Revealed: the two transit sites proposed for travellers in Poole – and residents are urged to oppose one

Bournemouth Echo: SITE: Proposed temporary transit camp for travellers at  Marshes End in Creekmoor SITE: Proposed temporary transit camp for travellers at Marshes End in Creekmoor

TWO sites have been put forward as summer transit sites for travellers in Poole and councillors are rallying residents to turn out in force and support their opposition to one.

The three ward councillors who represent Creekmoor have united to oppose controversial proposals which could see a temporary stopping site with 27 pitches during the summer months on land at Marshes End.

They are leafleting residents calling on them to attend Borough of Poole’s cabinet meeting, on tonight, where a report will suggest two possible sites in the borough, narrowed down from an original 90 and a shortlist of seven.

They are on land directly next to the fire station at Creekmoor – adjacent to the green belt park and ride – and a patch of land north of the B&Q car park in Broadstone Way with space for four pitches.

“Our residents in Creekmoor are understandably concerned as they have told us that they feel it always tends to be Creekmoor which bears the brunt of the more difficult ‘installations’ in Poole,” said ward councillor Judy Butt, who last October chaired a meeting to discuss the borough’s gypsy and traveller strategy.

Last summer public open space was frequently descended upon by travellers and the council, which has spent more than £200,000 of council tax-payers money on the issue over seven years, is finding it difficult to identify a temporary transit site.

Poole Mayor, Cllr Phil Eades, who called on the council to find a suitable temporary site before next summer said: “I welcome this and I call on all members of the council and the community to get behind it.

“This solves the problem. I truly believe that once the travellers know we have complied with the legislation, they will go somewhere else.”

However Creekmoor ward councillor John Rampton raised concerns over the suitability of the Marshes End site which he said was too contaminated to put a car park on. Plus issues with access and the proximity to the dual-carriageway.

The cabinet meeting where this will be discussed takes place tonight at the Civic Centre at 7pm.

Terry Stewart of the Vision for Poole Group said: “We were all in favour of having a temporary stopping place as long as they could find a suitable one.”

However with his Council for the Protection of Rural England hat on, he said:  “There is concern that they don’t tarmac over the marsh area.

“Also that wood is protected.”

Mike Randall of Parkstone Bay Association said: “If they create this and it’s full, where does the overflow go?”

He pointed out that at one point last summer there were 13 caravans at Baiter, and that different groups of travellers did not get on with each other.

Stephen Thorne, head of planning and regeneration, Borough of Poole said: “The council controls when the site is required, opened and who occupies it, minimising the disruption to local residents. The sites would only be required when the Council, as part of their normal process, cannot manage the situation on their own.”

However even if a site or sites are approved by cabinet and a planning application is submitted, this may not solve the problem.

“While police would be able to direct travellers to the site, should more turn up than there are pitches for, eviction orders for the remainder would still have to be sought through the courts.

Please note: Any reference to gypsies or any racially offensive term, or any comment inciting violence or hatred is in breach of our terms and conditions and will result in your account being suspended without notice. Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers are legally recognised as ethnic groups, and protected by the Race Relations Act. Please keep your comments to this particular incident and do not generalise. Thanks for your co-operation.

Comments (80)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:18am Tue 14 Jan 14

ASM says...

i feel sorry for anyone who has worked hard and bought a property there, because now they won't want to live there or be able to sell their house
i feel sorry for anyone who has worked hard and bought a property there, because now they won't want to live there or be able to sell their house ASM

7:23am Tue 14 Jan 14

alasdair1967 says...

What about all the open space down by the twin sails bridge
What about all the open space down by the twin sails bridge alasdair1967

7:34am Tue 14 Jan 14

Baysider says...

Yep, here we go. Just like every other story the Echo runs around travellers. Glib, populist comments rather than actually demonstrating they've actually understood or thought about a practical, legal solution.

I'll leave you all to get on with it.
Yep, here we go. Just like every other story the Echo runs around travellers. Glib, populist comments rather than actually demonstrating they've actually understood or thought about a practical, legal solution. I'll leave you all to get on with it. Baysider

7:39am Tue 14 Jan 14

alasdair1967 says...

It's all well and good putting plans in place,however does not take the brains of an archbishop to accept the months prior to the steam fair the travellers will pitch where they want when they want ,
It's all well and good putting plans in place,however does not take the brains of an archbishop to accept the months prior to the steam fair the travellers will pitch where they want when they want , alasdair1967

7:42am Tue 14 Jan 14

cheeriedriteup says...

alasdair1967 wrote:
It's all well and good putting plans in place,however does not take the brains of an archbishop to accept the months prior to the steam fair the travellers will pitch where they want when they want ,
Maybe there's the solution, the steam attracts them, the land owners of the steam fair make a lot of money, why are they not using their land to occupy these types all year round
[quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: It's all well and good putting plans in place,however does not take the brains of an archbishop to accept the months prior to the steam fair the travellers will pitch where they want when they want ,[/p][/quote]Maybe there's the solution, the steam attracts them, the land owners of the steam fair make a lot of money, why are they not using their land to occupy these types all year round cheeriedriteup

7:46am Tue 14 Jan 14

alasdair1967 says...

cheeriedriteup wrote:
alasdair1967 wrote:
It's all well and good putting plans in place,however does not take the brains of an archbishop to accept the months prior to the steam fair the travellers will pitch where they want when they want ,
Maybe there's the solution, the steam attracts them, the land owners of the steam fair make a lot of money, why are they not using their land to occupy these types all year round
As soon as the steam fair opens the problem disappears !
[quote][p][bold]cheeriedriteup[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: It's all well and good putting plans in place,however does not take the brains of an archbishop to accept the months prior to the steam fair the travellers will pitch where they want when they want ,[/p][/quote]Maybe there's the solution, the steam attracts them, the land owners of the steam fair make a lot of money, why are they not using their land to occupy these types all year round[/p][/quote]As soon as the steam fair opens the problem disappears ! alasdair1967

7:50am Tue 14 Jan 14

apm1954 says...

good old cllr eades got the answer to everything not in his ward about time he had a look around his branksome ward, i have, you have lost four votes in my house,
good old cllr eades got the answer to everything not in his ward about time he had a look around his branksome ward, i have, you have lost four votes in my house, apm1954

7:58am Tue 14 Jan 14

kalebmoledirt says...

If your one of the tax paying ethnic minorities.If you rent a home, you leave a deposite to ensure you leave it in the,same state you found it in.?
If your one of the tax paying ethnic minorities.If you rent a home, you leave a deposite to ensure you leave it in the,same state you found it in.? kalebmoledirt

8:05am Tue 14 Jan 14

Steveo123 says...

I don't understand ,,, If its only for the summer (as some live in houses in the winter) and its only 27 Vans , why don't they just book into a caravan park,, theres loads around.. ??
I don't understand ,,, If its only for the summer (as some live in houses in the winter) and its only 27 Vans , why don't they just book into a caravan park,, theres loads around.. ?? Steveo123

8:05am Tue 14 Jan 14

Ash_69 says...

A site needs to be found. As mentioned in the article and seen in other areas, if the travelers do have a site to go to and have to legally comply then they would rather go somewhere else.

It's when no sites area available then they target that area as they have more freedom of movement. So this is seen as much as prevention. Also once on the site they can be managed better for the good of all parties.

yes, it has to go somewhere and you can't please everybody. You can't have the perfect situation of them never coming here so you find the next best solution.
A site needs to be found. As mentioned in the article and seen in other areas, if the travelers do have a site to go to and have to legally comply then they would rather go somewhere else. It's when no sites area available then they target that area as they have more freedom of movement. So this is seen as much as prevention. Also once on the site they can be managed better for the good of all parties. yes, it has to go somewhere and you can't please everybody. You can't have the perfect situation of them never coming here so you find the next best solution. Ash_69

8:22am Tue 14 Jan 14

Carolyn43 says...

