out paying our taxes and being fined as and when if your little toe is out of line ! ben111
  • Score: 7

4:36pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Hawkstone says...

Right I am off to Lake Pier in the motorhome for a couple of nights ......wanna take bets on how long I would last! Strangely enough when I go on holiday I do what every other law abiding holidaymaker does...I PAY.
Right I am off to Lake Pier in the motorhome for a couple of nights ......wanna take bets on how long I would last! Strangely enough when I go on holiday I do what every other law abiding holidaymaker does...I PAY. Hawkstone
  • Score: 11

4:43pm Fri 13 Jun 14

BIGTONE says...

I like the signs on the road near to where they have parked.........
No camping,caravans or overnight stopping. Haaaaaaaa
I like the signs on the road near to where they have parked......... No camping,caravans or overnight stopping. Haaaaaaaa BIGTONE
  • Score: 17

4:52pm Fri 13 Jun 14

hoppy says...

I have said many times,Sun,Sea & Sod all to pay.
In Southern Spain they do not mess around with travelers,if any turn up in their big motor homes on beaches etc.the local Guardia Civil invite them to move on to the nearest legal camping site & if the do not move then they give them a hand !!! just as it should be !! & they certainly do not bother with the welfare of the travelers. It is time that the local council gets a grip & treats the travelers the same as the rest of us.
I have said many times,Sun,Sea & Sod all to pay. In Southern Spain they do not mess around with travelers,if any turn up in their big motor homes on beaches etc.the local Guardia Civil invite them to move on to the nearest legal camping site & if the do not move then they give them a hand !!! just as it should be !! & they certainly do not bother with the welfare of the travelers. It is time that the local council gets a grip & treats the travelers the same as the rest of us. hoppy
  • Score: 18

4:54pm Fri 13 Jun 14

joetheman says...

i say fxxk the echo and their dont say anything to upset this ethnic group,the truth is they are scum who know the councils have not got the bxlls to make a stand and say enough is enough.
i say fxxk the echo and their dont say anything to upset this ethnic group,the truth is they are scum who know the councils have not got the bxlls to make a stand and say enough is enough. joetheman
  • Score: 14

5:09pm Fri 13 Jun 14

PRF says...

This situation really brings the police and local authorities in to disrepute regarding their total inability and unwillingness to sort things out. For goodness sake lets have national government strong guidelines on this topic, which is clearly creating a justifiable public perception that these people are above the law and untouchable ... and they know it.
. It is wrong, and they are taking the mick (no pun intended) out of all of us who play by the rule of UK law... or suffer the consequences.
This situation really brings the police and local authorities in to disrepute regarding their total inability and unwillingness to sort things out. For goodness sake lets have national government strong guidelines on this topic, which is clearly creating a justifiable public perception that these people are above the law and untouchable ... and they know it. . It is wrong, and they are taking the mick (no pun intended) out of all of us who play by the rule of UK law... or suffer the consequences. PRF
  • Score: 10

5:22pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Bambamthe1st says...

Great news..... I need my drive done!
Great news..... I need my drive done! Bambamthe1st
  • Score: 0

5:33pm Fri 13 Jun 14

HRH of Boscombe says...

billy bumble wrote:
What interests me is how UKIP , when they gain control of Christchurch Council ( and they certainly will next year ) , pursue this particular agenda

btw I notice that the Echo still have not published the local ( as distinct from the electoral region ) European vote count results although it is freely available - they make interesting reading
If they win the general election we can start deporting them :)
[quote][p][bold]billy bumble[/bold] wrote: What interests me is how UKIP , when they gain control of Christchurch Council ( and they certainly will next year ) , pursue this particular agenda btw I notice that the Echo still have not published the local ( as distinct from the electoral region ) European vote count results although it is freely available - they make interesting reading[/p][/quote]If they win the general election we can start deporting them :) HRH of Boscombe
  • Score: -5

5:35pm Fri 13 Jun 14

HRH of Boscombe says...

Bob49 wrote:
"Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-)

The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. "

Now aside from why the government seems unwilling to change what is only case law, why are we not told what checks are made to ensure that these folk are genuine Travellers within the remit of that ruling.

they should be turfed out IMMEDIATEDLY and the onus put on them to prove that firstly they are Travellers, and secondly that there is not adequate space elsewhere.

Sadly the council are NEVER put on the spot because of the number of ill informed numpties who keep bleating out about the EU. Get your head out of the Daily Mail and check what CAN be done to stop this gross misuse of public land. Maybe then we might see some action.


And there we have it - yet continously we get these nonsensical bleats about the EU and human rights.

It is a ruling by an English judge in an Eenglish court !
Yes but out of the EU will we be free to deport them?
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: "Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. " Now aside from why the government seems unwilling to change what is only case law, why are we not told what checks are made to ensure that these folk are genuine Travellers within the remit of that ruling. they should be turfed out IMMEDIATEDLY and the onus put on them to prove that firstly they are Travellers, and secondly that there is not adequate space elsewhere. Sadly the council are NEVER put on the spot because of the number of ill informed numpties who keep bleating out about the EU. Get your head out of the Daily Mail and check what CAN be done to stop this gross misuse of public land. Maybe then we might see some action. And there we have it - yet continously we get these nonsensical bleats about the EU and human rights. It is a ruling by an English judge in an Eenglish court ![/p][/quote]Yes but out of the EU will we be free to deport them? HRH of Boscombe
  • Score: -2

6:24pm Fri 13 Jun 14

yvonne33 says...

there are a lot of car club spaces in the borough empty no one can park there perhaps they could stay there
there are a lot of car club spaces in the borough empty no one can park there perhaps they could stay there yvonne33
  • Score: 8

6:26pm Fri 13 Jun 14

boyerboy says...

Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth wrote:
Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-)

The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same.

(Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.)

So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??"

Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen.

UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year.

I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter.

But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though!
You have my vote SUR....by the way do ye need any tarmac or fancy buying me horse?
[quote][p][bold]Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth[/bold] wrote: Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though![/p][/quote]You have my vote SUR....by the way do ye need any tarmac or fancy buying me horse? boyerboy
  • Score: -5

6:34pm Fri 13 Jun 14

beachcomber1 says...

it beggars belief that they can't be moved on! it's part of the BICC, and that area is used by the big artics that deliver and remove stage equipment and etc for exhibitions. what are they supposed to do?
it beggars belief that they can't be moved on! it's part of the BICC, and that area is used by the big artics that deliver and remove stage equipment and etc for exhibitions. what are they supposed to do? beachcomber1
  • Score: 6

6:39pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Baysider says...

Leaving aside the usual ignorant, clichéd, legally farcical comments from the usual windbags, no one has picked up on the point that Bournemouth Council is spending £30,000+ to a private security firm to protect just ONE site. Sorry but that is a clear case of pandering to public opinion as it has not stopped travellers coming or indeed staying resulting in yet more money being spent getting rid of them from supposedly secure sites.

Forget this lock down nonsense we've seen time and again it doesn't work and spend thirty grand on removing their incentive to come to our towns by educating the public NEVER to give them any work.
Leaving aside the usual ignorant, clichéd, legally farcical comments from the usual windbags, no one has picked up on the point that Bournemouth Council is spending £30,000+ to a private security firm to protect just ONE site. Sorry but that is a clear case of pandering to public opinion as it has not stopped travellers coming or indeed staying resulting in yet more money being spent getting rid of them from supposedly secure sites. Forget this lock down nonsense we've seen time and again it doesn't work and spend thirty grand on removing their incentive to come to our towns by educating the public NEVER to give them any work. Baysider
  • Score: -3

6:42pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Jo__Go says...

So at last we have a definition of an Irish Traveller - someone owning a camper van with Irish plates.
Or speaking with an Irish accent

Well that makes it easy then.
So at last we have a definition of an Irish Traveller - someone owning a camper van with Irish plates. Or speaking with an Irish accent Well that makes it easy then. Jo__Go
  • Score: 7

6:44pm Fri 13 Jun 14

duke bingo says...

Hands up who didn't want a permanent transit site but is also now moaning that they are not being moved on.
Hands up who didn't want a permanent transit site but is also now moaning that they are not being moved on. duke bingo
  • Score: 6

6:45pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Bohochic72 says...

iseestupidpeople wrote:
So let me get this right. If we buy ourselves a big motorhome/caravan, put on an Irish accent and call ourselves 'gypsies' we are allowed to park anywhere?

Cool


*off to practise Irish accent*
According to Xena, you'll need to have another two tag along in order for it to be an "official encampment"
[quote][p][bold]iseestupidpeople[/bold] wrote: So let me get this right. If we buy ourselves a big motorhome/caravan, put on an Irish accent and call ourselves 'gypsies' we are allowed to park anywhere? Cool *off to practise Irish accent*[/p][/quote]According to Xena, you'll need to have another two tag along in order for it to be an "official encampment" Bohochic72
  • Score: 1

6:55pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Sir Beachy Head says...

Who cares ?

Not me. Moaning won't shift them, why waste cyber ink doing so.

