Travellers move onto land at Creekmoor - while Bournemouth council puts sites on lockdown

Travellers move onto land at Creekmoor - while Bournemouth council puts sites on lockdown

Travellers at Creekmoor on Friday morning

Creekmoor ward councillors Les Burden, Judy Butt and John Rampton with Poole MP Robert Syms

Travellers move onto land at Creekmoor - while Bournemouth council puts sites on lockdown

First published in News
Last updated

TRAVELLERS have reportedly moved onto the former Park and Ride site at Creekmoor.

It is believed fencing was broken to gain access to the site last night.

There are around a dozen caravans on the site.

Once again the council has immediately begun the legal process to move this latest group. Peter Haikin regulatory Services Manager, Borough of Poole, said temporary toilets and a skip had been provided to cut clean-up costs.

He added: “The encampment is not in a prominent position and we will be regularly monitoring the site to identify if there is any detrimental effect on the local community. This is a necessary part of the legal process to obtain a court order for the eventual removal of the travellers.”

Creekmoor ward councillor Judy Butt said she was concerned about the impact on residents adding: “Our concern is that more are going to come. It’s a huge site so we are holding our breath waiting for the next lot to turn up.

“We as ward councillors are obviously concerned for our residents and doing everything we can to remove them as soon as possible.”

Referring to the lack of a transit site within the borough she added: “A temporary site would not have been sufficient with the number of caravans we’ve got in the area at the moment – it would be overflowing. As I’ve always said a temporary site is not a cure-all.”

The latest encampment comes just hours after three new traveller encampments were set-up across Bournemouth and Poole.

Travellers left Turlin Moor on Wednesday night and moved to Baiter Park, Cotlands Road car park in Bournemouth and Beach Road car park in Canford Cliffs.

Travellers are still at Baiter Park this morning but an encampment at Beach Road car park, Branksome, have now left after direction orders were served yesterday by Borough of Poole and the site is clean. 

Six caravans remain at Cotlands car park today. 

Some even tried to gain entry to Kings Park in Bournemouth but were turned back.

Bournemouth Council has put other sites in lockdown following the latest camps.

These includes Meyrick Park, Queens Park, Redhill and Slades.

The lockdown will stay in place until the air festival at the end of the month.

Officials have put legal moves in process to gain possession of the Cotlands Road site, although at 4.30pm the council said some of the group appeared to be moving on because they "didn't like it" there.

Comments have been opened on this story but please note: any reference to gypsies or any racially offensive term will cause them to be closed and you may find your account suspended. 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 (161)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:30am Fri 8 Aug 14

JustForPoole says...

On the tourist map then
On the tourist map then JustForPoole
  • Score: 7

8:32am Fri 8 Aug 14

Kiki1973 says...

JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
[quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community" Kiki1973
  • Score: 56

8:34am Fri 8 Aug 14

crystal-coast says...

Anyone arrested for criminal damage?
Anyone arrested for criminal damage? crystal-coast
  • Score: 84

8:34am Fri 8 Aug 14

bourne free says...

Why not make this there summer site , its not used for anything else now ?
Why not make this there summer site , its not used for anything else now ? bourne free
  • Score: -36

8:36am Fri 8 Aug 14

alasdair1967 says...

Both entrance and exit to this site are gated and blocked with concrete blocks these so called travellers have caused criminal damage to access this site come on someone grow a pair and prosecute them
Both entrance and exit to this site are gated and blocked with concrete blocks these so called travellers have caused criminal damage to access this site come on someone grow a pair and prosecute them alasdair1967
  • Score: 150

8:39am Fri 8 Aug 14

susi.m says...

They wont like the park and ride because there is no water there.
If any of us broke down a fence that belonged to the council then we would be prosecuted.
Why is it one rule for them and one rule for us?
The law MUST be changed.
Lobby your MP's
They wont like the park and ride because there is no water there. If any of us broke down a fence that belonged to the council then we would be prosecuted. Why is it one rule for them and one rule for us? The law MUST be changed. Lobby your MP's susi.m
  • Score: 170

8:50am Fri 8 Aug 14

Mike_French says...

Criminal damage = prosecution.
Oh no, that was me being silly.......
Criminal damage = prosecution. Oh no, that was me being silly....... Mike_French
  • Score: 81

8:50am Fri 8 Aug 14

BIGTONE says...

the council said some of the group appeared to be moving on because they "didn't like it" there....

Haaaaaa. Because the job centre is there. Tramp and soap come to
mind here.

They are persistent Ill give em that.
the council said some of the group appeared to be moving on because they "didn't like it" there.... Haaaaaa. Because the job centre is there. Tramp and soap come to mind here. They are persistent Ill give em that. BIGTONE
  • Score: 44

8:54am Fri 8 Aug 14

folkprotector says...

How on earth does one law allow these supposed travellers to break other laws? Surely such a law is flawed. That law needs to be reviewed and either made into a sensible and realistic one or, be revoked.
How on earth does one law allow these supposed travellers to break other laws? Surely such a law is flawed. That law needs to be reviewed and either made into a sensible and realistic one or, be revoked. folkprotector
  • Score: 61

9:00am Fri 8 Aug 14

Quakers2 says...

Excellent choice of site. Let them stay there as long as they want to save chasing them around the Town and cleaning up our parks. This is wasted space and not used for anything meaningful.
Note Carolyn - they dont care about the noisey road or all that other cr*p you and the self appointed head of gypsies comes out with. They will love this site, let them enjoy it.
Excellent choice of site. Let them stay there as long as they want to save chasing them around the Town and cleaning up our parks. This is wasted space and not used for anything meaningful. Note Carolyn - they dont care about the noisey road or all that other cr*p you and the self appointed head of gypsies comes out with. They will love this site, let them enjoy it. Quakers2
  • Score: -53

9:02am Fri 8 Aug 14

Baysider says...