The Marshes End site was deemed contaminated and therefore not suitable for the Park and Ride, where people would be for just a few minutes parking and retrieving their cars, so trees were cut down and a green field tarmacked over to provide this white elephant.
......
Now it's suddenly suitable for people to live on, if only for a short time. Come on Poole Council - you can fool some of the people some of the time.
The Marshes End site was deemed contaminated and therefore not suitable for the Park and Ride, where people would be for just a few minutes parking and retrieving their cars, so trees were cut down and a green field tarmacked over to provide this white elephant. ...... Now it's suddenly suitable for people to live on, if only for a short time. Come on Poole Council - you can fool some of the people some of the time. Carolyn43

8:39am Tue 14 Jan 14

we-shall-see says...

So where is the other proposed site then?

Personally, I can't see why they don't use the so called "park & ride" car park at Creekmoor. It's closed most of the year and since the ground is already covered in tarmac, it would save a fortune in making a new car park for them.
So where is the other proposed site then? Personally, I can't see why they don't use the so called "park & ride" car park at Creekmoor. It's closed most of the year and since the ground is already covered in tarmac, it would save a fortune in making a new car park for them. we-shall-see

8:47am Tue 14 Jan 14

we-shall-see says...

Surely the B&Q one is a no-brainer? Ground already threre, floodlighting in place and it looks like a dump full of litter and rubbish anyway ….. it's not only travellers who leave masses of litter behind - kids who use the skatepark next to B&Q obviously do too, or it wouldn't look the way it does , full of rubbish and drink cans……. so before anyone goes around shouting off about filthy gypsies etc, try telling your own little darlings not to leave litter when they use the skate park …… glass houses and all that :o/
Surely the B&Q one is a no-brainer? Ground already threre, floodlighting in place and it looks like a dump full of litter and rubbish anyway ….. it's not only travellers who leave masses of litter behind - kids who use the skatepark next to B&Q obviously do too, or it wouldn't look the way it does , full of rubbish and drink cans……. so before anyone goes around shouting off about filthy gypsies etc, try telling your own little darlings not to leave litter when they use the skate park …… glass houses and all that :o/ we-shall-see

8:48am Tue 14 Jan 14

exocet says...

They obviously have money as evidenced by the flash cars and caravans.Why can't they contribute towards their own site?
They obviously have money as evidenced by the flash cars and caravans.Why can't they contribute towards their own site? exocet

8:59am Tue 14 Jan 14

60plus says...

Why not put them back at tower park,o I forgot they trashed that site.
Why not put them back at tower park,o I forgot they trashed that site. 60plus

9:06am Tue 14 Jan 14

suzigirl says...

Will they be charged for using the site?
Will they be charged for using the site? suzigirl

9:17am Tue 14 Jan 14

JustForPoole says...

Steveo123 wrote:
I don't understand ,,, If its only for the summer (as some live in houses in the winter) and its only 27 Vans , why don't they just book into a caravan park,, theres loads around.. ??
We don`t want them on a properly organised campsite where clean living, hygenic, law abiding tourists pay to relax!!!
[quote][p][bold]Steveo123[/bold] wrote: I don't understand ,,, If its only for the summer (as some live in houses in the winter) and its only 27 Vans , why don't they just book into a caravan park,, theres loads around.. ??[/p][/quote]We don`t want them on a properly organised campsite where clean living, hygenic, law abiding tourists pay to relax!!! JustForPoole

9:45am Tue 14 Jan 14

High Treason says...

This is the problem when the human rights act is forced on us. We have to put up with and pay dearly for others to abuse their surroundings.
This is the problem when the human rights act is forced on us. We have to put up with and pay dearly for others to abuse their surroundings. High Treason

9:46am Tue 14 Jan 14

canfordcherry says...

I think that everyone will not want them in their 'back yard' so to speak, but to alleviate the problem of the last several years unauthorised sites a permanent transit place has to be found. Both of these places are still to close to residential areas in my view. The travellers won't want to mix with the residents as the ways of both are alien to each other. There must be an area of open space that is not used by walkers, wildlife sensitive or sssi surely.
By giving them an area we re-open the rest of Dorset for summer recreational activities once again.
I think that everyone will not want them in their 'back yard' so to speak, but to alleviate the problem of the last several years unauthorised sites a permanent transit place has to be found. Both of these places are still to close to residential areas in my view. The travellers won't want to mix with the residents as the ways of both are alien to each other. There must be an area of open space that is not used by walkers, wildlife sensitive or sssi surely. By giving them an area we re-open the rest of Dorset for summer recreational activities once again. canfordcherry

9:55am Tue 14 Jan 14

CourtOffside says...

canfordcherry wrote:
I think that everyone will not want them in their 'back yard' so to speak, but to alleviate the problem of the last several years unauthorised sites a permanent transit place has to be found. Both of these places are still to close to residential areas in my view. The travellers won't want to mix with the residents as the ways of both are alien to each other. There must be an area of open space that is not used by walkers, wildlife sensitive or sssi surely.
By giving them an area we re-open the rest of Dorset for summer recreational activities once again.
There's a big area of open space we can give them.

Hampshire.
[quote][p][bold]canfordcherry[/bold] wrote: I think that everyone will not want them in their 'back yard' so to speak, but to alleviate the problem of the last several years unauthorised sites a permanent transit place has to be found. Both of these places are still to close to residential areas in my view. The travellers won't want to mix with the residents as the ways of both are alien to each other. There must be an area of open space that is not used by walkers, wildlife sensitive or sssi surely. By giving them an area we re-open the rest of Dorset for summer recreational activities once again.[/p][/quote]There's a big area of open space we can give them. Hampshire. CourtOffside

9:59am Tue 14 Jan 14

nickynoodah says...

we-shall-see wrote:
So where is the other proposed site then?

Personally, I can't see why they don't use the so called "park & ride" car park at Creekmoor. It's closed most of the year and since the ground is already covered in tarmac, it would save a fortune in making a new car park for them.
They are on land directly next to the fire station at Creekmoor – adjacent to the green belt park and ride – and a patch of land north of the B&Q car park in Broadstone Way with space for four pitches
[quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: So where is the other proposed site then? Personally, I can't see why they don't use the so called "park & ride" car park at Creekmoor. It's closed most of the year and since the ground is already covered in tarmac, it would save a fortune in making a new car park for them.[/p][/quote]They are on land directly next to the fire station at Creekmoor – adjacent to the green belt park and ride – and a patch of land north of the B&Q car park in Broadstone Way with space for four pitches nickynoodah

10:08am Tue 14 Jan 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Is the green in Walpole road big enough for s few caravans and police station.Would make a great musical.
Is the green in Walpole road big enough for s few caravans and police station.Would make a great musical. kalebmoledirt

10:25am Tue 14 Jan 14

kalebmoledirt says...

How about the other site going down on the sandbanks peninsula,plenty of fresh air nice hotel bar bit busy in the summer but nice neighbours.
How about the other site going down on the sandbanks peninsula,plenty of fresh air nice hotel bar bit busy in the summer but nice neighbours. kalebmoledirt

10:38am Tue 14 Jan 14

Pauljmills says...

It always seems to be us Creekmoor resident that bare the brunt of the travellers when they descend on area, can't the council used all the land over the side of the twin sails bridge, there are acres of unused land there
It always seems to be us Creekmoor resident that bare the brunt of the travellers when they descend on area, can't the council used all the land over the side of the twin sails bridge, there are acres of unused land there Pauljmills

11:16am Tue 14 Jan 14

Baywolf says...

I like the way the Tory led council is urging the public to show opposition to travelers yet condemn the public for protesting against council tax bedroom tax and bemoaning those using food banks..
I like the way the Tory led council is urging the public to show opposition to travelers yet condemn the public for protesting against council tax bedroom tax and bemoaning those using food banks.. Baywolf

11:17am Tue 14 Jan 14

muscliffman says...

Never mind the local NIMBY like problems such as narrow roads, nearby schools, unsuitable access, or even the concerns of neighbouring residents which are usually rolled out when these 'traveller' site proposals arise.