If you can't see them from your window, then they don't exist.
Who cares ? Not me. Moaning won't shift them, why waste cyber ink doing so. If you can't see them from your window, then they don't exist. Sir Beachy Head
  • Score: -10

7:08pm Fri 13 Jun 14

MrsF82 says...

pooleresident60 wrote:
pac31 wrote:
Well i say block of the walk way furher up pass the gate and send in a JCB and a jack hammer.Start to dig the path up add a nice smokey gen on top and make them move off due to the noise and dirty smoke.
As we walked up that access road we did notice that it could do with repairing so better to spend money that would cause them to move on 'peacefully' and repair the road - two birds one stone!
Maybe they could afford to repair it, if they weren't prioritising this issue ridiculously already and spending a fortune on security for multiple locations. You can't guard everywhere, but you can at least make sure the gates blooming work.
[quote][p][bold]pooleresident60[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pac31[/bold] wrote: Well i say block of the walk way furher up pass the gate and send in a JCB and a jack hammer.Start to dig the path up add a nice smokey gen on top and make them move off due to the noise and dirty smoke.[/p][/quote]As we walked up that access road we did notice that it could do with repairing so better to spend money that would cause them to move on 'peacefully' and repair the road - two birds one stone![/p][/quote]Maybe they could afford to repair it, if they weren't prioritising this issue ridiculously already and spending a fortune on security for multiple locations. You can't guard everywhere, but you can at least make sure the gates blooming work. MrsF82
  • Score: 5

7:12pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Lucky Rich says...

If any one can get me a holiday brochure from them i will be greatfull,,,ive spent a fortune over the years & they don't have views like that .
If any one can get me a holiday brochure from them i will be greatfull,,,ive spent a fortune over the years & they don't have views like that . Lucky Rich
  • Score: 7

7:13pm Fri 13 Jun 14

MrsF82 says...

hamworthygirl wrote:
Much as I agree and sympathise with peoples comments regarding "travellers" they will move on at some point. Unlike a family in a near vicinity to our house, whos garden is a tip and fences are falling down, and despite promises to repair it after 2 years its still the same. They do not work havent done since they moved in about 10 years ago. Have 2 young children so dont pay council house rent or council tax or NI or income tax, have dogs that bark. Sometimes i wonder of thats worse than travellers being parked for a week.
Shh.... The tories and UKIP don't want you thinking things like that, let alone saying them on the internet. The problem is the IMMIGRANTS and the GYPSIES and the EU and the DISABLED... they're causing the downfall of our country! Never mind the truth: that most immigrants work very hard in jobs that are refused by those on JSA, or that less than 0.5% of disability benefit claims are fraudulent, or that the council here is spending a small fortune on guarding specific locations from the threat of travellers but can't be bothered to lock a gate. It's all misdirection, smoke and mirrors and it's mind boggling how many people are falling for it!
[quote][p][bold]hamworthygirl[/bold] wrote: Much as I agree and sympathise with peoples comments regarding "travellers" they will move on at some point. Unlike a family in a near vicinity to our house, whos garden is a tip and fences are falling down, and despite promises to repair it after 2 years its still the same. They do not work havent done since they moved in about 10 years ago. Have 2 young children so dont pay council house rent or council tax or NI or income tax, have dogs that bark. Sometimes i wonder of thats worse than travellers being parked for a week.[/p][/quote]Shh.... The tories and UKIP don't want you thinking things like that, let alone saying them on the internet. The problem is the IMMIGRANTS and the GYPSIES and the EU and the DISABLED... they're causing the downfall of our country! Never mind the truth: that most immigrants work very hard in jobs that are refused by those on JSA, or that less than 0.5% of disability benefit claims are fraudulent, or that the council here is spending a small fortune on guarding specific locations from the threat of travellers but can't be bothered to lock a gate. It's all misdirection, smoke and mirrors and it's mind boggling how many people are falling for it! MrsF82
  • Score: 7

7:19pm Fri 13 Jun 14

MrsF82 says...

Is it right that these people can park their motor homes on the cliff top for free when the rest of us have to pay exorbitant parking fees throughout the town (and aren't allowed to access that particular road)? Of course.

Is it an excuse for you lot to let your masks slip and start spewing racist slurs and praising UKIP, that bastion of decency? Of course not. Get a grip. If this it the most important thing that's happening in your universe today, I suggest getting a hobby.
Is it right that these people can park their motor homes on the cliff top for free when the rest of us have to pay exorbitant parking fees throughout the town (and aren't allowed to access that particular road)? Of course. Is it an excuse for you lot to let your masks slip and start spewing racist slurs and praising UKIP, that bastion of decency? Of course not. Get a grip. If this it the most important thing that's happening in your universe today, I suggest getting a hobby. MrsF82
  • Score: -7

8:27pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Bob49 says...

Baysider wrote:
Leaving aside the usual ignorant, clichéd, legally farcical comments from the usual windbags, no one has picked up on the point that Bournemouth Council is spending £30,000+ to a private security firm to protect just ONE site. Sorry but that is a clear case of pandering to public opinion as it has not stopped travellers coming or indeed staying resulting in yet more money being spent getting rid of them from supposedly secure sites.

Forget this lock down nonsense we've seen time and again it doesn't work and spend thirty grand on removing their incentive to come to our towns by educating the public NEVER to give them any work.
And what legally farcical comments might be ?

Coming from someone who is daft enough to believe that these folk make their money by doing work I doubt there will be any reply that is based on reality or reasoned thought.

However we can hope !
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Leaving aside the usual ignorant, clichéd, legally farcical comments from the usual windbags, no one has picked up on the point that Bournemouth Council is spending £30,000+ to a private security firm to protect just ONE site. Sorry but that is a clear case of pandering to public opinion as it has not stopped travellers coming or indeed staying resulting in yet more money being spent getting rid of them from supposedly secure sites. Forget this lock down nonsense we've seen time and again it doesn't work and spend thirty grand on removing their incentive to come to our towns by educating the public NEVER to give them any work.[/p][/quote]And what legally farcical comments might be ? Coming from someone who is daft enough to believe that these folk make their money by doing work I doubt there will be any reply that is based on reality or reasoned thought. However we can hope ! Bob49
  • Score: 1

8:36pm Fri 13 Jun 14

its not that bad says...

when I came down with my family for the big wheels weekend it cost nearly £20 for parking I wont bother next time I will just borrow the in-laws motor home park up for free with a great view of the beach ready for the air show whats the betting I will get moved /clamped/ fined / and probably all 3 what a joke
when I came down with my family for the big wheels weekend it cost nearly £20 for parking I wont bother next time I will just borrow the in-laws motor home park up for free with a great view of the beach ready for the air show whats the betting I will get moved /clamped/ fined / and probably all 3 what a joke its not that bad
  • Score: 12

8:42pm Fri 13 Jun 14

rozmister says...

Baysider wrote:
Leaving aside the usual ignorant, clichéd, legally farcical comments from the usual windbags, no one has picked up on the point that Bournemouth Council is spending £30,000+ to a private security firm to protect just ONE site. Sorry but that is a clear case of pandering to public opinion as it has not stopped travellers coming or indeed staying resulting in yet more money being spent getting rid of them from supposedly secure sites.

Forget this lock down nonsense we've seen time and again it doesn't work and spend thirty grand on removing their incentive to come to our towns by educating the public NEVER to give them any work.
They're not working down here, they're just on holiday. I saw them all strolling down and through the gardens today when I was passing through the area. They were just like any other tourists...except their accommodation was totally free.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Leaving aside the usual ignorant, clichéd, legally farcical comments from the usual windbags, no one has picked up on the point that Bournemouth Council is spending £30,000+ to a private security firm to protect just ONE site. Sorry but that is a clear case of pandering to public opinion as it has not stopped travellers coming or indeed staying resulting in yet more money being spent getting rid of them from supposedly secure sites. Forget this lock down nonsense we've seen time and again it doesn't work and spend thirty grand on removing their incentive to come to our towns by educating the public NEVER to give them any work.[/p][/quote]They're not working down here, they're just on holiday. I saw them all strolling down and through the gardens today when I was passing through the area. They were just like any other tourists...except their accommodation was totally free. rozmister
  • Score: 6

8:57pm Fri 13 Jun 14

martinsim34 says...

so it was ok for poole to have them now they r on ur area ur councillors got same proms we had in poole

there is one answer as far as im aware a farmer over upton offered a field councils said no y cos its near upton house

oh as for breaking locks they get away with it so wen u go there the president has been set u not get prosecuted for anything
so it was ok for poole to have them now they r on ur area ur councillors got same proms we had in poole there is one answer as far as im aware a farmer over upton offered a field councils said no y cos its near upton house oh as for breaking locks they get away with it so wen u go there the president has been set u not get prosecuted for anything martinsim34
  • Score: -4

8:58pm Fri 13 Jun 14

new2it says...

suzigirl wrote:
Wackerone wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
Wackerone wrote: If any or all of the moaners on here had the guts, then they would take their caravans, motor homes or even cars down to join the free loaders. Then, with the right legal team, you could all test the equality and human rights laws that exist in this country. Unless you all want to stand up and be counted, stop moaning. Personally, I'm just fed up with the same old drivel every time these events happen. BAND TOGETHER, STRENGTH IN UNITY.
After you!
Before you comment on my post suzigirl, you might note that I am not the one moaning and groaning on here. I was just forwarding a suggestion, other than that I don't care as there are more concerns in the world today other than a few Irish residents pitching on the cliffs.
So why are you commenting?
He's got every right to make his comments, and suggest what people should do if they don't like it.
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wackerone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Wackerone[/bold] wrote: If any or all of the moaners on here had the guts, then they would take their caravans, motor homes or even cars down to join the free loaders. Then, with the right legal team, you could all test the equality and human rights laws that exist in this country. Unless you all want to stand up and be counted, stop moaning. Personally, I'm just fed up with the same old drivel every time these events happen. BAND TOGETHER, STRENGTH IN UNITY.[/p][/quote]After you![/p][/quote]Before you comment on my post suzigirl, you might note that I am not the one moaning and groaning on here. I was just forwarding a suggestion, other than that I don't care as there are more concerns in the world today other than a few Irish residents pitching on the cliffs.[/p][/quote]So why are you commenting?[/p][/quote]He's got every right to make his comments, and suggest what people should do if they don't like it. new2it
  • Score: 1

9:01pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Mattguna says...