Ahh...the old criminal damage , arrest them all without any proof anyway comments have started very early on this one. Settle in folks and await the usual repetitive comments from the usual suspects on here, they'll all be along soon. This subject is like a warm and comfy pair pair of slippers for some.
Ahh...the old criminal damage , arrest them all without any proof anyway comments have started very early on this one. Settle in folks and await the usual repetitive comments from the usual suspects on here, they'll all be along soon. This subject is like a warm and comfy pair pair of slippers for some. Baysider
  • Score: -62

9:05am Fri 8 Aug 14

PeteLandis says...

alasdair1967 wrote:
Both entrance and exit to this site are gated and blocked with concrete blocks these so called travellers have caused criminal damage to access this site come on someone grow a pair and prosecute them
Didn't you read the section at the bottom of the article. These "people" are a protected species. They are exempt from any action from the gutless cowards in authority. Personally I think they would provide good practice for the riot police in training for use of water cannons.
[quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: Both entrance and exit to this site are gated and blocked with concrete blocks these so called travellers have caused criminal damage to access this site come on someone grow a pair and prosecute them[/p][/quote]Didn't you read the section at the bottom of the article. These "people" are a protected species. They are exempt from any action from the gutless cowards in authority. Personally I think they would provide good practice for the riot police in training for use of water cannons. PeteLandis
  • Score: 81

9:22am Fri 8 Aug 14

mudeford7 says...

This seems a perfect site for the travellers, it is not being used as a park and ride.there is no parks to spoil.,and no houses nearby If they put a machine it they can pay a daily rate or a wekly discount and when the machine is full they can take it with them when they move out when they move to Spain for the winter
This seems a perfect site for the travellers, it is not being used as a park and ride.there is no parks to spoil.,and no houses nearby If they put a machine it they can pay a daily rate or a wekly discount and when the machine is full they can take it with them when they move out when they move to Spain for the winter mudeford7
  • Score: -41

9:30am Fri 8 Aug 14

muscliffman says...

And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers?

It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption.

Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.
And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers? It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption. Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind. muscliffman
  • Score: 39

9:37am Fri 8 Aug 14

Jo__Go says...

Quakers2 wrote:
Excellent choice of site. Let them stay there as long as they want to save chasing them around the Town and cleaning up our parks. This is wasted space and not used for anything meaningful.
Note Carolyn - they dont care about the noisey road or all that other cr*p you and the self appointed head of gypsies comes out with. They will love this site, let them enjoy it.
Excellent because it's nowhere near you, you smug little waste of skin?
[quote][p][bold]Quakers2[/bold] wrote: Excellent choice of site. Let them stay there as long as they want to save chasing them around the Town and cleaning up our parks. This is wasted space and not used for anything meaningful. Note Carolyn - they dont care about the noisey road or all that other cr*p you and the self appointed head of gypsies comes out with. They will love this site, let them enjoy it.[/p][/quote]Excellent because it's nowhere near you, you smug little waste of skin? Jo__Go
  • Score: 3

9:42am Fri 8 Aug 14

Jo__Go says...

bourne free wrote:
Why not make this there summer site , its not used for anything else now ?
Remind me again why we should provide people with free holiday accommodation at the expense of the local taxpayer? When we can't even provide homes for those that were born and grew up here?
[quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: Why not make this there summer site , its not used for anything else now ?[/p][/quote]Remind me again why we should provide people with free holiday accommodation at the expense of the local taxpayer? When we can't even provide homes for those that were born and grew up here? Jo__Go
  • Score: 54

9:42am Fri 8 Aug 14

Quakers2 says...

Jo__Go wrote:
Quakers2 wrote:
Excellent choice of site. Let them stay there as long as they want to save chasing them around the Town and cleaning up our parks. This is wasted space and not used for anything meaningful.
Note Carolyn - they dont care about the noisey road or all that other cr*p you and the self appointed head of gypsies comes out with. They will love this site, let them enjoy it.
Excellent because it's nowhere near you, you smug little waste of skin?
How do you know? I guess you live at Creekmoor. Pop over with some coffee and cup cakes it sounds like you will fit in well.
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quakers2[/bold] wrote: Excellent choice of site. Let them stay there as long as they want to save chasing them around the Town and cleaning up our parks. This is wasted space and not used for anything meaningful. Note Carolyn - they dont care about the noisey road or all that other cr*p you and the self appointed head of gypsies comes out with. They will love this site, let them enjoy it.[/p][/quote]Excellent because it's nowhere near you, you smug little waste of skin?[/p][/quote]How do you know? I guess you live at Creekmoor. Pop over with some coffee and cup cakes it sounds like you will fit in well. Quakers2
  • Score: 16

9:43am Fri 8 Aug 14

Jo__Go says...

Baysider wrote:
Ahh...the old criminal damage , arrest them all without any proof anyway comments have started very early on this one. Settle in folks and await the usual repetitive comments from the usual suspects on here, they'll all be along soon. This subject is like a warm and comfy pair pair of slippers for some.
Like.... you, maybe?
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: Ahh...the old criminal damage , arrest them all without any proof anyway comments have started very early on this one. Settle in folks and await the usual repetitive comments from the usual suspects on here, they'll all be along soon. This subject is like a warm and comfy pair pair of slippers for some.[/p][/quote]Like.... you, maybe? Jo__Go
  • Score: 17

9:45am Fri 8 Aug 14

Jo__Go says...

Quakers2 wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Quakers2 wrote:
Excellent choice of site. Let them stay there as long as they want to save chasing them around the Town and cleaning up our parks. This is wasted space and not used for anything meaningful.
Note Carolyn - they dont care about the noisey road or all that other cr*p you and the self appointed head of gypsies comes out with. They will love this site, let them enjoy it.
Excellent because it's nowhere near you, you smug little waste of skin?
How do you know? I guess you live at Creekmoor. Pop over with some coffee and cup cakes it sounds like you will fit in well.
Troll, skin, waste
Nuff said
[quote][p][bold]Quakers2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quakers2[/bold] wrote: Excellent choice of site. Let them stay there as long as they want to save chasing them around the Town and cleaning up our parks. This is wasted space and not used for anything meaningful. Note Carolyn - they dont care about the noisey road or all that other cr*p you and the self appointed head of gypsies comes out with. They will love this site, let them enjoy it.[/p][/quote]Excellent because it's nowhere near you, you smug little waste of skin?[/p][/quote]How do you know? I guess you live at Creekmoor. Pop over with some coffee and cup cakes it sounds like you will fit in well.[/p][/quote]Troll, skin, waste Nuff said Jo__Go
  • Score: -11

9:48am Fri 8 Aug 14

MCAME1989 says...

Now leave them there!
It's big enough for most of them to stay there!
It's not being used and they are not going to destroy anything or anywhere else!
Now leave them there! It's big enough for most of them to stay there! It's not being used and they are not going to destroy anything or anywhere else! MCAME1989
  • Score: -25

9:52am Fri 8 Aug 14

Tony Trent says...

Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
[quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows. Tony Trent
  • Score: -16

9:57am Fri 8 Aug 14

bourne free says...