Let's get to the basics, there is very good reason to suspect the majority of the British public do NOT want to recognise 'Irish travellers' as an 'ethnic' group (after all their own Country will not!) because they do not accept or agree with these people's often openly unlawful and generally freeloading lifestyle. But more to the point most of the British population almost certainly do not wish to provide any sites at public expense for these 'travellers' anywhere in Poole, Dorset or for that matter the entire UK!

It seems this whole topic is now about a small but very vocally supported group of people promoting a lifestyle unacceptable to the vast majority of the public running rings around our hapless politicians, who always duck for cover on this matter by hiding behind the 'PC rules' and 'EU law'. I will take the informed liberty of repeating the suggestion that most residents and voters in Poole do not want any 'traveller' site/s in their town - and there is the clue for these weak Councillors and MPs, it is 'their' town and their vote!
Never mind the local NIMBY like problems such as narrow roads, nearby schools, unsuitable access, or even the concerns of neighbouring residents which are usually rolled out when these 'traveller' site proposals arise. Let's get to the basics, there is very good reason to suspect the majority of the British public do NOT want to recognise 'Irish travellers' as an 'ethnic' group (after all their own Country will not!) because they do not accept or agree with these people's often openly unlawful and generally freeloading lifestyle. But more to the point most of the British population almost certainly do not wish to provide any sites at public expense for these 'travellers' anywhere in Poole, Dorset or for that matter the entire UK! It seems this whole topic is now about a small but very vocally supported group of people promoting a lifestyle unacceptable to the vast majority of the public running rings around our hapless politicians, who always duck for cover on this matter by hiding behind the 'PC rules' and 'EU law'. I will take the informed liberty of repeating the suggestion that most residents and voters in Poole do not want any 'traveller' site/s in their town - and there is the clue for these weak Councillors and MPs, it is 'their' town and their vote! muscliffman

11:18am Tue 14 Jan 14

bijupi says...

can anyone tell me exactly where the 2 possible mentioned sites are?
can anyone tell me exactly where the 2 possible mentioned sites are? bijupi

11:38am Tue 14 Jan 14

muscliffman says...

High Treason wrote:
This is the problem when the human rights act is forced on us. We have to put up with and pay dearly for others to abuse their surroundings.
And that is what our feeble UK politicians want us to believe - " human rights act is forced on us", forced upon us maybe, but by whom?

Because the Irish Republic itself a fully paid up EU member state has no problem in denying this 'traveller' lifestyle any ethnic recognition or privilege.
[quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: This is the problem when the human rights act is forced on us. We have to put up with and pay dearly for others to abuse their surroundings.[/p][/quote]And that is what our feeble UK politicians want us to believe - " human rights act is forced on us", forced upon us maybe, but by whom? Because the Irish Republic itself a fully paid up EU member state has no problem in denying this 'traveller' lifestyle any ethnic recognition or privilege. muscliffman

12:00pm Tue 14 Jan 14

bijupi says...

let's set a new ethnic group up - Poole non council tax payers, and fight for our human laws
let's set a new ethnic group up - Poole non council tax payers, and fight for our human laws bijupi

12:31pm Tue 14 Jan 14

cheeriedriteup says...

alasdair1967 wrote:
cheeriedriteup wrote:
alasdair1967 wrote:
It's all well and good putting plans in place,however does not take the brains of an archbishop to accept the months prior to the steam fair the travellers will pitch where they want when they want ,
Maybe there's the solution, the steam attracts them, the land owners of the steam fair make a lot of money, why are they not using their land to occupy these types all year round
As soon as the steam fair opens the problem disappears !
Because that particular farmer allocates a field for them, this is what I'm saying make it permenant there
[quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cheeriedriteup[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: It's all well and good putting plans in place,however does not take the brains of an archbishop to accept the months prior to the steam fair the travellers will pitch where they want when they want ,[/p][/quote]Maybe there's the solution, the steam attracts them, the land owners of the steam fair make a lot of money, why are they not using their land to occupy these types all year round[/p][/quote]As soon as the steam fair opens the problem disappears ![/p][/quote]Because that particular farmer allocates a field for them, this is what I'm saying make it permenant there cheeriedriteup

12:35pm Tue 14 Jan 14

altoman says...

speedy231278 wrote:
I'll be delighted for them to have a campsite wherever they like in the area. When they pay for it to be built, pay rent and tax on it, and leave it clean and tidy. In other words, never in a million bloody years! Funny how they're not even a recognised ethnic group in Ireland, they're recognised as troublemakers there too, and even the Irish who we poke fun at for allegedly being daft won't put up with their antics. Why do you think they are in England?
Because ENGLAND is a soft touch for everyone but the ENGLISH.
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: I'll be delighted for them to have a campsite wherever they like in the area. When they pay for it to be built, pay rent and tax on it, and leave it clean and tidy. In other words, never in a million bloody years! Funny how they're not even a recognised ethnic group in Ireland, they're recognised as troublemakers there too, and even the Irish who we poke fun at for allegedly being daft won't put up with their antics. Why do you think they are in England?[/p][/quote]Because ENGLAND is a soft touch for everyone but the ENGLISH. altoman

12:39pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

Waste as much tax-payers money as you like on this fools errand - we all know the summer invasion will begin as usual and objecting to the council's plan will only give them an excuse to not deal with the root cause of this problem, that is, anti-social 'travellers'.
Waste as much tax-payers money as you like on this fools errand - we all know the summer invasion will begin as usual and objecting to the council's plan will only give them an excuse to not deal with the root cause of this problem, that is, anti-social 'travellers'. Letcommonsenseprevail

12:43pm Tue 14 Jan 14

kalebmoledirt says...

What are the qualifications for being a Romany gypsies or an Irish traveller.does it state what ethnic minority you belong too on their national insurance card, passport,tax return.or any other official document.or can you turn up at traveller site and make camp rent free.if that is the case then the system is open to abuse, could get all sorts of scallywagss living rent free at the exspence of the ethnic minorities of tax payers.never known such naughtyness
What are the qualifications for being a Romany gypsies or an Irish traveller.does it state what ethnic minority you belong too on their national insurance card, passport,tax return.or any other official document.or can you turn up at traveller site and make camp rent free.if that is the case then the system is open to abuse, could get all sorts of scallywagss living rent free at the exspence of the ethnic minorities of tax payers.never known such naughtyness kalebmoledirt

1:02pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Ebb Tide says...

ASM wrote:
i feel sorry for anyone who has worked hard and bought a property there, because now they won't want to live there or be able to sell their house
Surely it will only be for 2014, whilst the law is changed by our concerned MPs. They do have the problem of being in a minority within the House and having to protect our Borough from civil unrest - perhaps they can succeed before 2015 !

On the other hand you may be right about a permanent blight on any locality that persistently has to host anti-social behaviour dressed up as 'human rights'.
[quote][p][bold]ASM[/bold] wrote: i feel sorry for anyone who has worked hard and bought a property there, because now they won't want to live there or be able to sell their house[/p][/quote]Surely it will only be for 2014, whilst the law is changed by our concerned MPs. They do have the problem of being in a minority within the House and having to protect our Borough from civil unrest - perhaps they can succeed before 2015 ! On the other hand you may be right about a permanent blight on any locality that persistently has to host anti-social behaviour dressed up as 'human rights'. Ebb Tide

1:08pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Tony Trent says...

It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this!
It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this! Tony Trent

1:16pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Ebb Tide says...

Tony Trent wrote:
It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this!
Agreed. That is why it is thought that temporary (for one year only) transit sites should be found, pending a change in the law. If our MPs fail to secure a change in the law, then the transit site for 2015 should be somewhere other than that which may be adopted for 2014. No doubt local householders will be given that guarantee together with a hot line to the police !! ???
[quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this![/p][/quote]Agreed. That is why it is thought that temporary (for one year only) transit sites should be found, pending a change in the law. If our MPs fail to secure a change in the law, then the transit site for 2015 should be somewhere other than that which may be adopted for 2014. No doubt local householders will be given that guarantee together with a hot line to the police !! ??? Ebb Tide

1:19pm Tue 14 Jan 14

randson112 says...