Wouldn't it be just awful if the Friday night drunk brigade wander up there tonight and give them a shake down. So if I go and park on the beach then, talk in an Irish accent and say I'm a traveller I would get away with it?? Yeh right. I be screwed. Pathetic gutless incompetent authorities treating these parasitic nasties with kid gloves. It's easy, tow away there vans and charge them £120 a day just like if you happen to accidentally park in the wrong place around Bournemouth and get clamped. Horrible parasitic underclass.
Wouldn't it be just awful if the Friday night drunk brigade wander up there tonight and give them a shake down. So if I go and park on the beach then, talk in an Irish accent and say I'm a traveller I would get away with it?? Yeh right. I be screwed. Pathetic gutless incompetent authorities treating these parasitic nasties with kid gloves. It's easy, tow away there vans and charge them £120 a day just like if you happen to accidentally park in the wrong place around Bournemouth and get clamped. Horrible parasitic underclass. Mattguna
  • Score: 8

9:26pm Fri 13 Jun 14

markelkins says...

Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth wrote:
Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-)

The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same.

(Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.)

So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??"

Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen.

UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year.

I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter.

But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though!
Fair comment over the UK courts ruling. Most likely made by the mindset of certain members of the middle class who think the UK is better off then it actually is and who would give away truckloads of working peoples money when given the chance. However the issue would not arise if the UK was not in the EU because people from the Republic of Ireland would have no automatic right to come here for their holidays or for anything else for that matter. So I might suggest that if they came here for a holiday for example and did something that contraved our laws they would be swiflty told to return like any tourist from anywhere else would.
[quote][p][bold]Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth[/bold] wrote: Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though![/p][/quote]Fair comment over the UK courts ruling. Most likely made by the mindset of certain members of the middle class who think the UK is better off then it actually is and who would give away truckloads of working peoples money when given the chance. However the issue would not arise if the UK was not in the EU because people from the Republic of Ireland would have no automatic right to come here for their holidays or for anything else for that matter. So I might suggest that if they came here for a holiday for example and did something that contraved our laws they would be swiflty told to return like any tourist from anywhere else would. markelkins
  • Score: 2

11:05pm Fri 13 Jun 14

martinsim34 says...

this is playing straight into ukip divide and argue tory style stand together and conquer
this is playing straight into ukip divide and argue tory style stand together and conquer martinsim34
  • Score: -3

11:14pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Baysider says...

Bob49 wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Leaving aside the usual ignorant, clichéd, legally farcical comments from the usual windbags, no one has picked up on the point that Bournemouth Council is spending £30,000+ to a private security firm to protect just ONE site. Sorry but that is a clear case of pandering to public opinion as it has not stopped travellers coming or indeed staying resulting in yet more money being spent getting rid of them from supposedly secure sites.

Forget this lock down nonsense we've seen time and again it doesn't work and spend thirty grand on removing their incentive to come to our towns by educating the public NEVER to give them any work.
And what legally farcical comments might be ?

Coming from someone who is daft enough to believe that these folk make their money by doing work I doubt there will be any reply that is based on reality or reasoned thought.

However we can hope !
They would be the knee jerk usual ones tvat have been explained ad nausea on here over the last couple of years. But posters don't"t want to acknowledge the local authorities hands are tied legally when they can instead use the presence of one hated group to have a go at another.


And of course they come here to work. This particular lot may be on their way elsewhere or even on holiday as claimed but if you've been paying any sort of attention at all you would see that the vast majority have builders vans, trailers, cement mixers, etc with them. They don't bring the builders rubble, garden waste, etc they leave behind with them do they numnuts???
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Leaving aside the usual ignorant, clichéd, legally farcical comments from the usual windbags, no one has picked up on the point that Bournemouth Council is spending £30,000+ to a private security firm to protect just ONE site. Sorry but that is a clear case of pandering to public opinion as it has not stopped travellers coming or indeed staying resulting in yet more money being spent getting rid of them from supposedly secure sites. Forget this lock down nonsense we've seen time and again it doesn't work and spend thirty grand on removing their incentive to come to our towns by educating the public NEVER to give them any work.[/p][/quote]And what legally farcical comments might be ? Coming from someone who is daft enough to believe that these folk make their money by doing work I doubt there will be any reply that is based on reality or reasoned thought. However we can hope ![/p][/quote]They would be the knee jerk usual ones tvat have been explained ad nausea on here over the last couple of years. But posters don't"t want to acknowledge the local authorities hands are tied legally when they can instead use the presence of one hated group to have a go at another. And of course they come here to work. This particular lot may be on their way elsewhere or even on holiday as claimed but if you've been paying any sort of attention at all you would see that the vast majority have builders vans, trailers, cement mixers, etc with them. They don't bring the builders rubble, garden waste, etc they leave behind with them do they numnuts??? Baysider
  • Score: 3

11:38pm Fri 13 Jun 14

gameon says...

folkprotector wrote:
What exactly are the parking regulations at that location? Is camping disallowed? If the regulations say No Parking then surely the regulations need to be upheld. Isn't it as simple as that? I invite anyone in authority and with the relevant knowledge to respond with a definitive answer, anonymously if you want.
Better still someone in authority tell us why rules and regulations apply to us and not to the travellers
[quote][p][bold]folkprotector[/bold] wrote: What exactly are the parking regulations at that location? Is camping disallowed? If the regulations say No Parking then surely the regulations need to be upheld. Isn't it as simple as that? I invite anyone in authority and with the relevant knowledge to respond with a definitive answer, anonymously if you want.[/p][/quote]Better still someone in authority tell us why rules and regulations apply to us and not to the travellers gameon
  • Score: 12

8:26am Sat 14 Jun 14

Carolyn43 says...

duke bingo wrote:
Hands up who didn't want a permanent transit site but is also now moaning that they are not being moved on.
I don't think anyone said they didn't want a permanent transit site. Poole Council proposed and rejected a Temporary Stopping Place (not a Transit Site), but had chosen a totally unsuitable site that the travellers representative had said they wouldn't use for various safety reasons.
[quote][p][bold]duke bingo[/bold] wrote: Hands up who didn't want a permanent transit site but is also now moaning that they are not being moved on.[/p][/quote]I don't think anyone said they didn't want a permanent transit site. Poole Council proposed and rejected a Temporary Stopping Place (not a Transit Site), but had chosen a totally unsuitable site that the travellers representative had said they wouldn't use for various safety reasons. Carolyn43
  • Score: -2

8:47am Sat 14 Jun 14

Baysider says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
duke bingo wrote:
Hands up who didn't want a permanent transit site but is also now moaning that they are not being moved on.
I don't think anyone said they didn't want a permanent transit site. Poole Council proposed and rejected a Temporary Stopping Place (not a Transit Site), but had chosen a totally unsuitable site that the travellers representative had said they wouldn't use for various safety reasons.
Rubbish. There's been 100's of post on the Echo to the effect they don't see why councils should have to provide transit sites, stopping places or whatever you want to call them.
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]duke bingo[/bold] wrote: Hands up who didn't want a permanent transit site but is also now moaning that they are not being moved on.[/p][/quote]I don't think anyone said they didn't want a permanent transit site. Poole Council proposed and rejected a Temporary Stopping Place (not a Transit Site), but had chosen a totally unsuitable site that the travellers representative had said they wouldn't use for various safety reasons.[/p][/quote]Rubbish. There's been 100's of post on the Echo to the effect they don't see why councils should have to provide transit sites, stopping places or whatever you want to call them. Baysider
  • Score: 10

10:30am Sat 14 Jun 14

boardsandphotos says...

martinsim34 wrote:
so it was ok for poole to have them now they r on ur area ur councillors got same proms we had in poole

there is one answer as far as im aware a farmer over upton offered a field councils said no y cos its near upton house

oh as for breaking locks they get away with it so wen u go there the president has been set u not get prosecuted for anything
What's the President got to do with it? He's more concerned in the developing crisis in Iraq, I doubt he has the time to help Bournemouth Council remove a couple of illegally parked Irish holiday makers...
[quote][p][bold]martinsim34[/bold] wrote: so it was ok for poole to have them now they r on ur area ur councillors got same proms we had in poole there is one answer as far as im aware a farmer over upton offered a field councils said no y cos its near upton house oh as for breaking locks they get away with it so wen u go there the president has been set u not get prosecuted for anything[/p][/quote]What's the President got to do with it? He's more concerned in the developing crisis in Iraq, I doubt he has the time to help Bournemouth Council remove a couple of illegally parked Irish holiday makers... boardsandphotos
  • Score: 3

11:32am Sat 14 Jun 14

BigAlfromsunnyBournemouth says...