Jo__Go wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Why not make this there summer site , its not used for anything else now ?
Remind me again why we should provide people with free holiday accommodation at the expense of the local taxpayer? When we can't even provide homes for those that were born and grew up here?
That car park isnt used for anything else and it cost very little to keep them there , thus less expense for courts and mass clean ups /in the winter it can be used as a xmas park and ride again , there are plenty of spongers in Poole already who are to lazy to get work and pay there way !
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: Why not make this there summer site , its not used for anything else now ?[/p][/quote]Remind me again why we should provide people with free holiday accommodation at the expense of the local taxpayer? When we can't even provide homes for those that were born and grew up here?[/p][/quote]That car park isnt used for anything else and it cost very little to keep them there , thus less expense for courts and mass clean ups /in the winter it can be used as a xmas park and ride again , there are plenty of spongers in Poole already who are to lazy to get work and pay there way ! bourne free
  • Score: -25

10:08am Fri 8 Aug 14

Baysider says...

muscliffman wrote:
And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers?

It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption.

Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.
Now, without reference to their accent or where they might have a vehicle registered as these are clearly nonsense when considering ones ethnicity, share with us how YOU would go about satisfying a court that these people are NOT travellers Muzzy?
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers? It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption. Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.[/p][/quote]Now, without reference to their accent or where they might have a vehicle registered as these are clearly nonsense when considering ones ethnicity, share with us how YOU would go about satisfying a court that these people are NOT travellers Muzzy? Baysider
  • Score: -10

10:14am Fri 8 Aug 14

dogsoftheworld says...

Isn't it amazing how some of the trolls on here find it acceptable for Creekmoor to be saddled so long as they're ok...
This is why the travellers do so well- the settled community aren't a community at all, just a selfish bunch of "i'm allright jack" types whilst the travellers work in concert.
If you want any chance of beating these invaders then you have to work together as one. Some of the comments on here display a total disregard for the local POOLE people in Creekmoor just across the road from this site, and that is very sad, and says a lot more about them than the travellers!
I don't know how many travellers we have in Poole at the mo- but its a lot. The demand will always outstrip supply, whatever sites are provided- it would just draw more in.
Isn't it amazing how some of the trolls on here find it acceptable for Creekmoor to be saddled so long as they're ok... This is why the travellers do so well- the settled community aren't a community at all, just a selfish bunch of "i'm allright jack" types whilst the travellers work in concert. If you want any chance of beating these invaders then you have to work together as one. Some of the comments on here display a total disregard for the local POOLE people in Creekmoor just across the road from this site, and that is very sad, and says a lot more about them than the travellers! I don't know how many travellers we have in Poole at the mo- but its a lot. The demand will always outstrip supply, whatever sites are provided- it would just draw more in. dogsoftheworld
  • Score: 20

10:19am Fri 8 Aug 14

BarrHumbug says...

If we can't stop them then is there no way we can make their stay so un appealing that they choose to leave the area of their own accord?
Can we not set our own home grown asbo kids on them to steal their kids motorbikes and vandalise their cars?
If we can't stop them then is there no way we can make their stay so un appealing that they choose to leave the area of their own accord? Can we not set our own home grown asbo kids on them to steal their kids motorbikes and vandalise their cars? BarrHumbug
  • Score: 23

10:22am Fri 8 Aug 14

Jo__Go says...

Tony Trent wrote:
Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
Cllr Trent,
There have been numerous reasonable responses to your postings, that you seem to simply ignore, because they don't fit your picture of the world.
The proposals earlier this year may well have been based on best advice, they may even have been the best available options, but as your own Planning Cttee, and not a few residents pointed out, they simply weren't good enough. Not fit for purpose. Non-starters.
The simple fact of the matter is that as a Unitary Authority with, for the most part, densely populated geography and the rest either green belt or protected heathland, Poole simply has no suitable sites for TSP's or Transit Sites.
The law on this matter is an and the sooner it is changed the better. I'm all for making reasonable provision for true travellers, with adequate safeguards to ensure they fulfill the responsibilities that go alongside their rights, but if there ain't space, there ain't space!
[quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.[/p][/quote]Cllr Trent, There have been numerous reasonable responses to your postings, that you seem to simply ignore, because they don't fit your picture of the world. The proposals earlier this year may well have been based on best advice, they may even have been the best available options, but as your own Planning Cttee, and not a few residents pointed out, they simply weren't good enough. Not fit for purpose. Non-starters. The simple fact of the matter is that as a Unitary Authority with, for the most part, densely populated geography and the rest either green belt or protected heathland, Poole simply has no suitable sites for TSP's or Transit Sites. The law on this matter is an [synonym of donkey] and the sooner it is changed the better. I'm all for making reasonable provision for true travellers, with adequate safeguards to ensure they fulfill the responsibilities that go alongside their rights, but if there ain't space, there ain't space! Jo__Go
  • Score: 15

10:24am Fri 8 Aug 14

bourne free says...

dogsoftheworld wrote:
Isn't it amazing how some of the trolls on here find it acceptable for Creekmoor to be saddled so long as they're ok...
This is why the travellers do so well- the settled community aren't a community at all, just a selfish bunch of "i'm allright jack" types whilst the travellers work in concert.
If you want any chance of beating these invaders then you have to work together as one. Some of the comments on here display a total disregard for the local POOLE people in Creekmoor just across the road from this site, and that is very sad, and says a lot more about them than the travellers!
I don't know how many travellers we have in Poole at the mo- but its a lot. The demand will always outstrip supply, whatever sites are provided- it would just draw more in.
They have to go somewhere and that site is perfect for the majority as is shown by the responses on here ,its big enough and not used for anything else ?
[quote][p][bold]dogsoftheworld[/bold] wrote: Isn't it amazing how some of the trolls on here find it acceptable for Creekmoor to be saddled so long as they're ok... This is why the travellers do so well- the settled community aren't a community at all, just a selfish bunch of "i'm allright jack" types whilst the travellers work in concert. If you want any chance of beating these invaders then you have to work together as one. Some of the comments on here display a total disregard for the local POOLE people in Creekmoor just across the road from this site, and that is very sad, and says a lot more about them than the travellers! I don't know how many travellers we have in Poole at the mo- but its a lot. The demand will always outstrip supply, whatever sites are provided- it would just draw more in.[/p][/quote]They have to go somewhere and that site is perfect for the majority as is shown by the responses on here ,its big enough and not used for anything else ? bourne free
  • Score: -18

10:32am Fri 8 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

mudeford7 wrote:
This seems a perfect site for the travellers, it is not being used as a park and ride.there is no parks to spoil.,and no houses nearby If they put a machine it they can pay a daily rate or a wekly discount and when the machine is full they can take it with them when they move out when they move to Spain for the winter
So the people who bought new houses on the opposite side of the road from a green field site and having being assured that nothing would get built on it and then got landed with the Park and Ride don't matter if travellers camp on it?