I,m a Poole resident, I own a caravan, when I'm hooked up does that make me a traveller, can I use them sites, or am I victimised into having to use a camp site, I promise to leave the place filthier than I found it and scarper before paying any rent, I will also complain of racism and the disgusting state of the site, I suggest locals get together and demand we be able to use the sites as well as anybody else.
I,m a Poole resident, I own a caravan, when I'm hooked up does that make me a traveller, can I use them sites, or am I victimised into having to use a camp site, I promise to leave the place filthier than I found it and scarper before paying any rent, I will also complain of racism and the disgusting state of the site, I suggest locals get together and demand we be able to use the sites as well as anybody else. randson112

1:20pm Tue 14 Jan 14

carrrob says...

Unfortunately for the residents this was the obvious site
Unfortunately for the residents this was the obvious site carrrob

1:26pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Ebb Tide says...

randson112 wrote:
I,m a Poole resident, I own a caravan, when I'm hooked up does that make me a traveller, can I use them sites, or am I victimised into having to use a camp site, I promise to leave the place filthier than I found it and scarper before paying any rent, I will also complain of racism and the disgusting state of the site, I suggest locals get together and demand we be able to use the sites as well as anybody else.
Guess you have highlighted the stupidity of the law that is afflicting this part of the UK like nowhere else. Thank you. It is hoped our MPs read these comments and gain the sort of insights that they provide.
[quote][p][bold]randson112[/bold] wrote: I,m a Poole resident, I own a caravan, when I'm hooked up does that make me a traveller, can I use them sites, or am I victimised into having to use a camp site, I promise to leave the place filthier than I found it and scarper before paying any rent, I will also complain of racism and the disgusting state of the site, I suggest locals get together and demand we be able to use the sites as well as anybody else.[/p][/quote]Guess you have highlighted the stupidity of the law that is afflicting this part of the UK like nowhere else. Thank you. It is hoped our MPs read these comments and gain the sort of insights that they provide. Ebb Tide

1:41pm Tue 14 Jan 14

JustForPoole says...

I think we should get the subject of "travellers" into context. We all complain and moan about them when they arrive ... but why??? Because they pitch their caravans wherever they want ... they do not pay any form of rent or parking charge for the duration of their stay ... they have below average toilet skills, frequently leaving a mess behind them ... they do not know how to dispose of any form of rubbish ... they lack the ability to agreeably mix with the local community frequently using unsocial behaviour ... they do not know how to behave when in a public house, frequently spoiling a social occasion for locals ... a criminal element seems to follow them ????? How much more should I write. All of these are against the law whether it be "White British" "Asian" "Black Caribean" or traveller ..... so why don`t our law keepers, THE POLICE, do something about it ..... maybe then the travellers might think twice before setting foot in Dorset. Rant over!!!
I think we should get the subject of "travellers" into context. We all complain and moan about them when they arrive ... but why??? Because they pitch their caravans wherever they want ... they do not pay any form of rent or parking charge for the duration of their stay ... they have below average toilet skills, frequently leaving a mess behind them ... they do not know how to dispose of any form of rubbish ... they lack the ability to agreeably mix with the local community frequently using unsocial behaviour ... they do not know how to behave when in a public house, frequently spoiling a social occasion for locals ... a criminal element seems to follow them ????? How much more should I write. All of these are against the law whether it be "White British" "Asian" "Black Caribean" or traveller ..... so why don`t our law keepers, THE POLICE, do something about it ..... maybe then the travellers might think twice before setting foot in Dorset. Rant over!!! JustForPoole

2:06pm Tue 14 Jan 14

davecook says...

If it is a temporary site, why make spend money making a site next to the Creekmoor park and ride? Why not use the Creekmoor park and ride itself as the car park is virtually disused. All it needs is a water tap and waste facilities, which would have to be put elsewhere anyway. As for the bit at the northern end of B&Q car park, this is next to a childrens skate park. Totally unsuitable.
If it is a temporary site, why make spend money making a site next to the Creekmoor park and ride? Why not use the Creekmoor park and ride itself as the car park is virtually disused. All it needs is a water tap and waste facilities, which would have to be put elsewhere anyway. As for the bit at the northern end of B&Q car park, this is next to a childrens skate park. Totally unsuitable. davecook

2:10pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

Baysider wrote:
Yep, here we go. Just like every other story the Echo runs around travellers. Glib, populist comments rather than actually demonstrating they've actually understood or thought about a practical, legal solution.

I'll leave you all to get on with it.
By populist, presumably you mean in line with majority opinion? Shame our council representatives (ha!) can't follow the same track, and avoid the glib solution of dumping the problem in Creekmoor.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Yep, here we go. Just like every other story the Echo runs around travellers. Glib, populist comments rather than actually demonstrating they've actually understood or thought about a practical, legal solution. I'll leave you all to get on with it.[/p][/quote]By populist, presumably you mean in line with majority opinion? Shame our council representatives (ha!) can't follow the same track, and avoid the glib solution of dumping the problem in Creekmoor. Jo__Go

2:12pm Tue 14 Jan 14

adspacebroker says...

In amongst the ridiculous 'too much time on my hands' comments' there are some very valid ones. It is important to focus on the words 'transit' and 'temporary'. I am sure that many of us have experienced the appalling neanderthal behaviour of some of these 'migrants'. What financial or social contribution to they make to our local community? Apart from costing the tax payer for cleansing after spending so much time looking for somewhere to put them! So...summer transit sites, what is the criteria for determining how long the migrants can stay considering they are in 'transit'. Will Dorset Police exercise their powers more correctly this time when criminal damage and traffic offences are being committed. They were wrong not to make arrests last year and that has been proven, sadly inexperienced PCSO's and Constables left unsupported at the scene will go with the flow of intimidation. Farmers are well paid to allow their field to go fallow....so what is wrong with creating a site at such a location, after all the majority don't need humanistic facilities like power, toilets and shops!
In amongst the ridiculous 'too much time on my hands' comments' there are some very valid ones. It is important to focus on the words 'transit' and 'temporary'. I am sure that many of us have experienced the appalling neanderthal behaviour of some of these 'migrants'. What financial or social contribution to they make to our local community? Apart from costing the tax payer for cleansing after spending so much time looking for somewhere to put them! So...summer transit sites, what is the criteria for determining how long the migrants can stay considering they are in 'transit'. Will Dorset Police exercise their powers more correctly this time when criminal damage and traffic offences are being committed. They were wrong not to make arrests last year and that has been proven, sadly inexperienced PCSO's and Constables left unsupported at the scene will go with the flow of intimidation. Farmers are well paid to allow their field to go fallow....so what is wrong with creating a site at such a location, after all the majority don't need humanistic facilities like power, toilets and shops! adspacebroker

2:14pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

Ash_69 wrote:
A site needs to be found. As mentioned in the article and seen in other areas, if the travelers do have a site to go to and have to legally comply then they would rather go somewhere else.

It's when no sites area available then they target that area as they have more freedom of movement. So this is seen as much as prevention. Also once on the site they can be managed better for the good of all parties.

yes, it has to go somewhere and you can't please everybody. You can't have the perfect situation of them never coming here so you find the next best solution.
I'm guessing you don't live anywhere near the proposed site...
[quote][p][bold]Ash_69[/bold] wrote: A site needs to be found. As mentioned in the article and seen in other areas, if the travelers do have a site to go to and have to legally comply then they would rather go somewhere else. It's when no sites area available then they target that area as they have more freedom of movement. So this is seen as much as prevention. Also once on the site they can be managed better for the good of all parties. yes, it has to go somewhere and you can't please everybody. You can't have the perfect situation of them never coming here so you find the next best solution.[/p][/quote]I'm guessing you don't live anywhere near the proposed site... Jo__Go

2:18pm Tue 14 Jan 14

MattGillett says...