Oh for heaven's sake just tell them either they move or they get towed, and if they choose the tow option then no responsibility can be accepted for damage that ensues.
Oh for heaven's sake just tell them either they move or they get towed, and if they choose the tow option then no responsibility can be accepted for damage that ensues. BigAlfromsunnyBournemouth
  • Score: 7

12:32pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Bourne272 says...

What I find most annoying is that people pay millions for a view like that and those two idiots are sat there looking at the BIC.
What I find most annoying is that people pay millions for a view like that and those two idiots are sat there looking at the BIC. Bourne272
  • Score: 7

12:51pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Baysider says...

BigAlfromsunnyBourne
mouth
wrote:
Oh for heaven's sake just tell them either they move or they get towed, and if they choose the tow option then no responsibility can be accepted for damage that ensues.
...there you go Bob49. A perfect example of one of those posts that has no regard to the legal situation or what might happen if their advice were followed. I rest my case for now.
[quote][p][bold]BigAlfromsunnyBourne mouth[/bold] wrote: Oh for heaven's sake just tell them either they move or they get towed, and if they choose the tow option then no responsibility can be accepted for damage that ensues.[/p][/quote]...there you go Bob49. A perfect example of one of those posts that has no regard to the legal situation or what might happen if their advice were followed. I rest my case for now. Baysider
  • Score: 3

1:36pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Rich521 says...

I believe this "camping" is not allowed in Ireland.
Ireland is in the EU, so why is this the case?
Does anyone know?
How does Ireland get round the rules, if they are real?
Or are we all being fooled here?
I believe this "camping" is not allowed in Ireland. Ireland is in the EU, so why is this the case? Does anyone know? How does Ireland get round the rules, if they are real? Or are we all being fooled here? Rich521
  • Score: 4

2:06pm Sat 14 Jun 14

BoscombeWarLord says...

TheDistrict wrote:
Travellers, my backside, and Bournemouth Council must know this, and have the right to move them on immediately. They have admitted they are from Ireland and on holiday. Get rid of them.

They are probably a couple of the convoy of Irish Mobile Homes traveller down the road from Cherbourg and St. Malo on the 31st May. 48 of them in total heading south for their "holidays". I suspect that these "holiday makers" are part of that group returning via Poole, ready for their south coast raid on free locations.

I think I will cancel my next France holiday, and park up on the cliff tops of Bournemouth, maybe during the Air Show. What is the betting I will be dragged off with immediate effect.

How can the Echo say no racialist comments, when we are the one who are being treated in that why, not being able to do what they bummers do.
I believe the travellers are heading down to Lourdes in France as they are very 'religious'. I kid you not. So the Bournemouth/Poole area will get another influx when they come back in a few weeks. They'll have to be back in the Republic to sign on for September. Maybe pick up a couple of Giros on the way through and not the cycling kind!
[quote][p][bold]TheDistrict[/bold] wrote: Travellers, my backside, and Bournemouth Council must know this, and have the right to move them on immediately. They have admitted they are from Ireland and on holiday. Get rid of them. They are probably a couple of the convoy of Irish Mobile Homes traveller down the road from Cherbourg and St. Malo on the 31st May. 48 of them in total heading south for their "holidays". I suspect that these "holiday makers" are part of that group returning via Poole, ready for their south coast raid on free locations. I think I will cancel my next France holiday, and park up on the cliff tops of Bournemouth, maybe during the Air Show. What is the betting I will be dragged off with immediate effect. How can the Echo say no racialist comments, when we are the one who are being treated in that why, not being able to do what they bummers do.[/p][/quote]I believe the travellers are heading down to Lourdes in France as they are very 'religious'. I kid you not. So the Bournemouth/Poole area will get another influx when they come back in a few weeks. They'll have to be back in the Republic to sign on for September. Maybe pick up a couple of Giros on the way through and not the cycling kind! BoscombeWarLord
  • Score: 3

3:24pm Sat 14 Jun 14

MrPitiful says...

There have been various amounts cited as to how much th security company is costing the local council - or council tax-payer - for upholding the lockdown on these sites.

Well, I would strongly suggest they ask for a refund.

Ther was a security vehicle this morning on the car park inbetween the Royal Bath Hotel and the old Imax site. It was blocking the entrance but the exit was wide open.

One of the "guards" was flat out asleep. The other was guiding in a large Irish plated motorhome. There was one already on there in the corner and so now there are 2.

No point spending all that money on security if they ain't gonna make the place secure!
There have been various amounts cited as to how much th security company is costing the local council - or council tax-payer - for upholding the lockdown on these sites. Well, I would strongly suggest they ask for a refund. Ther was a security vehicle this morning on the car park inbetween the Royal Bath Hotel and the old Imax site. It was blocking the entrance but the exit was wide open. One of the "guards" was flat out asleep. The other was guiding in a large Irish plated motorhome. There was one already on there in the corner and so now there are 2. No point spending all that money on security if they ain't gonna make the place secure! MrPitiful
  • Score: 3

3:25pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Bob49 says...

Rich521 wrote:
I believe this "camping" is not allowed in Ireland.
Ireland is in the EU, so why is this the case?
Does anyone know?
How does Ireland get round the rules, if they are real?
Or are we all being fooled here?
oh dear,

it was a ruling made in an ENGLISH court by an ENGLISH judge that 'these' people have a seperate ethnicity - therefore they are afforded rights to allow them to practice their ethnic traditions ie roaming and staying where they wish.

Unfortunately the question that should always be raised is who determines who is a bona fida traveller and not a free loader scrounger. However this question is never raised as it is drwoned out by the "political correctness/gone mad/ EU morons" who have no wish to actually look up the cause but are happy to bleat out moronic nonsense instead.

So firstly, put your counciloor and MP on notice that you wish to know what checks are made with regard to this authenticity and what the criteria is..... and maybe why is there not a lay person there to see 'fair play' ?

Secondly as this was a ruling in the court it can be over turned, so again ask your councillor MP to explain why no challenge has been made.

And end to this annual 'rampage' will only occur when we start to fight on our terms - not those of the MP's and councillors.
[quote][p][bold]Rich521[/bold] wrote: I believe this "camping" is not allowed in Ireland. Ireland is in the EU, so why is this the case? Does anyone know? How does Ireland get round the rules, if they are real? Or are we all being fooled here?[/p][/quote]oh dear, it was a ruling made in an ENGLISH court by an ENGLISH judge that 'these' people have a seperate ethnicity - therefore they are afforded rights to allow them to practice their ethnic traditions ie roaming and staying where they wish. Unfortunately the question that should always be raised is who determines who is a bona fida traveller and not a free loader scrounger. However this question is never raised as it is drwoned out by the "political correctness/gone mad/ EU morons" who have no wish to actually look up the cause but are happy to bleat out moronic nonsense instead. So firstly, put your counciloor and MP on notice that you wish to know what checks are made with regard to this authenticity and what the criteria is..... and maybe why is there not a lay person there to see 'fair play' ? Secondly as this was a ruling in the court it can be over turned, so again ask your councillor MP to explain why no challenge has been made. And end to this annual 'rampage' will only occur when we start to fight on our terms - not those of the MP's and councillors. Bob49
  • Score: 3

3:54pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Peroni says...

I'd love to know what would happen to them if they were parked there for say a Tory Conference at the BIC .And they wanted to do some interviews on that stretch of road.............I recon they would get them moved lol !
I'd love to know what would happen to them if they were parked there for say a Tory Conference at the BIC .And they wanted to do some interviews on that stretch of road.............I recon they would get them moved lol ! Peroni
  • Score: 5

4:01pm Sat 14 Jun 14

spooki says...

So I park my car by Tesco in Bmth Square (travelling with my mum and her disabled badge) for 3 hours and if I overstay I get a parking ticket. These folk somehow gain access to a private road and happily set up camp with no "get orf moi land" or anything?
Hmm.....
So I park my car by Tesco in Bmth Square (travelling with my mum and her disabled badge) for 3 hours and if I overstay I get a parking ticket. These folk somehow gain access to a private road and happily set up camp with no "get orf moi land" or anything? Hmm..... spooki
  • Score: 4

5:12pm Sat 14 Jun 14

cromwell9 says...