Let's see if the Council now stick to their word and enforce it not being used for travellers as they accepted government money to build it as a Park and ride and it has to be kept as such even when not in use.

The proposed TSP was south and east of the Park and Ride and wouldn't have interfered with residents at all, so none objected on grounds of NIMBYism as has been said by some, but on very sound grounds of suitability and that was why it was objected to. They will have every right to demand they're moved as quickly as they were from Beach Road.

And Quaker2, there are no overhead lights for the roundabout, no contaminated ground and access is from a quieter road. So that's your argument gone. Do check your facts.
[quote][p][bold]mudeford7[/bold] wrote: This seems a perfect site for the travellers, it is not being used as a park and ride.there is no parks to spoil.,and no houses nearby If they put a machine it they can pay a daily rate or a wekly discount and when the machine is full they can take it with them when they move out when they move to Spain for the winter[/p][/quote]So the people who bought new houses on the opposite side of the road from a green field site and having being assured that nothing would get built on it and then got landed with the Park and Ride don't matter if travellers camp on it? Let's see if the Council now stick to their word and enforce it not being used for travellers as they accepted government money to build it as a Park and ride and it has to be kept as such even when not in use. The proposed TSP was south and east of the Park and Ride and wouldn't have interfered with residents at all, so none objected on grounds of NIMBYism as has been said by some, but on very sound grounds of suitability and that was why it was objected to. They will have every right to demand they're moved as quickly as they were from Beach Road. And Quaker2, there are no overhead lights for the roundabout, no contaminated ground and access is from a quieter road. So that's your argument gone. Do check your facts. Carolyn43
  • Score: 11

10:37am Fri 8 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

bourne free wrote:
dogsoftheworld wrote:
Isn't it amazing how some of the trolls on here find it acceptable for Creekmoor to be saddled so long as they're ok...
This is why the travellers do so well- the settled community aren't a community at all, just a selfish bunch of "i'm allright jack" types whilst the travellers work in concert.
If you want any chance of beating these invaders then you have to work together as one. Some of the comments on here display a total disregard for the local POOLE people in Creekmoor just across the road from this site, and that is very sad, and says a lot more about them than the travellers!
I don't know how many travellers we have in Poole at the mo- but its a lot. The demand will always outstrip supply, whatever sites are provided- it would just draw more in.
They have to go somewhere and that site is perfect for the majority as is shown by the responses on here ,its big enough and not used for anything else ?
You mean the majority on here who are happy to see travellers invade any community but their own. You either don't want travellers in the borough at all, or, if you think it's OK for one community to have to put up with them, then you're very selfish. But then that's how many are today - me, me, me.
[quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dogsoftheworld[/bold] wrote: Isn't it amazing how some of the trolls on here find it acceptable for Creekmoor to be saddled so long as they're ok... This is why the travellers do so well- the settled community aren't a community at all, just a selfish bunch of "i'm allright jack" types whilst the travellers work in concert. If you want any chance of beating these invaders then you have to work together as one. Some of the comments on here display a total disregard for the local POOLE people in Creekmoor just across the road from this site, and that is very sad, and says a lot more about them than the travellers! I don't know how many travellers we have in Poole at the mo- but its a lot. The demand will always outstrip supply, whatever sites are provided- it would just draw more in.[/p][/quote]They have to go somewhere and that site is perfect for the majority as is shown by the responses on here ,its big enough and not used for anything else ?[/p][/quote]You mean the majority on here who are happy to see travellers invade any community but their own. You either don't want travellers in the borough at all, or, if you think it's OK for one community to have to put up with them, then you're very selfish. But then that's how many are today - me, me, me. Carolyn43
  • Score: -6

10:40am Fri 8 Aug 14

speedy231278 says...

"It is believed fencing was broken to gain access to the site last night."

So they have broken and entered, and thus are guilty of criminal trespass and can be evicted without prior notice under section whatevernumberitis that the Police casually ignore every single time without fail.

If I broken down a neighbour's fence and set up camp on their property, the police would be around swiftly, and I'd be carted off before my arse could hit the ground.

Why do our Police and councils completely ignore illegal activity just because this lot have recognition as an ethnic group? Being a recognised ethnic group is about respecting their beliefs and way of life, not turning a blind eye to breaking the law. I don't see Jewish people camping on forbidden sites, or Muslims breaking into fenced off areas, so why should a made-up ethnic group unrecognised outside of English law be any bloody different?
"It is believed fencing was broken to gain access to the site last night." So they have broken and entered, and thus are guilty of criminal trespass and can be evicted without prior notice under section whatevernumberitis that the Police casually ignore every single time without fail. If I broken down a neighbour's fence and set up camp on their property, the police would be around swiftly, and I'd be carted off before my arse could hit the ground. Why do our Police and councils completely ignore illegal activity just because this lot have recognition as an ethnic group? Being a recognised ethnic group is about respecting their beliefs and way of life, not turning a blind eye to breaking the law. I don't see Jewish people camping on forbidden sites, or Muslims breaking into fenced off areas, so why should a made-up ethnic group unrecognised outside of English law be any bloody different? speedy231278
  • Score: 55