If you don't have a transit site it's much harder and much more expensive for a council to evict travellers from the local park.
Some of the £200,000 saving should be spent on the area that takes the transit site. Most of the saving will be needed to repair the site regularily.
Finally if you are going to have a 4 van site anyway why not have a 10 Van site and get Bournemouth to pay £50k per annum to sort their traveller problems as well.
If you don't have a transit site it's much harder and much more expensive for a council to evict travellers from the local park. Some of the £200,000 saving should be spent on the area that takes the transit site. Most of the saving will be needed to repair the site regularily. Finally if you are going to have a 4 van site anyway why not have a 10 Van site and get Bournemouth to pay £50k per annum to sort their traveller problems as well. MattGillett

2:20pm Tue 14 Jan 14

dribydal says...

alasdair1967 wrote:
What about all the open space down by the twin sails bridge
Do you mean on the water lol?
[quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: What about all the open space down by the twin sails bridge[/p][/quote]Do you mean on the water lol? dribydal

2:30pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
The Marshes End site was deemed contaminated and therefore not suitable for the Park and Ride, where people would be for just a few minutes parking and retrieving their cars, so trees were cut down and a green field tarmacked over to provide this white elephant.
......
Now it's suddenly suitable for people to live on, if only for a short time. Come on Poole Council - you can fool some of the people some of the time.
The P&R fiasco was a result of greedy councillors and officers drooling over a lump of central government cash. They wanted the kudos of a P&R but without spending too much local cash, so they identified everywhere but the green field (the cheapest solution) as too contaminated to use. Since then they have built a fire station (permanently manned) on the 'contaminated' site, and now they want to stick travellers on another part of the 'contaminated' site.
The odd thing is that the P&R was a Lib Dem fiasco, which made them unelectable in Creekmoor; the travellers site is happening under a Tory administration. Despite the best efforts of the Tory ward councillors to stand against the ridiculous proposal, it may well make Tories unelectable in Creekmoor next year... Carolyn43 is bang on right.
Anyone for independent councillors?
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: The Marshes End site was deemed contaminated and therefore not suitable for the Park and Ride, where people would be for just a few minutes parking and retrieving their cars, so trees were cut down and a green field tarmacked over to provide this white elephant. ...... Now it's suddenly suitable for people to live on, if only for a short time. Come on Poole Council - you can fool some of the people some of the time.[/p][/quote]The P&R fiasco was a result of greedy councillors and officers drooling over a lump of central government cash. They wanted the kudos of a P&R but without spending too much local cash, so they identified everywhere but the green field (the cheapest solution) as too contaminated to use. Since then they have built a fire station (permanently manned) on the 'contaminated' site, and now they want to stick travellers on another part of the 'contaminated' site. The odd thing is that the P&R was a Lib Dem fiasco, which made them unelectable in Creekmoor; the travellers site is happening under a Tory administration. Despite the best efforts of the Tory ward councillors to stand against the ridiculous proposal, it may well make Tories unelectable in Creekmoor next year... Carolyn43 is bang on right. Anyone for independent councillors? Jo__Go

2:46pm Tue 14 Jan 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Just an observation.I live in France.where we have many travellers.the static parks are tidy and draw very little attention,those that travel pitch up at the cattle market hang washing on the trees knock on your door looking to do odd jobs and and clear scrap metal.it,s the sort of thing travellers do.the Gendarms drive past occasionally.then they leave.No rubbish no one claiming they have been robbed.And there are few if any foreign travellers.because the French traveling community Don,t want them.It would appear the French traveling folk share a similar view with the Irish government.
Just an observation.I live in France.where we have many travellers.the static parks are tidy and draw very little attention,those that travel pitch up at the cattle market hang washing on the trees knock on your door looking to do odd jobs and and clear scrap metal.it,s the sort of thing travellers do.the Gendarms drive past occasionally.then they leave.No rubbish no one claiming they have been robbed.And there are few if any foreign travellers.because the French traveling community Don,t want them.It would appear the French traveling folk share a similar view with the Irish government. kalebmoledirt

2:49pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

we-shall-see wrote:
So where is the other proposed site then?

Personally, I can't see why they don't use the so called "park & ride" car park at Creekmoor. It's closed most of the year and since the ground is already covered in tarmac, it would save a fortune in making a new car park for them.
They can't use the P&R because, not unsurprisingly, central government would be a tad hacked off to find the money they gave Poole for a P&R was being used to source a rest stop for 'travellers'
Plus it isn't really a P&R, it's a green field in the Green Belt that the idiots in Planning and Transportation tarmacked over, to try and win brownie points.
[quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: So where is the other proposed site then? Personally, I can't see why they don't use the so called "park & ride" car park at Creekmoor. It's closed most of the year and since the ground is already covered in tarmac, it would save a fortune in making a new car park for them.[/p][/quote]They can't use the P&R because, not unsurprisingly, central government would be a tad hacked off to find the money they gave Poole for a P&R was being used to source a rest stop for 'travellers' Plus it isn't really a P&R, it's a green field in the Green Belt that the idiots in Planning and Transportation tarmacked over, to try and win brownie points. Jo__Go

2:55pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

davecook wrote:
If it is a temporary site, why make spend money making a site next to the Creekmoor park and ride? Why not use the Creekmoor park and ride itself as the car park is virtually disused. All it needs is a water tap and waste facilities, which would have to be put elsewhere anyway. As for the bit at the northern end of B&Q car park, this is next to a childrens skate park. Totally unsuitable.
Why not put it on Branksome Rec, which already has utilities laid in, along with hard standing. Zero cost.
Oh wait - that's Eades ward, isn't it? And he was so angry, he had to change his trousers last summer when the travellers turned up there...
[quote][p][bold]davecook[/bold] wrote: If it is a temporary site, why make spend money making a site next to the Creekmoor park and ride? Why not use the Creekmoor park and ride itself as the car park is virtually disused. All it needs is a water tap and waste facilities, which would have to be put elsewhere anyway. As for the bit at the northern end of B&Q car park, this is next to a childrens skate park. Totally unsuitable.[/p][/quote]Why not put it on Branksome Rec, which already has utilities laid in, along with hard standing. Zero cost. Oh wait - that's Eades ward, isn't it? And he was so angry, he had to change his trousers last summer when the travellers turned up there... Jo__Go

3:06pm Tue 14 Jan 14

pete woodley says...

apm1954 wrote:
good old cllr eades got the answer to everything not in his ward about time he had a look around his branksome ward, i have, you have lost four votes in my house,
You are quite right there.
[quote][p][bold]apm1954[/bold] wrote: good old cllr eades got the answer to everything not in his ward about time he had a look around his branksome ward, i have, you have lost four votes in my house,[/p][/quote]You are quite right there. pete woodley

3:10pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

bijupi wrote:
can anyone tell me exactly where the 2 possible mentioned sites are?
Follow the link below and open the report under agenda item 6...
http://ha2.boroughof
poole.com/akspoole/u
sers/public/admin/ka
b14.pl?operation=SUB
MIT&meet=140&cmte=CA
B&grpid=public&arc=7
1
[quote][p][bold]bijupi[/bold] wrote: can anyone tell me exactly where the 2 possible mentioned sites are?[/p][/quote]Follow the link below and open the report under agenda item 6... http://ha2.boroughof poole.com/akspoole/u sers/public/admin/ka b14.pl?operation=SUB MIT&meet=140&cmte=CA B&grpid=public&arc=7 1 Jo__Go

3:20pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

Tony Trent wrote:
It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this!
I don't have a problem with the logic behind the decision ... but vaguely amusing that Eades only got behind it after travellers invaded his cosy little corner last year. He does seem to have a bit of a hate-thing going for Creekmoor. Would you and he be quite so up-for-it if the site were in Branksome or Alderney?
Funny how the LibDem numpties that raped the green space in Creekmoor for a never-to-be-used P&R are so keen now to hide their foul-up by continuing to dump Poole's problems there.
[quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this![/p][/quote]I don't have a problem with the logic behind the decision ... but vaguely amusing that Eades only got behind it after travellers invaded his cosy little corner last year. He does seem to have a bit of a hate-thing going for Creekmoor. Would you and he be quite so up-for-it if the site were in Branksome or Alderney? Funny how the LibDem numpties that raped the green space in Creekmoor for a never-to-be-used P&R are so keen now to hide their foul-up by continuing to dump Poole's problems there. Jo__Go

3:22pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

carrrob wrote:
Unfortunately for the residents this was the obvious site
Obvious to who?
Have you seen the decision making process? Finely tuned to give the answer they wanted...
[quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: Unfortunately for the residents this was the obvious site[/p][/quote]Obvious to who? Have you seen the decision making process? Finely tuned to give the answer they wanted... Jo__Go

3:25pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Ebb Tide says...