Bob49 wrote:
High Treason wrote:
I do not care if they are ethnic Irish Travellers, just a load of spongers and all down to Blair and his mates at the EU and the human rights act. With all the other problems in the UK, housing shortage, weak justice, immigration with an overloaded NHS it is only a matter of time before we end up with civil unrest.
oh dear

whereas in reality this is due to a ruling made in an ENGLISH court

any wonder these folk know they can get away with this kind of stuff when there is this level of ignorance

however, can the council tell us what checks have been made to verify these people are genuine 'Traveller's

and will the Daily Echo ask the council ?
Dont start me on BLAIR,Or the ILEGAL WAR.What a mess this man has left us.
I am sure some of those MPs are going to end up in the Tower Of London,
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: I do not care if they are ethnic Irish Travellers, just a load of spongers and all down to Blair and his mates at the EU and the human rights act. With all the other problems in the UK, housing shortage, weak justice, immigration with an overloaded NHS it is only a matter of time before we end up with civil unrest.[/p][/quote]oh dear whereas in reality this is due to a ruling made in an ENGLISH court any wonder these folk know they can get away with this kind of stuff when there is this level of ignorance however, can the council tell us what checks have been made to verify these people are genuine 'Traveller's and will the Daily Echo ask the council ?[/p][/quote]Dont start me on BLAIR,Or the ILEGAL WAR.What a mess this man has left us. I am sure some of those MPs are going to end up in the Tower Of London, cromwell9
  • Score: -2

5:15pm Sat 14 Jun 14

cromwell9 says...

pauls55 wrote:
Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth wrote:
Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though!
Good God I think I'm going to faint, a UKIP spokesman who is honest for a change and who, on this particular point, is fair and reasonable (you still wont ever get my vote though,sorry!)
If you dont vote for UKIP.Your daughter will have to where a Burker in 25 yrs time etc etc .Think about it ?.
[quote][p][bold]pauls55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth[/bold] wrote: Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though![/p][/quote]Good God I think I'm going to faint, a UKIP spokesman who is honest for a change and who, on this particular point, is fair and reasonable (you still wont ever get my vote though,sorry!)[/p][/quote]If you dont vote for UKIP.Your daughter will have to where a Burker in 25 yrs time etc etc .Think about it ?. cromwell9
  • Score: -3

7:12pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Baysider says...

cromwell9 wrote:
pauls55 wrote:
Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth wrote:
Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though!
Good God I think I'm going to faint, a UKIP spokesman who is honest for a change and who, on this particular point, is fair and reasonable (you still wont ever get my vote though,sorry!)
If you dont vote for UKIP.Your daughter will have to where a Burker in 25 yrs time etc etc .Think about it ?.
Deary me...and UKIP supporters claim they aren't alarmist.
[quote][p][bold]cromwell9[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pauls55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth[/bold] wrote: Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though![/p][/quote]Good God I think I'm going to faint, a UKIP spokesman who is honest for a change and who, on this particular point, is fair and reasonable (you still wont ever get my vote though,sorry!)[/p][/quote]If you dont vote for UKIP.Your daughter will have to where a Burker in 25 yrs time etc etc .Think about it ?.[/p][/quote]Deary me...and UKIP supporters claim they aren't alarmist. Baysider
  • Score: 3

7:26pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Baysider says...

Bob49 wrote:
Rich521 wrote:
I believe this "camping" is not allowed in Ireland.
Ireland is in the EU, so why is this the case?
Does anyone know?
How does Ireland get round the rules, if they are real?
Or are we all being fooled here?
oh dear,

it was a ruling made in an ENGLISH court by an ENGLISH judge that 'these' people have a seperate ethnicity - therefore they are afforded rights to allow them to practice their ethnic traditions ie roaming and staying where they wish.

Unfortunately the question that should always be raised is who determines who is a bona fida traveller and not a free loader scrounger. However this question is never raised as it is drwoned out by the "political correctness/gone mad/ EU morons" who have no wish to actually look up the cause but are happy to bleat out moronic nonsense instead.

So firstly, put your counciloor and MP on notice that you wish to know what checks are made with regard to this authenticity and what the criteria is..... and maybe why is there not a lay person there to see 'fair play' ?

Secondly as this was a ruling in the court it can be over turned, so again ask your councillor MP to explain why no challenge has been made.

And end to this annual 'rampage' will only occur when we start to fight on our terms - not those of the MP's and councillors.
Hey Bobby old boy I see you haven't replied to me pointing out the evidence that most travellers are here to work but we'll let that go for now.



Moving on to your boring old hobby horse about the enquiries made or otherwise as to whether they are travellers or not. Let's assume you are right. They won't admit they aren't so they council would have to prove to the satisfaction of a court they weren't. How many weeks or months of enquiries would this take? Then, once you've establish, and the burden of proof would be that way around wouldn't it, you'd have to go back to the courts to have them evicted under the 'normal' trespass situation.


Basically, all you would succeed in doing is prolonging the situation. There, I've explained why you and others are wasting your time pursuing this particular line of anti-council criticism. I give it 24 hours before you trot it out again sadly...
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rich521[/bold] wrote: I believe this "camping" is not allowed in Ireland. Ireland is in the EU, so why is this the case? Does anyone know? How does Ireland get round the rules, if they are real? Or are we all being fooled here?[/p][/quote]oh dear, it was a ruling made in an ENGLISH court by an ENGLISH judge that 'these' people have a seperate ethnicity - therefore they are afforded rights to allow them to practice their ethnic traditions ie roaming and staying where they wish. Unfortunately the question that should always be raised is who determines who is a bona fida traveller and not a free loader scrounger. However this question is never raised as it is drwoned out by the "political correctness/gone mad/ EU morons" who have no wish to actually look up the cause but are happy to bleat out moronic nonsense instead. So firstly, put your counciloor and MP on notice that you wish to know what checks are made with regard to this authenticity and what the criteria is..... and maybe why is there not a lay person there to see 'fair play' ? Secondly as this was a ruling in the court it can be over turned, so again ask your councillor MP to explain why no challenge has been made. And end to this annual 'rampage' will only occur when we start to fight on our terms - not those of the MP's and councillors.[/p][/quote]Hey Bobby old boy I see you haven't replied to me pointing out the evidence that most travellers are here to work but we'll let that go for now. Moving on to your boring old hobby horse about the enquiries made or otherwise as to whether they are travellers or not. Let's assume you are right. They won't admit they aren't so they council would have to prove to the satisfaction of a court they weren't. How many weeks or months of enquiries would this take? Then, once you've establish, and the burden of proof would be that way around wouldn't it, you'd have to go back to the courts to have them evicted under the 'normal' trespass situation. Basically, all you would succeed in doing is prolonging the situation. There, I've explained why you and others are wasting your time pursuing this particular line of anti-council criticism. I give it 24 hours before you trot it out again sadly... Baysider
  • Score: -1

9:08pm Sat 14 Jun 14

davecook says...

Who owns this "private" road? I assumed the council owned the road and paths leading up the cliffs. Funny how ownership suddenly seems vague when it's certain types, but if you want to park your own car there to nip into the shops wardens would appear from under every stone in the area......
Who owns this "private" road? I assumed the council owned the road and paths leading up the cliffs. Funny how ownership suddenly seems vague when it's certain types, but if you want to park your own car there to nip into the shops wardens would appear from under every stone in the area...... davecook
  • Score: 4

10:28am Sun 15 Jun 14

alasdair1967 says...

davecook wrote:
Who owns this "private" road? I assumed the council owned the road and paths leading up the cliffs. Funny how ownership suddenly seems vague when it's certain types, but if you want to park your own car there to nip into the shops wardens would appear from under every stone in the area......
I believe it is owned by the bic to enable the articulated trucks bringing equipment to the venue a ring road around the building when major events are on
[quote][p][bold]davecook[/bold] wrote: Who owns this "private" road? I assumed the council owned the road and paths leading up the cliffs. Funny how ownership suddenly seems vague when it's certain types, but if you want to park your own car there to nip into the shops wardens would appear from under every stone in the area......[/p][/quote]I believe it is owned by the bic to enable the articulated trucks bringing equipment to the venue a ring road around the building when major events are on alasdair1967
  • Score: 0

10:32am Sun 15 Jun 14

Baysider says...

I see the Echo has finally taken action and closed the comments on the other traveller thread. No doubt due to the illegal comments inciting racial hate being made. I very much hope that those involved have received bans as well if not a referral to the police...but I expect not.
I see the Echo has finally taken action and closed the comments on the other traveller thread. No doubt due to the illegal comments inciting racial hate being made. I very much hope that those involved have received bans as well if not a referral to the police...but I expect not. Baysider
  • Score: -4

11:15am Sun 15 Jun 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

I think the illegal comments are due to peoples frustration with our useless council who fail to take appropriate action to stop these encampments. Why are these travellers not issued parking tickets and fined for their actions like anyone else would be? This a simple straightforward question which our authorities consistently refuse to answer!
I think the illegal comments are due to peoples frustration with our useless council who fail to take appropriate action to stop these encampments. Why are these travellers not issued parking tickets and fined for their actions like anyone else would be? This a simple straightforward question which our authorities consistently refuse to answer! fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 4

11:36am Sun 15 Jun 14

alasdair1967 says...