10:45am Fri 8 Aug 14

bourne free says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
bourne free wrote:
dogsoftheworld wrote:
Isn't it amazing how some of the trolls on here find it acceptable for Creekmoor to be saddled so long as they're ok...
This is why the travellers do so well- the settled community aren't a community at all, just a selfish bunch of "i'm allright jack" types whilst the travellers work in concert.
If you want any chance of beating these invaders then you have to work together as one. Some of the comments on here display a total disregard for the local POOLE people in Creekmoor just across the road from this site, and that is very sad, and says a lot more about them than the travellers!
I don't know how many travellers we have in Poole at the mo- but its a lot. The demand will always outstrip supply, whatever sites are provided- it would just draw more in.
They have to go somewhere and that site is perfect for the majority as is shown by the responses on here ,its big enough and not used for anything else ?
You mean the majority on here who are happy to see travellers invade any community but their own. You either don't want travellers in the borough at all, or, if you think it's OK for one community to have to put up with them, then you're very selfish. But then that's how many are today - me, me, me.
Yes agree with your problem with gutless poole council, but we all know they will always be here in summer as they always have been and they will camp anywhere regardless - where do you suggest they stay then without the reply of move them on as that dont work ??
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dogsoftheworld[/bold] wrote: Isn't it amazing how some of the trolls on here find it acceptable for Creekmoor to be saddled so long as they're ok... This is why the travellers do so well- the settled community aren't a community at all, just a selfish bunch of "i'm allright jack" types whilst the travellers work in concert. If you want any chance of beating these invaders then you have to work together as one. Some of the comments on here display a total disregard for the local POOLE people in Creekmoor just across the road from this site, and that is very sad, and says a lot more about them than the travellers! I don't know how many travellers we have in Poole at the mo- but its a lot. The demand will always outstrip supply, whatever sites are provided- it would just draw more in.[/p][/quote]They have to go somewhere and that site is perfect for the majority as is shown by the responses on here ,its big enough and not used for anything else ?[/p][/quote]You mean the majority on here who are happy to see travellers invade any community but their own. You either don't want travellers in the borough at all, or, if you think it's OK for one community to have to put up with them, then you're very selfish. But then that's how many are today - me, me, me.[/p][/quote]Yes agree with your problem with gutless poole council, but we all know they will always be here in summer as they always have been and they will camp anywhere regardless - where do you suggest they stay then without the reply of move them on as that dont work ?? bourne free
  • Score: 12

10:53am Fri 8 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

I don't suggest they stay anywhere, but can anyone give a reason why the people of Creekmoor deserve to have them camped on their doorstep more than any other area of Poole, and I mean the people, the residents, the council tax payers? Now we'll see posters true colours.
I don't suggest they stay anywhere, but can anyone give a reason why the people of Creekmoor deserve to have them camped on their doorstep more than any other area of Poole, and I mean the people, the residents, the council tax payers? Now we'll see posters true colours. Carolyn43
  • Score: -7

10:53am Fri 8 Aug 14

its not that bad says...

Tony Trent wrote:
Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
I would like to know how much its cost poole this year on court costs and clean ups / poole keeps saying there is no place in poole for a site but how much will it cost are town in the coming years if one is not found you get people in the papers saying we need a site to cover all of dorset how will that work no one wants are problems a site needs to be found in poole park and ride sites are perfect skip toilet water job done / it will save poole money in the long run no one likes them hear but they clearly do
[quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.[/p][/quote]I would like to know how much its cost poole this year on court costs and clean ups / poole keeps saying there is no place in poole for a site but how much will it cost are town in the coming years if one is not found you get people in the papers saying we need a site to cover all of dorset how will that work no one wants are problems a site needs to be found in poole park and ride sites are perfect skip toilet water job done / it will save poole money in the long run no one likes them hear but they clearly do its not that bad
  • Score: 4

10:56am Fri 8 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

I've just noticed the minuses on my posts - that just shows that some do think it's OK for Creekmoor residents to have them. I repeat - selfish.
I've just noticed the minuses on my posts - that just shows that some do think it's OK for Creekmoor residents to have them. I repeat - selfish. Carolyn43
  • Score: -15

10:58am Fri 8 Aug 14

bourne free says...

Jo__Go wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
bourne free wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Quakers2 wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Quakers2 wrote:
Excellent choice of site. Let them stay there as long as they want to save chasing them around the Town and cleaning up our parks. This is wasted space and not used for anything meaningful.
Note Carolyn - they dont care about the noisey road or all that other cr*p you and the self appointed head of gypsies comes out with. They will love this site, let them enjoy it.
Excellent because it's nowhere near you, you smug little waste of skin?
How do you know? I guess you live at Creekmoor. Pop over with some coffee and cup cakes it sounds like you will fit in well.
Troll, skin, waste
Nuff said
Why the p1key talk then luv ?
Chubby Eades?
Not seen you on here in a while...
Who the hell is eades .Back to Jeremy Kyle, Josephine my pet ?
Jeremy Kyle? Does he play for Branksome United?
His name has been mentioned twice now and Liverpool FC have a scout looking for BUFC fixture list for the next wanabee saint !
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quakers2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quakers2[/bold] wrote: Excellent choice of site. Let them stay there as long as they want to save chasing them around the Town and cleaning up our parks. This is wasted space and not used for anything meaningful. Note Carolyn - they dont care about the noisey road or all that other cr*p you and the self appointed head of gypsies comes out with. They will love this site, let them enjoy it.[/p][/quote]Excellent because it's nowhere near you, you smug little waste of skin?[/p][/quote]How do you know? I guess you live at Creekmoor. Pop over with some coffee and cup cakes it sounds like you will fit in well.[/p][/quote]Troll, skin, waste Nuff said[/p][/quote]Why the p1key talk then luv ?[/p][/quote]Chubby Eades? Not seen you on here in a while...[/p][/quote]Who the hell is eades .Back to Jeremy Kyle, Josephine my pet ?[/p][/quote]Jeremy Kyle? Does he play for Branksome United?[/p][/quote]His name has been mentioned twice now and Liverpool FC have a scout looking for BUFC fixture list for the next wanabee saint ! bourne free
  • Score: 7

10:59am Fri 8 Aug 14

BigAlfromsunnyBournemouth says...

At last we are a bit of the way towards what should be happening, the best site, Creekmoor Park and Ride, designated as a TEMPORARY stopping site with a fixed weekly charge per vehicle for it's use, payable in advance for a full week or part week. A vehicle being a truck, a car, a van, a caravan or a motor caravan so a motor pulling a caravan pays for two vehicles.

What will then happen, any freeloading holidaymakers arriving in the area will then be directed to the P&R where they will be offered a site and charged the fee on entry, no other encampments will be allowed and the police will have the powers they want to move anyone on, that camps elsewhere.