Jo__Go wrote:
Tony Trent wrote:
It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this!
I don't have a problem with the logic behind the decision ... but vaguely amusing that Eades only got behind it after travellers invaded his cosy little corner last year. He does seem to have a bit of a hate-thing going for Creekmoor. Would you and he be quite so up-for-it if the site were in Branksome or Alderney?
Funny how the LibDem numpties that raped the green space in Creekmoor for a never-to-be-used P&R are so keen now to hide their foul-up by continuing to dump Poole's problems there.
"Never to be used" ?? It will be used when common sense (as was the case) returns to Poole. In the meantime......... !!
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this![/p][/quote]I don't have a problem with the logic behind the decision ... but vaguely amusing that Eades only got behind it after travellers invaded his cosy little corner last year. He does seem to have a bit of a hate-thing going for Creekmoor. Would you and he be quite so up-for-it if the site were in Branksome or Alderney? Funny how the LibDem numpties that raped the green space in Creekmoor for a never-to-be-used P&R are so keen now to hide their foul-up by continuing to dump Poole's problems there.[/p][/quote]"Never to be used" ?? It will be used when common sense (as was the case) returns to Poole. In the meantime......... !! Ebb Tide

3:26pm Tue 14 Jan 14

GaryC67 says...

I think we had this discussion last year... and the year before that!

Oh well that's another £200k we'll be spending again in 2014
I think we had this discussion last year... and the year before that! Oh well that's another £200k we'll be spending again in 2014 GaryC67

3:40pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

Ebb Tide wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Tony Trent wrote:
It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this!
I don't have a problem with the logic behind the decision ... but vaguely amusing that Eades only got behind it after travellers invaded his cosy little corner last year. He does seem to have a bit of a hate-thing going for Creekmoor. Would you and he be quite so up-for-it if the site were in Branksome or Alderney?
Funny how the LibDem numpties that raped the green space in Creekmoor for a never-to-be-used P&R are so keen now to hide their foul-up by continuing to dump Poole's problems there.
"Never to be used" ?? It will be used when common sense (as was the case) returns to Poole. In the meantime......... !!
You mean when Clegg's Clangers get back in power?
Yeah, right... They couldn't make it work when they built it, what's going to change?
[quote][p][bold]Ebb Tide[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this![/p][/quote]I don't have a problem with the logic behind the decision ... but vaguely amusing that Eades only got behind it after travellers invaded his cosy little corner last year. He does seem to have a bit of a hate-thing going for Creekmoor. Would you and he be quite so up-for-it if the site were in Branksome or Alderney? Funny how the LibDem numpties that raped the green space in Creekmoor for a never-to-be-used P&R are so keen now to hide their foul-up by continuing to dump Poole's problems there.[/p][/quote]"Never to be used" ?? It will be used when common sense (as was the case) returns to Poole. In the meantime......... !![/p][/quote]You mean when Clegg's Clangers get back in power? Yeah, right... They couldn't make it work when they built it, what's going to change? Jo__Go

3:47pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Ebb Tide says...

Jo__Go wrote:
Ebb Tide wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Tony Trent wrote:
It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this!
I don't have a problem with the logic behind the decision ... but vaguely amusing that Eades only got behind it after travellers invaded his cosy little corner last year. He does seem to have a bit of a hate-thing going for Creekmoor. Would you and he be quite so up-for-it if the site were in Branksome or Alderney?
Funny how the LibDem numpties that raped the green space in Creekmoor for a never-to-be-used P&R are so keen now to hide their foul-up by continuing to dump Poole's problems there.
"Never to be used" ?? It will be used when common sense (as was the case) returns to Poole. In the meantime......... !!
You mean when Clegg's Clangers get back in power?
Yeah, right... They couldn't make it work when they built it, what's going to change?
Less tribal arguments and consequential disruption would help Poole control its motor addiction. !
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ebb Tide[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this![/p][/quote]I don't have a problem with the logic behind the decision ... but vaguely amusing that Eades only got behind it after travellers invaded his cosy little corner last year. He does seem to have a bit of a hate-thing going for Creekmoor. Would you and he be quite so up-for-it if the site were in Branksome or Alderney? Funny how the LibDem numpties that raped the green space in Creekmoor for a never-to-be-used P&R are so keen now to hide their foul-up by continuing to dump Poole's problems there.[/p][/quote]"Never to be used" ?? It will be used when common sense (as was the case) returns to Poole. In the meantime......... !![/p][/quote]You mean when Clegg's Clangers get back in power? Yeah, right... They couldn't make it work when they built it, what's going to change?[/p][/quote]Less tribal arguments and consequential disruption would help Poole control its motor addiction. ! Ebb Tide

4:00pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

You'll have to bit a bit less opaque for us mere mortals, Ebb Tide
You'll have to bit a bit less opaque for us mere mortals, Ebb Tide Jo__Go

5:17pm Tue 14 Jan 14

apm1954 says...

suzigirl wrote:
MMM444 wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
nosuchluck54 wrote:
MMM444 wrote:
suzigirl wrote:
MMM444 wrote: How thick is this clown Cllr Phill (moron) Eades, There travellers, they travel, not interested in campsites, unless there over looking Poole Harbour with pubs on there doorstep, you really dont live in the real world Phill, there not interested in living next to some noisy dangerous by-pass, or under a bridge at B&Q, stop wasting council tax payers money
"They are" or "They're - not there!
Well there ya go, suzy-suzie, surely not suzi
I was a bit unsure how she manages to post comments between school lessons but perhaps its break time or should that be brake time
Very droll yawn............ Nosuchluck was calling Cllr Eades thick - pot kettle black as he cannot manage basic grammar!
You are an internet troll, end of, get back to your facebook, someone's poking ya, in the eye with a bit of look
Do you mean "luck" you just can't help yourself can you - and what do you imagine people are calling you - answers on a postcard!
come on children
[quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MMM444[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nosuchluck54[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MMM444[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]suzigirl[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MMM444[/bold] wrote: How thick is this clown Cllr Phill (moron) Eades, There travellers, they travel, not interested in campsites, unless there over looking Poole Harbour with pubs on there doorstep, you really dont live in the real world Phill, there not interested in living next to some noisy dangerous by-pass, or under a bridge at B&Q, stop wasting council tax payers money[/p][/quote]"They are" or "They're - not there![/p][/quote]Well there ya go, suzy-suzie, surely not suzi[/p][/quote]I was a bit unsure how she manages to post comments between school lessons but perhaps its break time or should that be brake time[/p][/quote]Very droll yawn............ Nosuchluck was calling Cllr Eades thick - pot kettle black as he cannot manage basic grammar![/p][/quote]You are an internet troll, end of, get back to your facebook, someone's poking ya, in the eye with a bit of look[/p][/quote]Do you mean "luck" you just can't help yourself can you - and what do you imagine people are calling you - answers on a postcard![/p][/quote]come on children apm1954

5:18pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Ebb Tide says...

Jo__Go wrote:
You'll have to bit a bit less opaque for us mere mortals, Ebb Tide
Nothing opaque about holders of entrenched views failing to reach agreement and then being obstructive over the long years - even though we all know we use cars too much and buses not enough.

Park and Ride must be made to work somehow and we are way behind other towns in making less use of our cars and requiring too much cheap town centre parking.