Just wondering if I where to hire a motor home and visit Southern Ireland and pitch up where ever takes my fancy how would I be treated by the Garda and the Irish authority's ?
Just wondering if I where to hire a motor home and visit Southern Ireland and pitch up where ever takes my fancy how would I be treated by the Garda and the Irish authority's ? alasdair1967
  • Score: 1

11:56am Sun 15 Jun 14

alasdair1967 says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
I think the illegal comments are due to peoples frustration with our useless council who fail to take appropriate action to stop these encampments. Why are these travellers not issued parking tickets and fined for their actions like anyone else would be? This a simple straightforward question which our authorities consistently refuse to answer!
If our vehicles are not taxed or insured our vehicles are IMMEDIATELY impounded ,yet the authorities will do nothing against the travellers one rule for one and a different rule for others
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: I think the illegal comments are due to peoples frustration with our useless council who fail to take appropriate action to stop these encampments. Why are these travellers not issued parking tickets and fined for their actions like anyone else would be? This a simple straightforward question which our authorities consistently refuse to answer![/p][/quote]If our vehicles are not taxed or insured our vehicles are IMMEDIATELY impounded ,yet the authorities will do nothing against the travellers one rule for one and a different rule for others alasdair1967
  • Score: 4

11:57am Sun 15 Jun 14

MrPitiful says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
I think the illegal comments are due to peoples frustration with our useless council who fail to take appropriate action to stop these encampments. Why are these travellers not issued parking tickets and fined for their actions like anyone else would be? This a simple straightforward question which our authorities consistently refuse to answer!
I suggest the relevant local authority's parking departments would answer these questions if anyone could be bothered enough to go to the trouble and write to them direct with the enquiry.
What they won't do as part of their procedures - and rightly so - is register an account with the local rag's website and answer such questions on here.
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: I think the illegal comments are due to peoples frustration with our useless council who fail to take appropriate action to stop these encampments. Why are these travellers not issued parking tickets and fined for their actions like anyone else would be? This a simple straightforward question which our authorities consistently refuse to answer![/p][/quote]I suggest the relevant local authority's parking departments would answer these questions if anyone could be bothered enough to go to the trouble and write to them direct with the enquiry. What they won't do as part of their procedures - and rightly so - is register an account with the local rag's website and answer such questions on here. MrPitiful
  • Score: 2

12:16pm Sun 15 Jun 14

Minty Fresh says...

So the Echo have closed the comments on the other story. Why? As if the racist commenters won't just come here and post their bile. I get really fed up with the racist remarks as this issue has absolutely NOTHING to do with race, it's about nomads breaking the law and our Police and Council being unable to prosecute them as they should. As for this publication, they don't give a monkeys about the local people who are sick and tired of these undesirables coming to our area, doing whatever they want and leaving their rubbish etc everywhere. When is the totally anonymous Editor of the Echo going to stand up and launch a high profile campaign for a law change that would see all travellers treated the same way the rest of us would if we behaved in the manner they do? Unfortunately, Newsquest, who own this rag, are more concerned with pleasing shareholders than actually being what they should be: a local paper that cares about local issues and it's readers.
So the Echo have closed the comments on the other story. Why? As if the racist commenters won't just come here and post their bile. I get really fed up with the racist remarks as this issue has absolutely NOTHING to do with race, it's about nomads breaking the law and our Police and Council being unable to prosecute them as they should. As for this publication, they don't give a monkeys about the local people who are sick and tired of these undesirables coming to our area, doing whatever they want and leaving their rubbish etc everywhere. When is the totally anonymous Editor of the Echo going to stand up and launch a high profile campaign for a law change that would see all travellers treated the same way the rest of us would if we behaved in the manner they do? Unfortunately, Newsquest, who own this rag, are more concerned with pleasing shareholders than actually being what they should be: a local paper that cares about local issues and it's readers. Minty Fresh
  • Score: 9

12:22pm Sun 15 Jun 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

MrPitiful wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
I think the illegal comments are due to peoples frustration with our useless council who fail to take appropriate action to stop these encampments. Why are these travellers not issued parking tickets and fined for their actions like anyone else would be? This a simple straightforward question which our authorities consistently refuse to answer!
I suggest the relevant local authority's parking departments would answer these questions if anyone could be bothered enough to go to the trouble and write to them direct with the enquiry.
What they won't do as part of their procedures - and rightly so - is register an account with the local rag's website and answer such questions on here.
I would have thought the council's PR dept would be keen to put their reasons for treating travellers differently to the rest of society ,,,, or at least expect the local rag to find out. As for writing to the council, my experience to date is that their answer will be just more weasle words.
[quote][p][bold]MrPitiful[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: I think the illegal comments are due to peoples frustration with our useless council who fail to take appropriate action to stop these encampments. Why are these travellers not issued parking tickets and fined for their actions like anyone else would be? This a simple straightforward question which our authorities consistently refuse to answer![/p][/quote]I suggest the relevant local authority's parking departments would answer these questions if anyone could be bothered enough to go to the trouble and write to them direct with the enquiry. What they won't do as part of their procedures - and rightly so - is register an account with the local rag's website and answer such questions on here.[/p][/quote]I would have thought the council's PR dept would be keen to put their reasons for treating travellers differently to the rest of society ,,,, or at least expect the local rag to find out. As for writing to the council, my experience to date is that their answer will be just more weasle words. fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 1

12:53pm Sun 15 Jun 14

Baysider says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
I think the illegal comments are due to peoples frustration with our useless council who fail to take appropriate action to stop these encampments. Why are these travellers not issued parking tickets and fined for their actions like anyone else would be? This a simple straightforward question which our authorities consistently refuse to answer!
I did answer your questions in the closed thread so won't do it in detail again (thanks Echo!) but basically it comes down to practicality - spending £1000's chasing parking fines that will never be paid is annoying for the majority but pragmatic. Similarly you need evidence of which individual dropped what litter don't you...our courts are funny about prosecuting people without proper evidence!
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: I think the illegal comments are due to peoples frustration with our useless council who fail to take appropriate action to stop these encampments. Why are these travellers not issued parking tickets and fined for their actions like anyone else would be? This a simple straightforward question which our authorities consistently refuse to answer![/p][/quote]I did answer your questions in the closed thread so won't do it in detail again (thanks Echo!) but basically it comes down to practicality - spending £1000's chasing parking fines that will never be paid is annoying for the majority but pragmatic. Similarly you need evidence of which individual dropped what litter don't you...our courts are funny about prosecuting people without proper evidence! Baysider
  • Score: -2

2:10pm Sun 15 Jun 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

Just the other week a guy was fined £400 for dropping a dog end (after failing to pay the £50 fixed penalty), so I say again why can't parking fines be issued to travellers with similar penalties applied for non payment? As for the litter, there have been numerous cases in the past where travellers have left rubbish which has cost a fortune to clear .... and no attempts ever made to prosecute forcriminal damage caused! The reason the travellers keep returning is they run rings around our spineless council!
Just the other week a guy was fined £400 for dropping a dog end (after failing to pay the £50 fixed penalty), so I say again why can't parking fines be issued to travellers with similar penalties applied for non payment? As for the litter, there have been numerous cases in the past where travellers have left rubbish which has cost a fortune to clear .... and no attempts ever made to prosecute forcriminal damage caused! The reason the travellers keep returning is they run rings around our spineless council! fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 2

3:00pm Sun 15 Jun 14

JackJohnson says...

Orb wrote:
"Not doing any harm" what's the betting there's a shed-load of litter and human waste left behind upon their departure.

Move them on immediately - as previously mentioned there's no overnight camping allowed in these areas. Are they breaching any other parking regs?
There'll be no human waste. It'll be moving on to Torquay and Paignton at the weekend.
[quote][p][bold]Orb[/bold] wrote: "Not doing any harm" what's the betting there's a shed-load of litter and human waste left behind upon their departure. Move them on immediately - as previously mentioned there's no overnight camping allowed in these areas. Are they breaching any other parking regs?[/p][/quote]There'll be no human waste. It'll be moving on to Torquay and Paignton at the weekend. JackJohnson
  • Score: 1

3:20pm Sun 15 Jun 14

Baysider says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Just the other week a guy was fined £400 for dropping a dog end (after failing to pay the £50 fixed penalty), so I say again why can't parking fines be issued to travellers with similar penalties applied for non payment? As for the litter, there have been numerous cases in the past where travellers have left rubbish which has cost a fortune to clear .... and no attempts ever made to prosecute forcriminal damage caused! The reason the travellers keep returning is they run rings around our spineless council!
Sigh...because there's little way of pursuing it when they don't pay up...unlike the bloke chucking his litter around whose identity and permanent address were established. As for litter YOU WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHICH INDIVIDUAL LEFT BEHIND WHAT RUBBISH...without witnesses prepared to identity which traveller left which pile of rubble how are you ever going to do that??? And how would you ever get them into court or get the few people hundred quid they would get back fined out of them??? For our sakes PLEASE try to think before posting the same thing over and over and over again...
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: Just the other week a guy was fined £400 for dropping a dog end (after failing to pay the £50 fixed penalty), so I say again why can't parking fines be issued to travellers with similar penalties applied for non payment? As for the litter, there have been numerous cases in the past where travellers have left rubbish which has cost a fortune to clear .... and no attempts ever made to prosecute forcriminal damage caused! The reason the travellers keep returning is they run rings around our spineless council![/p][/quote]Sigh...because there's little way of pursuing it when they don't pay up...unlike the bloke chucking his litter around whose identity and permanent address were established. As for litter YOU WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHICH INDIVIDUAL LEFT BEHIND WHAT RUBBISH...without witnesses prepared to identity which traveller left which pile of rubble how are you ever going to do that??? And how would you ever get them into court or get the few people hundred quid they would get back fined out of them??? For our sakes PLEASE try to think before posting the same thing over and over and over again... Baysider
  • Score: 0

5:05pm Sun 15 Jun 14

boardsandphotos says...