What will happen in practice is that anyone arriving in the area and setting up an encampment will be moved on by the police and directed to the P&R, then on arrival at the P&R they will see the site, they will refuse to pay and leave the area completely knowing full well that it's the P&R or nothing.
At last we are a bit of the way towards what should be happening, the best site, Creekmoor Park and Ride, designated as a TEMPORARY stopping site with a fixed weekly charge per vehicle for it's use, payable in advance for a full week or part week. A vehicle being a truck, a car, a van, a caravan or a motor caravan so a motor pulling a caravan pays for two vehicles. What will then happen, any freeloading holidaymakers arriving in the area will then be directed to the P&R where they will be offered a site and charged the fee on entry, no other encampments will be allowed and the police will have the powers they want to move anyone on, that camps elsewhere. What will happen in practice is that anyone arriving in the area and setting up an encampment will be moved on by the police and directed to the P&R, then on arrival at the P&R they will see the site, they will refuse to pay and leave the area completely knowing full well that it's the P&R or nothing. BigAlfromsunnyBournemouth
  • Score: 10

11:00am Fri 8 Aug 14

city guy says...

bournemouth is on lockdown ? by what we hear/ read on here when the travellers try to gain access and security guards call the police they say "let them on " i suppose they are trying to stop a breach of the peace but they say they cant do anything about damage etc as it is a civil matter.
as long as the authorities take a "couldnt care less attitude"this will continue year after year
as for an offical travellers site even if one is provided they wont go there as they will be charged a fee(you would hope) for services but as it stands now they are geeting everything for free
i read on here that portsmouth council can move theses people on within 24 hours if this is true why cant all councils ?
bournemouth is on lockdown ? by what we hear/ read on here when the travellers try to gain access and security guards call the police they say "let them on " i suppose they are trying to stop a breach of the peace but they say they cant do anything about damage etc as it is a civil matter. as long as the authorities take a "couldnt care less attitude"this will continue year after year as for an offical travellers site even if one is provided they wont go there as they will be charged a fee(you would hope) for services but as it stands now they are geeting everything for free i read on here that portsmouth council can move theses people on within 24 hours if this is true why cant all councils ? city guy
  • Score: 14

11:02am Fri 8 Aug 14

bourne free says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
I've just noticed the minuses on my posts - that just shows that some do think it's OK for Creekmoor residents to have them. I repeat - selfish.
Read the post then and answer my question mrs me me me ?
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: I've just noticed the minuses on my posts - that just shows that some do think it's OK for Creekmoor residents to have them. I repeat - selfish.[/p][/quote]Read the post then and answer my question mrs me me me ? bourne free
  • Score: 14

11:13am Fri 8 Aug 14

Marty Caine says...

BigAlfromsunnyBourne
mouth
wrote:
At last we are a bit of the way towards what should be happening, the best site, Creekmoor Park and Ride, designated as a TEMPORARY stopping site with a fixed weekly charge per vehicle for it's use, payable in advance for a full week or part week. A vehicle being a truck, a car, a van, a caravan or a motor caravan so a motor pulling a caravan pays for two vehicles.

What will then happen, any freeloading holidaymakers arriving in the area will then be directed to the P&R where they will be offered a site and charged the fee on entry, no other encampments will be allowed and the police will have the powers they want to move anyone on, that camps elsewhere.

What will happen in practice is that anyone arriving in the area and setting up an encampment will be moved on by the police and directed to the P&R, then on arrival at the P&R they will see the site, they will refuse to pay and leave the area completely knowing full well that it's the P&R or nothing.
And after the council have wasted £250,000 building a lovely TSP and it becomes full you are right back to square one, chasing them around with costly eviction orders. A TSP is not the solution as it will only increase the costs of the problem. The law needs to be changed and that can only be done through parliament.
[quote][p][bold]BigAlfromsunnyBourne mouth[/bold] wrote: At last we are a bit of the way towards what should be happening, the best site, Creekmoor Park and Ride, designated as a TEMPORARY stopping site with a fixed weekly charge per vehicle for it's use, payable in advance for a full week or part week. A vehicle being a truck, a car, a van, a caravan or a motor caravan so a motor pulling a caravan pays for two vehicles. What will then happen, any freeloading holidaymakers arriving in the area will then be directed to the P&R where they will be offered a site and charged the fee on entry, no other encampments will be allowed and the police will have the powers they want to move anyone on, that camps elsewhere. What will happen in practice is that anyone arriving in the area and setting up an encampment will be moved on by the police and directed to the P&R, then on arrival at the P&R they will see the site, they will refuse to pay and leave the area completely knowing full well that it's the P&R or nothing.[/p][/quote]And after the council have wasted £250,000 building a lovely TSP and it becomes full you are right back to square one, chasing them around with costly eviction orders. A TSP is not the solution as it will only increase the costs of the problem. The law needs to be changed and that can only be done through parliament. Marty Caine
  • Score: 6

11:20am Fri 8 Aug 14

Norman Stansfield says...

Like I always say : this is the ideal location for them. Massive, empty, tarmac'ed area. Fences, basic hygene facilities, security, job done. Small expenditure here, massive savings clearing up after them all over the place. I feel the pain of creekmorians : nothing personal chaps. You have the faclilty, already built and waiting. It would be the same if it was any other locale. None of this 'green belt, must be used as p&r' nonsense please....both of those arguments have been invalidated by the fact that a, someone put tarmac on the green belt and b, it's not being used as a park and ride..... It's a perfect solution. Someone make it happen.
Like I always say : this is the ideal location for them. Massive, empty, tarmac'ed area. Fences, basic hygene facilities, security, job done. Small expenditure here, massive savings clearing up after them all over the place. I feel the pain of creekmorians : nothing personal chaps. You have the faclilty, already built and waiting. It would be the same if it was any other locale. None of this 'green belt, must be used as p&r' nonsense please....both of those arguments have been invalidated by the fact that a, someone put tarmac on the green belt and b, it's not being used as a park and ride..... It's a perfect solution. Someone make it happen. Norman Stansfield
  • Score: 2

11:22am Fri 8 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

bourne free wrote:
Carolyn43 wrote:
I've just noticed the minuses on my posts - that just shows that some do think it's OK for Creekmoor residents to have them. I repeat - selfish.
Read the post then and answer my question mrs me me me ?
Why am I mrs me me me? I don't want travellers anywhere in the borough, but it seems that many others think it's OK PROVIDED THEY'RE NOT NEAR THEM, but pitch up in Creekmoor. Presumably you think Creekmoor residents deserve to have them because of the misguided opinion that they stopped the TSP - read all the documents on the Planning web site. When has an group managed to stop the council doing what it wants? Never! So why is it thought that Creekmoor residents had any influence on the council?
[quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: I've just noticed the minuses on my posts - that just shows that some do think it's OK for Creekmoor residents to have them. I repeat - selfish.[/p][/quote]Read the post then and answer my question mrs me me me ?[/p][/quote]Why am I mrs me me me? I don't want travellers anywhere in the borough, but it seems that many others think it's OK PROVIDED THEY'RE NOT NEAR THEM, but pitch up in Creekmoor. Presumably you think Creekmoor residents deserve to have them because of the misguided opinion that they stopped the TSP - read all the documents on the Planning web site. When has an group managed to stop the council doing what it wants? Never! So why is it thought that Creekmoor residents had any influence on the council? Carolyn43
  • Score: 6

11:27am Fri 8 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

Norman Stansfield wrote:
Like I always say : this is the ideal location for them. Massive, empty, tarmac'ed area. Fences, basic hygene facilities, security, job done. Small expenditure here, massive savings clearing up after them all over the place. I feel the pain of creekmorians : nothing personal chaps. You have the faclilty, already built and waiting. It would be the same if it was any other locale. None of this 'green belt, must be used as p&r' nonsense please....both of those arguments have been invalidated by the fact that a, someone put tarmac on the green belt and b, it's not being used as a park and ride..... It's a perfect solution. Someone make it happen.
But the council took money from the government to build it as a park and ride and for no other purpose!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!