It seems that the electorate suffers (on a number of issues) because too many are concerned more about the pride they have in their political party than the pride they have in meeting the needs of our Borough.
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: You'll have to bit a bit less opaque for us mere mortals, Ebb Tide[/p][/quote]Nothing opaque about holders of entrenched views failing to reach agreement and then being obstructive over the long years - even though we all know we use cars too much and buses not enough. Park and Ride must be made to work somehow and we are way behind other towns in making less use of our cars and requiring too much cheap town centre parking. It seems that the electorate suffers (on a number of issues) because too many are concerned more about the pride they have in their political party than the pride they have in meeting the needs of our Borough. Ebb Tide

5:20pm Tue 14 Jan 14

apm1954 says...

Ebb Tide wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Ebb Tide wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Tony Trent wrote:
It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this!
I don't have a problem with the logic behind the decision ... but vaguely amusing that Eades only got behind it after travellers invaded his cosy little corner last year. He does seem to have a bit of a hate-thing going for Creekmoor. Would you and he be quite so up-for-it if the site were in Branksome or Alderney?
Funny how the LibDem numpties that raped the green space in Creekmoor for a never-to-be-used P&R are so keen now to hide their foul-up by continuing to dump Poole's problems there.
"Never to be used" ?? It will be used when common sense (as was the case) returns to Poole. In the meantime......... !!
You mean when Clegg's Clangers get back in power?
Yeah, right... They couldn't make it work when they built it, what's going to change?
Less tribal arguments and consequential disruption would help Poole control its motor addiction. !
tony
[quote][p][bold]Ebb Tide[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ebb Tide[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this![/p][/quote]I don't have a problem with the logic behind the decision ... but vaguely amusing that Eades only got behind it after travellers invaded his cosy little corner last year. He does seem to have a bit of a hate-thing going for Creekmoor. Would you and he be quite so up-for-it if the site were in Branksome or Alderney? Funny how the LibDem numpties that raped the green space in Creekmoor for a never-to-be-used P&R are so keen now to hide their foul-up by continuing to dump Poole's problems there.[/p][/quote]"Never to be used" ?? It will be used when common sense (as was the case) returns to Poole. In the meantime......... !![/p][/quote]You mean when Clegg's Clangers get back in power? Yeah, right... They couldn't make it work when they built it, what's going to change?[/p][/quote]Less tribal arguments and consequential disruption would help Poole control its motor addiction. ![/p][/quote]tony apm1954

6:37pm Tue 14 Jan 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Do the health and safety ,hygean rules apply to traveller sites ?
Do the health and safety ,hygean rules apply to traveller sites ? kalebmoledirt

6:48pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Carolyn43 says...

I assume that the current council will be happy to receive less income in council tax, when the residents of Creekmoor have their council tax band reduced, so any site will actually cost more than they will originally quote..
I assume that the current council will be happy to receive less income in council tax, when the residents of Creekmoor have their council tax band reduced, so any site will actually cost more than they will originally quote.. Carolyn43

8:15pm Tue 14 Jan 14

GAHmusic says...

kalebmoledirt wrote:
Just an observation.I live in France.where we have many travellers.the static parks are tidy and draw very little attention,those that travel pitch up at the cattle market hang washing on the trees knock on your door looking to do odd jobs and and clear scrap metal.it,s the sort of thing travellers do.the Gendarms drive past occasionally.then they leave.No rubbish no one claiming they have been robbed.And there are few if any foreign travellers.because the French traveling community Don,t want them.It would appear the French traveling folk share a similar view with the Irish government.
I think you'll find that's the caravan club of Great Britain :-)
[quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: Just an observation.I live in France.where we have many travellers.the static parks are tidy and draw very little attention,those that travel pitch up at the cattle market hang washing on the trees knock on your door looking to do odd jobs and and clear scrap metal.it,s the sort of thing travellers do.the Gendarms drive past occasionally.then they leave.No rubbish no one claiming they have been robbed.And there are few if any foreign travellers.because the French traveling community Don,t want them.It would appear the French traveling folk share a similar view with the Irish government.[/p][/quote]I think you'll find that's the caravan club of Great Britain :-) GAHmusic

10:44pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Yankee1 says...

alasdair1967 wrote:
What about all the open space down by the twin sails bridge
Eco hazard. The soil is spoiled due to the old power station.

Then again...............
........
[quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: What about all the open space down by the twin sails bridge[/p][/quote]Eco hazard. The soil is spoiled due to the old power station. Then again............... ........ Yankee1

10:46pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Yankee1 says...

Why not the car park at Poole's Civic Offices?

Why not?
Why not the car park at Poole's Civic Offices? Why not? Yankee1

10:51pm Tue 14 Jan 14

Ebb Tide says...

Yankee1 wrote:
alasdair1967 wrote:
What about all the open space down by the twin sails bridge
Eco hazard. The soil is spoiled due to the old power station.

Then again...............

........
What's the problem ? Warnings about digging through a layer of hoggin can be given and it is unlikely any visitor will want to set up an allotment.
[quote][p][bold]Yankee1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: What about all the open space down by the twin sails bridge[/p][/quote]Eco hazard. The soil is spoiled due to the old power station. Then again............... ........[/p][/quote]What's the problem ? Warnings about digging through a layer of hoggin can be given and it is unlikely any visitor will want to set up an allotment. Ebb Tide

3:05am Wed 15 Jan 14

poolequarter says...

GAHmusic wrote:
kalebmoledirt wrote:
Just an observation.I live in France.where we have many travellers.the static parks are tidy and draw very little attention,those that travel pitch up at the cattle market hang washing on the trees knock on your door looking to do odd jobs and and clear scrap metal.it,s the sort of thing travellers do.the Gendarms drive past occasionally.then they leave.No rubbish no one claiming they have been robbed.And there are few if any foreign travellers.because the French traveling community Don,t want them.It would appear the French traveling folk share a similar view with the Irish government.
I think you'll find that's the caravan club of Great Britain :-)
GAHmusic comes out with such rubbish .... if nothing sensible to say ... say nothing!
[quote][p][bold]GAHmusic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: Just an observation.I live in France.where we have many travellers.the static parks are tidy and draw very little attention,those that travel pitch up at the cattle market hang washing on the trees knock on your door looking to do odd jobs and and clear scrap metal.it,s the sort of thing travellers do.the Gendarms drive past occasionally.then they leave.No rubbish no one claiming they have been robbed.And there are few if any foreign travellers.because the French traveling community Don,t want them.It would appear the French traveling folk share a similar view with the Irish government.[/p][/quote]I think you'll find that's the caravan club of Great Britain :-)[/p][/quote]GAHmusic comes out with such rubbish .... if nothing sensible to say ... say nothing! poolequarter

6:49am Wed 15 Jan 14

kalebmoledirt says...

poolequarter wrote:
GAHmusic wrote:
kalebmoledirt wrote:
Just an observation.I live in France.where we have many travellers.the static parks are tidy and draw very little attention,those that travel pitch up at the cattle market hang washing on the trees knock on your door looking to do odd jobs and and clear scrap metal.it,s the sort of thing travellers do.the Gendarms drive past occasionally.then they leave.No rubbish no one claiming they have been robbed.And there are few if any foreign travellers.because the French traveling community Don,t want them.It would appear the French traveling folk share a similar view with the Irish government.
I think you'll find that's the caravan club of Great Britain :-)
GAHmusic comes out with such rubbish .... if nothing sensible to say ... say nothing!
I thought it was quite good
[quote][p][bold]poolequarter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]GAHmusic[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: Just an observation.I live in France.where we have many travellers.the static parks are tidy and draw very little attention,those that travel pitch up at the cattle market hang washing on the trees knock on your door looking to do odd jobs and and clear scrap metal.it,s the sort of thing travellers do.the Gendarms drive past occasionally.then they leave.No rubbish no one claiming they have been robbed.And there are few if any foreign travellers.because the French traveling community Don,t want them.It would appear the French traveling folk share a similar view with the Irish government.[/p][/quote]I think you'll find that's the caravan club of Great Britain :-)[/p][/quote]GAHmusic comes out with such rubbish .... if nothing sensible to say ... say nothing![/p][/quote]I thought it was quite good kalebmoledirt

1:48pm Wed 15 Jan 14

speedy231278 says...

dribydal wrote:
alasdair1967 wrote:
What about all the open space down by the twin sails bridge
Do you mean on the water lol?
No, the roads leading to it when it's broken and all the traffic uses the old bridge, which never seems to break....
[quote][p][bold]dribydal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: What about all the open space down by the twin sails bridge[/p][/quote]Do you mean on the water lol?[/p][/quote]No, the roads leading to it when it's broken and all the traffic uses the old bridge, which never seems to break.... speedy231278

4:08pm Wed 15 Jan 14

constant gardener says...