Baysider wrote:
cromwell9 wrote:
pauls55 wrote:
Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth wrote:
Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though!
Good God I think I'm going to faint, a UKIP spokesman who is honest for a change and who, on this particular point, is fair and reasonable (you still wont ever get my vote though,sorry!)
If you dont vote for UKIP.Your daughter will have to where a Burker in 25 yrs time etc etc .Think about it ?.
Deary me...and UKIP supporters claim they aren't alarmist.
What is a 'Burker' anyway?
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cromwell9[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pauls55[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth[/bold] wrote: Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though![/p][/quote]Good God I think I'm going to faint, a UKIP spokesman who is honest for a change and who, on this particular point, is fair and reasonable (you still wont ever get my vote though,sorry!)[/p][/quote]If you dont vote for UKIP.Your daughter will have to where a Burker in 25 yrs time etc etc .Think about it ?.[/p][/quote]Deary me...and UKIP supporters claim they aren't alarmist.[/p][/quote]What is a 'Burker' anyway? boardsandphotos
  • Score: 1

7:27pm Sun 15 Jun 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Just the other week a guy was fined £400 for dropping a dog end (after failing to pay the £50 fixed penalty), so I say again why can't parking fines be issued to travellers with similar penalties applied for non payment? As for the litter, there have been numerous cases in the past where travellers have left rubbish which has cost a fortune to clear .... and no attempts ever made to prosecute forcriminal damage caused! The reason the travellers keep returning is they run rings around our spineless council!
Sigh...because there's little way of pursuing it when they don't pay up...unlike the bloke chucking his litter around whose identity and permanent address were established. As for litter YOU WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHICH INDIVIDUAL LEFT BEHIND WHAT RUBBISH...without witnesses prepared to identity which traveller left which pile of rubble how are you ever going to do that??? And how would you ever get them into court or get the few people hundred quid they would get back fined out of them??? For our sakes PLEASE try to think before posting the same thing over and over and over again...
I'm sorry but your answer is part of the problem! They can and should be issued parking tickets and many car parks have CCTV. Their vans have number plates so presumably the Irish authorities will have the owners details on record. We need less of the "no can do" attitude, just get on and enforce the law irrespective of race, creed or colour! The reason these people keep coming back again and again is because they know our hapless authorities will let the get away scot free.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: Just the other week a guy was fined £400 for dropping a dog end (after failing to pay the £50 fixed penalty), so I say again why can't parking fines be issued to travellers with similar penalties applied for non payment? As for the litter, there have been numerous cases in the past where travellers have left rubbish which has cost a fortune to clear .... and no attempts ever made to prosecute forcriminal damage caused! The reason the travellers keep returning is they run rings around our spineless council![/p][/quote]Sigh...because there's little way of pursuing it when they don't pay up...unlike the bloke chucking his litter around whose identity and permanent address were established. As for litter YOU WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHICH INDIVIDUAL LEFT BEHIND WHAT RUBBISH...without witnesses prepared to identity which traveller left which pile of rubble how are you ever going to do that??? And how would you ever get them into court or get the few people hundred quid they would get back fined out of them??? For our sakes PLEASE try to think before posting the same thing over and over and over again...[/p][/quote]I'm sorry but your answer is part of the problem! They can and should be issued parking tickets and many car parks have CCTV. Their vans have number plates so presumably the Irish authorities will have the owners details on record. We need less of the "no can do" attitude, just get on and enforce the law irrespective of race, creed or colour! The reason these people keep coming back again and again is because they know our hapless authorities will let the get away scot free. fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 2

10:05pm Sun 15 Jun 14

Sir Beachy Head says...

I wonder if anyone noticed but at the start of this article the echo wrote,

AS holiday sites go, there are worse locations.


Basically they goaded you dear viewer into getting angry and venting your spleen. Now this thread is 125 post long and who wins ?

Well the echo wins because the more hits and site traffic the more they can charge for their advertising space on this site

So, please dont Isenberg to the bait next time. If you see a P1key story just dont read it and ignore it. Hit them where it hurts, in the wallet.
I wonder if anyone noticed but at the start of this article the echo wrote, AS holiday sites go, there are worse locations. Basically they goaded you dear viewer into getting angry and venting your spleen. Now this thread is 125 post long and who wins ? Well the echo wins because the more hits and site traffic the more they can charge for their advertising space on this site So, please dont Isenberg to the bait next time. If you see a P1key story just dont read it and ignore it. Hit them where it hurts, in the wallet. Sir Beachy Head
  • Score: 1

10:12pm Sun 15 Jun 14

Sir Beachy Head says...

I am sorry for the word Isenberg in my previous post. I didn't write it I wrote the word 'rise' but the **** stupid american predictive text that comes with an android tablet keeps on changing words as and when it feels like it.
******* Americans.
I am sorry for the word Isenberg in my previous post. I didn't write it I wrote the word 'rise' but the **** stupid american predictive text that comes with an android tablet keeps on changing words as and when it feels like it. ******* Americans. Sir Beachy Head
  • Score: 1

10:49pm Sun 15 Jun 14

Baysider says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Baysider wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Just the other week a guy was fined £400 for dropping a dog end (after failing to pay the £50 fixed penalty), so I say again why can't parking fines be issued to travellers with similar penalties applied for non payment? As for the litter, there have been numerous cases in the past where travellers have left rubbish which has cost a fortune to clear .... and no attempts ever made to prosecute forcriminal damage caused! The reason the travellers keep returning is they run rings around our spineless council!
Sigh...because there's little way of pursuing it when they don't pay up...unlike the bloke chucking his litter around whose identity and permanent address were established. As for litter YOU WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHICH INDIVIDUAL LEFT BEHIND WHAT RUBBISH...without witnesses prepared to identity which traveller left which pile of rubble how are you ever going to do that??? And how would you ever get them into court or get the few people hundred quid they would get back fined out of them??? For our sakes PLEASE try to think before posting the same thing over and over and over again...
I'm sorry but your answer is part of the problem! They can and should be issued parking tickets and many car parks have CCTV. Their vans have number plates so presumably the Irish authorities will have the owners details on record. We need less of the "no can do" attitude, just get on and enforce the law irrespective of race, creed or colour! The reason these people keep coming back again and again is because they know our hapless authorities will let the get away scot free.
No. They come back time and again because the work is there for them. No work on shonky driveways or over priced gardening = no or fewer travellers...but no one actually wants to discuss WHY they come here when they can throw brickbats at the council instead.
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: Just the other week a guy was fined £400 for dropping a dog end (after failing to pay the £50 fixed penalty), so I say again why can't parking fines be issued to travellers with similar penalties applied for non payment? As for the litter, there have been numerous cases in the past where travellers have left rubbish which has cost a fortune to clear .... and no attempts ever made to prosecute forcriminal damage caused! The reason the travellers keep returning is they run rings around our spineless council![/p][/quote]Sigh...because there's little way of pursuing it when they don't pay up...unlike the bloke chucking his litter around whose identity and permanent address were established. As for litter YOU WOULD NEED TO KNOW WHICH INDIVIDUAL LEFT BEHIND WHAT RUBBISH...without witnesses prepared to identity which traveller left which pile of rubble how are you ever going to do that??? And how would you ever get them into court or get the few people hundred quid they would get back fined out of them??? For our sakes PLEASE try to think before posting the same thing over and over and over again...[/p][/quote]I'm sorry but your answer is part of the problem! They can and should be issued parking tickets and many car parks have CCTV. Their vans have number plates so presumably the Irish authorities will have the owners details on record. We need less of the "no can do" attitude, just get on and enforce the law irrespective of race, creed or colour! The reason these people keep coming back again and again is because they know our hapless authorities will let the get away scot free.[/p][/quote]No. They come back time and again because the work is there for them. No work on shonky driveways or over priced gardening = no or fewer travellers...but no one actually wants to discuss WHY they come here when they can throw brickbats at the council instead. Baysider
  • Score: 1

8:40am Mon 16 Jun 14

podgie says...

Jo__Go wrote:
So at last we have a definition of an Irish Traveller - someone owning a camper van with Irish plates.
Or speaking with an Irish accent

Well that makes it easy then.
No the oxford definition is
'Irish Traveller/Traveller'
Someone who is often regarded as a anti social scumbag,
for reference also see 'free loading',Litter .Thief , watchdog TV program etc
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: So at last we have a definition of an Irish Traveller - someone owning a camper van with Irish plates. Or speaking with an Irish accent Well that makes it easy then.[/p][/quote]No the oxford definition is 'Irish Traveller/Traveller' Someone who is often regarded as a anti social scumbag, for reference also see 'free loading',Litter .Thief , watchdog TV program etc podgie
  • Score: 4

8:44am Mon 16 Jun 14

Carolyn43 says...

But this lot are here on holiday.
But this lot are here on holiday. Carolyn43
  • Score: 0

10:18am Mon 16 Jun 14

TheDistrict says...

As the comments have been removed in relation to the other illegal camp site set up by the very rich Irish holidaymakers on the Bath Road Car Park, I am wondering why such action was taken, when Cllr Beesley blatantly lies with his comments on that Bournemouth Council are succeeding in their fight against illegal campsites and parking, although in this latest case, court action cannot commence until today when the courts open. What happen to weekend emergency courts.