It would be an ideal place, but unless the government agree to its additional use, it can't be used as a traveller site. That's why it wasn't included in the survey to try and find somewhere suitable.

Even if additional use was approved, unlike other posting here, I'd still feel for the people who bought houses in good faith opposite what was a green field site on the understanding t would stay that way.
[quote][p][bold]Norman Stansfield[/bold] wrote: Like I always say : this is the ideal location for them. Massive, empty, tarmac'ed area. Fences, basic hygene facilities, security, job done. Small expenditure here, massive savings clearing up after them all over the place. I feel the pain of creekmorians : nothing personal chaps. You have the faclilty, already built and waiting. It would be the same if it was any other locale. None of this 'green belt, must be used as p&r' nonsense please....both of those arguments have been invalidated by the fact that a, someone put tarmac on the green belt and b, it's not being used as a park and ride..... It's a perfect solution. Someone make it happen.[/p][/quote]But the council took money from the government to build it as a park and ride and for no other purpose!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!! It would be an ideal place, but unless the government agree to its additional use, it can't be used as a traveller site. That's why it wasn't included in the survey to try and find somewhere suitable. Even if additional use was approved, unlike other posting here, I'd still feel for the people who bought houses in good faith opposite what was a green field site on the understanding t would stay that way. Carolyn43
  • Score: 9

11:40am Fri 8 Aug 14

muscliffman says...

Baysider wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers?

It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption.

Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.
Now, without reference to their accent or where they might have a vehicle registered as these are clearly nonsense when considering ones ethnicity, share with us how YOU would go about satisfying a court that these people are NOT travellers Muzzy?
Not my job Bayzee.

If these 'tourists' were treated as normal citizens by our apparently inept public servants and arrested and prosecuted for breaking the countless laws that they usually do, then it would be entirely up to them to prove in a Court that they WERE 'ethnic travellers' - and that this status apparently also puts them above so many other laws.

It was loppy liberalism that got us into this whole 'traveller' mess - thanks!
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers? It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption. Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.[/p][/quote]Now, without reference to their accent or where they might have a vehicle registered as these are clearly nonsense when considering ones ethnicity, share with us how YOU would go about satisfying a court that these people are NOT travellers Muzzy?[/p][/quote]Not my job Bayzee. If these 'tourists' were treated as normal citizens by our apparently inept public servants and arrested and prosecuted for breaking the countless laws that they usually do, then it would be entirely up to them to prove in a Court that they WERE 'ethnic travellers' - and that this status apparently also puts them above so many other laws. It was loppy liberalism that got us into this whole 'traveller' mess - thanks! muscliffman
  • Score: 16

11:42am Fri 8 Aug 14

Norman Stansfield says...

Hi Carolyn. If it was being used as a P&R, fine. If it was still a fiels, equally fine. It's not. It's never going to be. It's an ideal location for a traveller transit camp. We need to start dealing with the stuff that's actually happening now. Not what could have or should have happened. It's not 10 years ago when they were getting permission, funding and building it. It's now. It could be useful now. It needs to happen.
Hi Carolyn. If it was being used as a P&R, fine. If it was still a fiels, equally fine. It's not. It's never going to be. It's an ideal location for a traveller transit camp. We need to start dealing with the stuff that's actually happening now. Not what could have or should have happened. It's not 10 years ago when they were getting permission, funding and building it. It's now. It could be useful now. It needs to happen. Norman Stansfield
  • Score: 0

11:46am Fri 8 Aug 14

Marty Caine says...

Tony Trent wrote:
Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
If the proposals were based on the best advice you could get, I strongly suggest you get some new advisors. Anyone who thought that putting a TSP next to Poole's main fire station was a good idea, really should never be out on their own.

The land adjacent to the fire station on the other side of the dual carriageway would have been a far more suitable site, giving it a slip road in, coming down Old wareham road and and exit road heading into Poole. No doubt you will start claiming flood plains but as Safety Drive had the same problem and it was clearly pointed out at the meeting in the lighthouse that the land could be raised to overcome that, that kind of eliminates that argument.

However, I still believe that a TSP is not part of the solution and will only incur greater costs to the taxpayers and undoubtedly show the traveler community what a soft touch Poole council is, though most already know that by now anyway.
[quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.[/p][/quote]If the proposals were based on the best advice you could get, I strongly suggest you get some new advisors. Anyone who thought that putting a TSP next to Poole's main fire station was a good idea, really should never be out on their own. The land adjacent to the fire station on the other side of the dual carriageway would have been a far more suitable site, giving it a slip road in, coming down Old wareham road and and exit road heading into Poole. No doubt you will start claiming flood plains but as Safety Drive had the same problem and it was clearly pointed out at the meeting in the lighthouse that the land could be raised to overcome that, that kind of eliminates that argument. However, I still believe that a TSP is not part of the solution and will only incur greater costs to the taxpayers and undoubtedly show the traveler community what a soft touch Poole council is, though most already know that by now anyway. Marty Caine
  • Score: 6

11:49am Fri 8 Aug 14

TheDistrict says...

Travellers, my backside. Why cannot the Echo do a research and find out the truth, do these "So Called Travellers" come under their notice of Racial Equality and Ethnic Groups. I bet you cannot. Therefore, and regardless, these people are committing offences, and because of your continuous support for them, along with the councils they are getting away with it.