Steveo123 wrote:
I don't understand ,,, If its only for the summer (as some live in houses in the winter) and its only 27 Vans , why don't they just book into a caravan park,, theres loads around.. ??
Why oh why is there one rule for travellers which allows them to holiday for free and another rule for ordinary folk who have to scrimp and save for their holidays.
[quote][p][bold]Steveo123[/bold] wrote: I don't understand ,,, If its only for the summer (as some live in houses in the winter) and its only 27 Vans , why don't they just book into a caravan park,, theres loads around.. ??[/p][/quote]Why oh why is there one rule for travellers which allows them to holiday for free and another rule for ordinary folk who have to scrimp and save for their holidays. constant gardener

5:19pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Count Mehin says...

I don't understand why you put up with freeloading travellers.
They ruin common areas, prevent other taxpayers from enjoying them.
Tell them to move on or arrest and deport them. It's nuts!
I don't understand why you put up with freeloading travellers. They ruin common areas, prevent other taxpayers from enjoying them. Tell them to move on or arrest and deport them. It's nuts! Count Mehin

6:22pm Wed 15 Jan 14

Peroni says...

Tony Trent wrote:
It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this!
What do you call the site in Mannings Heath Road then ?
[quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this![/p][/quote]What do you call the site in Mannings Heath Road then ? Peroni

7:08pm Wed 15 Jan 14

JustForPoole says...

Peroni wrote:
Tony Trent wrote:
It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this!
What do you call the site in Mannings Heath Road then ?
Yarrow Close .... check it out on Google Earth Streetview ... our money well spent ?????????
[quote][p][bold]Peroni[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: It seems obvious that no one on here attended the public meeting a few months back to discuss options to deal with travellers, or if they did they didn't listen. It was very clear that short of putting in proper fully equiped transit sites within Poole, these temporary stopping places are the only weapon left if you want to move travellers on quickly from other more sensitive sites in Poole. It has been proven to work elsewhere in Dorset. More power to Phil Eades's elbow for keeping the pressure up on this![/p][/quote]What do you call the site in Mannings Heath Road then ?[/p][/quote]Yarrow Close .... check it out on Google Earth Streetview ... our money well spent ????????? JustForPoole

4:04pm Thu 16 Jan 14

DorsetFerret says...

A couple of clear facts are emerging.

(a) Nimby’s or not, no right-minded Poole resident really wants a travellers transit site in their neighbourhood, so why on earth do we put up with this tomfoolery?

(b) Councillor Eades may have done his own constituents a favour but at what cost to the conservative vote at the next local elections?

In the first instance, unless a site is agreed that is unlikely to affect property values of nearby residence( no matter where it is) then the only answer seems to be direct peaceful action against the chosen spot. If the anti-frackers can do it so can we.

As for the second point, I predict a growth in vote for independent candidates standing for a council seat and UKIP at the next local election.
A couple of clear facts are emerging. (a) Nimby’s or not, no right-minded Poole resident really wants a travellers transit site in their neighbourhood, so why on earth do we put up with this tomfoolery? (b) Councillor Eades may have done his own constituents a favour but at what cost to the conservative vote at the next local elections? In the first instance, unless a site is agreed that is unlikely to affect property values of nearby residence( no matter where it is) then the only answer seems to be direct peaceful action against the chosen spot. If the anti-frackers can do it so can we. As for the second point, I predict a growth in vote for independent candidates standing for a council seat and UKIP at the next local election. DorsetFerret

4:43pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Jo__Go says...

Errm... Eades is one of Clegg's Clangers, a Liberal Democrat. He'll be very happy to drag down the Conservative vote.
Errm... Eades is one of Clegg's Clangers, a Liberal Democrat. He'll be very happy to drag down the Conservative vote. Jo__Go

12:27pm Sun 19 Jan 14

stevobath says...

nickynoodah wrote:
we-shall-see wrote:
So where is the other proposed site then?

Personally, I can't see why they don't use the so called "park & ride" car park at Creekmoor. It's closed most of the year and since the ground is already covered in tarmac, it would save a fortune in making a new car park for them.
They are on land directly next to the fire station at Creekmoor – adjacent to the green belt park and ride – and a patch of land north of the B&Q car park in Broadstone Way with space for four pitches
The 1st comment you've ever made that wasn't a puerile attempt at humour.

I congratulate you. Maybe you can put the stress of puberty behind you now?
[quote][p][bold]nickynoodah[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: So where is the other proposed site then? Personally, I can't see why they don't use the so called "park & ride" car park at Creekmoor. It's closed most of the year and since the ground is already covered in tarmac, it would save a fortune in making a new car park for them.[/p][/quote]They are on land directly next to the fire station at Creekmoor – adjacent to the green belt park and ride – and a patch of land north of the B&Q car park in Broadstone Way with space for four pitches[/p][/quote]The 1st comment you've ever made that wasn't a puerile attempt at humour. I congratulate you. Maybe you can put the stress of puberty behind you now? stevobath

12:32pm Sun 19 Jan 14

stevobath says...

Count Mehin wrote:
I don't understand why you put up with freeloading travellers.
They ruin common areas, prevent other taxpayers from enjoying them.
Tell them to move on or arrest and deport them. It's nuts!
Are you 'Head Keeper Of The Pitchforks' in the village?
[quote][p][bold]Count Mehin[/bold] wrote: I don't understand why you put up with freeloading travellers. They ruin common areas, prevent other taxpayers from enjoying them. Tell them to move on or arrest and deport them. It's nuts![/p][/quote]Are you 'Head Keeper Of The Pitchforks' in the village? stevobath

6:14pm Sun 19 Jan 14

Count Mehin says...

stevobath wrote:
nickynoodah wrote:
we-shall-see wrote:
So where is the other proposed site then?

Personally, I can't see why they don't use the so called "park & ride" car park at Creekmoor. It's closed most of the year and since the ground is already covered in tarmac, it would save a fortune in making a new car park for them.
They are on land directly next to the fire station at Creekmoor – adjacent to the green belt park and ride – and a patch of land north of the B&Q car park in Broadstone Way with space for four pitches
The 1st comment you've ever made that wasn't a puerile attempt at humour.

I congratulate you. Maybe you can put the stress of puberty behind you now?
Steveobath said "The 1st comment you've ever made that wasn't a puerile attempt at humour. Maybe you can put the stress of puberty behind you now?"

So Steve, is that a serious mature comment, or a puerile attempt at humour?
[quote][p][bold]stevobath[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]nickynoodah[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: So where is the other proposed site then? Personally, I can't see why they don't use the so called "park & ride" car park at Creekmoor. It's closed most of the year and since the ground is already covered in tarmac, it would save a fortune in making a new car park for them.[/p][/quote]They are on land directly next to the fire station at Creekmoor – adjacent to the green belt park and ride – and a patch of land north of the B&Q car park in Broadstone Way with space for four pitches[/p][/quote]The 1st comment you've ever made that wasn't a puerile attempt at humour. I congratulate you. Maybe you can put the stress of puberty behind you now?[/p][/quote]Steveobath said "The 1st comment you've ever made that wasn't a puerile attempt at humour. Maybe you can put the stress of puberty behind you now?" So Steve, is that a serious mature comment, or a puerile attempt at humour? Count Mehin

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

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

I agree