Bournemouth Council and Beesley are far too frighten to step forward and make an issue of such matters. Why are they in fear of ethnic repriasals or race relations matters, when it is very clear to all that this is only used by those illegal parkers to gain a free holiday and access to wherever they like.

Get a grip on the situation Beesley, or get out. Oh you will next May.
As the comments have been removed in relation to the other illegal camp site set up by the very rich Irish holidaymakers on the Bath Road Car Park, I am wondering why such action was taken, when Cllr Beesley blatantly lies with his comments on that Bournemouth Council are succeeding in their fight against illegal campsites and parking, although in this latest case, court action cannot commence until today when the courts open. What happen to weekend emergency courts. Bournemouth Council and Beesley are far too frighten to step forward and make an issue of such matters. Why are they in fear of ethnic repriasals or race relations matters, when it is very clear to all that this is only used by those illegal parkers to gain a free holiday and access to wherever they like. Get a grip on the situation Beesley, or get out. Oh you will next May. TheDistrict
  • Score: 1

11:45am Mon 16 Jun 14

bogtrotter says...

Not sure I follow. 'Gained access to a private road'. That to me means they are there illegally so why can't they be told to move instantly or towed away if they refuse? If you 'gained access to a private house', that's call breaking and entering (unless you steal something then add burglary) which is a crime.
Not sure I follow. 'Gained access to a private road'. That to me means they are there illegally so why can't they be told to move instantly or towed away if they refuse? If you 'gained access to a private house', that's call breaking and entering (unless you steal something then add burglary) which is a crime. bogtrotter
  • Score: 2

12:01pm Mon 16 Jun 14

Baysider says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
But this lot are here on holiday.
This particular lot of three...yes, just three camper vans on a car park are creating such a fuss...may or may not be here on holiday/passing through/here for a wedding or whatever but it is a FACT that most camps we get in the area are full of building and gardening vans with their equipment. Pretty much every Echo story about it shows pictures of these work vehicles don't they?
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: But this lot are here on holiday.[/p][/quote]This particular lot of three...yes, just three camper vans on a car park are creating such a fuss...may or may not be here on holiday/passing through/here for a wedding or whatever but it is a FACT that most camps we get in the area are full of building and gardening vans with their equipment. Pretty much every Echo story about it shows pictures of these work vehicles don't they? Baysider
  • Score: 1

3:05pm Mon 16 Jun 14

coster says...

As we all trust the Police 'Service' to do the right thing, why don't we just wait for one of those chaps with the shiny stuff on his hat to sort it all out. You all know how efficient they are.
As we all trust the Police 'Service' to do the right thing, why don't we just wait for one of those chaps with the shiny stuff on his hat to sort it all out. You all know how efficient they are. coster
  • Score: 0

6:21pm Mon 16 Jun 14

simond001 says...

If Bournemouth council actually made it possible to park a motorhome in the town then maybe these holiday makers would have parked there. I spent the weekend in my motorhome in Bournemouth and have never found a more difficult place to park.

Whatever racist comments the Echo and its readers which to use, I am an English homeowner who also pays my taxes, and the reason I have a motorhome is because I like to travel the UK. What a shame that a traditional seaside holiday town is ruined by bigots.
If Bournemouth council actually made it possible to park a motorhome in the town then maybe these holiday makers would have parked there. I spent the weekend in my motorhome in Bournemouth and have never found a more difficult place to park. Whatever racist comments the Echo and its readers which to use, I am an English homeowner who also pays my taxes, and the reason I have a motorhome is because I like to travel the UK. What a shame that a traditional seaside holiday town is ruined by bigots. simond001
  • Score: 1

10:31pm Mon 16 Jun 14

MrPitiful says...

simond001 wrote:
If Bournemouth council actually made it possible to park a motorhome in the town then maybe these holiday makers would have parked there. I spent the weekend in my motorhome in Bournemouth and have never found a more difficult place to park.

Whatever racist comments the Echo and its readers which to use, I am an English homeowner who also pays my taxes, and the reason I have a motorhome is because I like to travel the UK. What a shame that a traditional seaside holiday town is ruined by bigots.
Plenty of legal spaces if you know where to look mate.

Everyone moans about lack of free parking in & around the town centre but there is plenty.
[quote][p][bold]simond001[/bold] wrote: If Bournemouth council actually made it possible to park a motorhome in the town then maybe these holiday makers would have parked there. I spent the weekend in my motorhome in Bournemouth and have never found a more difficult place to park. Whatever racist comments the Echo and its readers which to use, I am an English homeowner who also pays my taxes, and the reason I have a motorhome is because I like to travel the UK. What a shame that a traditional seaside holiday town is ruined by bigots.[/p][/quote]Plenty of legal spaces if you know where to look mate. Everyone moans about lack of free parking in & around the town centre but there is plenty. MrPitiful
  • Score: 0

1:31am Tue 17 Jun 14

AdelaidePete says...

Can an Australian on holiday get these type of camp sites free or is it just Irish? I want to know whether to hire a campervan next year!
Can an Australian on holiday get these type of camp sites free or is it just Irish? I want to know whether to hire a campervan next year! AdelaidePete
  • Score: 2

7:17pm Tue 17 Jun 14

oh curly girl says...

I thought Travellers were just that...' Travellers ' so shouldn't they just keep on moving..... go ' though ' an area.... ?
I thought Travellers were just that...' Travellers ' so shouldn't they just keep on moving..... go ' though ' an area.... ? oh curly girl
  • Score: 0

10:29pm Tue 17 Jun 14

simond001 says...

MrPitiful wrote:
simond001 wrote:
If Bournemouth council actually made it possible to park a motorhome in the town then maybe these holiday makers would have parked there. I spent the weekend in my motorhome in Bournemouth and have never found a more difficult place to park.

Whatever racist comments the Echo and its readers which to use, I am an English homeowner who also pays my taxes, and the reason I have a motorhome is because I like to travel the UK. What a shame that a traditional seaside holiday town is ruined by bigots.
Plenty of legal spaces if you know where to look mate.

Everyone moans about lack of free parking in & around the town centre but there is plenty.
Mr Pitiful, please tell me where.

Even the council were at a loss when requesting suitable parking.

Bear in mind that locals knowing where it is no benefit to visitors. Surely a tourist hotspot should make it easy for visitors to safely park.
[quote][p][bold]MrPitiful[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]simond001[/bold] wrote: If Bournemouth council actually made it possible to park a motorhome in the town then maybe these holiday makers would have parked there. I spent the weekend in my motorhome in Bournemouth and have never found a more difficult place to park. Whatever racist comments the Echo and its readers which to use, I am an English homeowner who also pays my taxes, and the reason I have a motorhome is because I like to travel the UK. What a shame that a traditional seaside holiday town is ruined by bigots.[/p][/quote]Plenty of legal spaces if you know where to look mate. Everyone moans about lack of free parking in & around the town centre but there is plenty.[/p][/quote]Mr Pitiful, please tell me where. Even the council were at a loss when requesting suitable parking. Bear in mind that locals knowing where it is no benefit to visitors. Surely a tourist hotspot should make it easy for visitors to safely park. simond001
  • Score: 0

2:39am Fri 27 Jun 14

mimi55 says...

Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth wrote:
Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-)

The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same.

(Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.)

So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??"

Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen.

UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year.

I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter.

But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though!
Criminal justice act 1994, section 61!
[quote][p][bold]Martin Houlden UKIP Bournemouth[/bold] wrote: Well unusually for a UKIP member, let me say that this particular problem is NOT caused by the EU (yes, you heard that right ;-) The issue is caused partly because of an ECHR ruling (which is not the EU) where the legislation originated. The problem is that a UK judge (back in 2000 I think) was asked to decide if 'travellers' should be afforded the same protection under the ECHR ruling as 'Romany Gypsies' - the judge decided that they were the same. (Before I continue, it's worth noting that the same legislation is in place in Eire, but their judges decided that 'travellers' were NOT the same as Romany Gypsies - hence if you try this over there you'll get locked up.) So we know that a UK is at least partially to blame. But the other problem is "what is the definition of a traveller??" Now i'm probably one of the few people who's taken time to actually speak to a gypsy liaison officer and asked that very question (i like to do research before ranting!) and he said that the definition is "so wide" the effect is that if someone travels for "part of the year" then they are a traveller. I asked if there were time limits to validate this, and apparently there are none. So in effect if you own a motorhome and spend one weekend a year in the Lake District, then you have every right to call yourself a traveller, and thus you get to be able to laugh in the face of the ordinary law-abiding citizen. UKIP policy in 2010 (which is being revised and detailed again now in time for launch this September) was to send that ruling back to the UK Courts and strip out the reference to "travellers" from the ECHR ruling (to be on the same footing as other nations). Now although this would still allow authentic Romany Gypsies the right to act in this way (another discussion for another day I think) it would stop the sort of incursion that residents of Bournemouth and Poole have to put up with every year. I do not know for certain if the policy will be the same as in 2010 (though I'll lobby Tim Aker - Head of Policy - for the inclusion of this if it has been left out) but I sincerely hope we will not have changed our intent on this matter. But the upshot is (for now at least) that the best the council can do is apply for court orders as fast as possible - just remember who's working for you in May 2015 though![/p][/quote]Criminal justice act 1994, section 61! mimi55
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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