You talk of the Air Show. No doubt these "So Called Travellers" will take up the disabled spaces at the end of Eastcliff during the show allowing some disabled people unable to visit the show themselves.
Travellers, my backside. Why cannot the Echo do a research and find out the truth, do these "So Called Travellers" come under their notice of Racial Equality and Ethnic Groups. I bet you cannot. Therefore, and regardless, these people are committing offences, and because of your continuous support for them, along with the councils they are getting away with it. You talk of the Air Show. No doubt these "So Called Travellers" will take up the disabled spaces at the end of Eastcliff during the show allowing some disabled people unable to visit the show themselves. TheDistrict
  • Score: 11

12:08pm Fri 8 Aug 14

nermal says...

Baysider wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers?

It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption.

Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.
Now, without reference to their accent or where they might have a vehicle registered as these are clearly nonsense when considering ones ethnicity, share with us how YOU would go about satisfying a court that these people are NOT travellers Muzzy?
I don't care who they are or aren't, I would be prosecuted for criminal damage or fined for not paying for parking, why should they be any different? THAT is what grates.
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers? It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption. Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.[/p][/quote]Now, without reference to their accent or where they might have a vehicle registered as these are clearly nonsense when considering ones ethnicity, share with us how YOU would go about satisfying a court that these people are NOT travellers Muzzy?[/p][/quote]I don't care who they are or aren't, I would be prosecuted for criminal damage or fined for not paying for parking, why should they be any different? THAT is what grates. nermal
  • Score: 17

12:09pm Fri 8 Aug 14

nermal says...

BarrHumbug wrote:
If we can't stop them then is there no way we can make their stay so un appealing that they choose to leave the area of their own accord?
Can we not set our own home grown asbo kids on them to steal their kids motorbikes and vandalise their cars?
Couple of nights of really loud music playing might help too! You know, the sort with the thumping bass that goes right through you...
[quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: If we can't stop them then is there no way we can make their stay so un appealing that they choose to leave the area of their own accord? Can we not set our own home grown asbo kids on them to steal their kids motorbikes and vandalise their cars?[/p][/quote]Couple of nights of really loud music playing might help too! You know, the sort with the thumping bass that goes right through you... nermal
  • Score: 7

12:14pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Townee says...

Perhaps the British Caravan club could take note. Travel in groups, use car parks to rest up in, don't worry about paying and if asked just say you are a group of travellers going about your lawful business.
Perhaps the British Caravan club could take note. Travel in groups, use car parks to rest up in, don't worry about paying and if asked just say you are a group of travellers going about your lawful business. Townee
  • Score: 11

12:31pm Fri 8 Aug 14

S,Bowes says...

Baysider wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers?

It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption.

Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.
Now, without reference to their accent or where they might have a vehicle registered as these are clearly nonsense when considering ones ethnicity, share with us how YOU would go about satisfying a court that these people are NOT travellers Muzzy?
Do have documentation of a passport proving they are travellers??
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers? It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption. Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.[/p][/quote]Now, without reference to their accent or where they might have a vehicle registered as these are clearly nonsense when considering ones ethnicity, share with us how YOU would go about satisfying a court that these people are NOT travellers Muzzy?[/p][/quote]Do have documentation of a passport proving they are travellers?? S,Bowes
  • Score: 3

12:37pm Fri 8 Aug 14

sunnybournemouth says...

Don’t worry, they will all move next Wednesday. That way their new home will be safe for the duration of the air show (by the time the council has got hold of the paperwork to move them on)
Don’t worry, they will all move next Wednesday. That way their new home will be safe for the duration of the air show (by the time the council has got hold of the paperwork to move them on) sunnybournemouth
  • Score: 1

12:39pm Fri 8 Aug 14

speedy231278 says...

How about a £1000 steak and kidney lock opener surcharge on every new caravan and motorhome sold in the land, to be paid into a fund to be given to all local councils to help clear up the mess they make? Then they'd be paying something towards all the aggravation they cause. Otherwise, why should anyone have to pay a penny to provide free accommodation to people who contribute nothing towards it, yet are able to afford massively expensive palaces on wheels?
How about a £1000 steak and kidney lock opener surcharge on every new caravan and motorhome sold in the land, to be paid into a fund to be given to all local councils to help clear up the mess they make? Then they'd be paying something towards all the aggravation they cause. Otherwise, why should anyone have to pay a penny to provide free accommodation to people who contribute nothing towards it, yet are able to afford massively expensive palaces on wheels? speedy231278
  • Score: 0

12:41pm Fri 8 Aug 14

S,Bowes says...

A Parkston councillor wrote to the environment minister Eric Pickles ,about party houses . He informed her that were already enough powers to resolve the problem that the council and police seemed to be dodging .perhaps some councillor could ask him about traveller making people's lives a missary and a great deal of money while the people we imagined were in.place to protect us hide behind some imaginary law ..Will be a real stinker for them if it turns out they are required to enforce the law,
A Parkston councillor wrote to the environment minister Eric Pickles ,about party houses . He informed her that were already enough powers to resolve the problem that the council and police seemed to be dodging .perhaps some councillor could ask him about traveller making people's lives a missary and a great deal of money while the people we imagined were in.place to protect us hide behind some imaginary law ..Will be a real stinker for them if it turns out they are required to enforce the law, S,Bowes
  • Score: 6

12:46pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Gtx2014 says...

LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE ON FIRE JUST SEEN TWO FIRE ENGINES ARRIVE AT THIS SITE :)
LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE ON FIRE JUST SEEN TWO FIRE ENGINES ARRIVE AT THIS SITE :) Gtx2014
  • Score: 9

1:06pm Fri 8 Aug 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Can bed sit barrister tell us if it's possible to get the police commissioner out on a vote of no confidence?
Can bed sit barrister tell us if it's possible to get the police commissioner out on a vote of no confidence? kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 7

1:08pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Wackerone says...

Tony Trent wrote:
Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
How many times do you need to be told Tony? Section 61! Criminal Damage, anti social behaviour! Just two instances where this can be used for immediate eviction. INSIST ON ITS APPLICATION!
[quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.[/p][/quote]How many times do you need to be told Tony? Section 61! Criminal Damage, anti social behaviour! Just two instances where this can be used for immediate eviction. INSIST ON ITS APPLICATION! Wackerone
  • Score: 17

1:10pm Fri 8 Aug 14

alasdair1967 says...

"It is believed a section of fence was broken"
No it's fact a section of fence has been ripped down by these criminals yes criminals , Poole councils gates and concrete blocks remain in place if any other member of the public had done this they would be prosecuted this is blatant criminal damage and trespass throw the book at them !
"It is believed a section of fence was broken" No it's fact a section of fence has been ripped down by these criminals yes criminals , Poole councils gates and concrete blocks remain in place if any other member of the public had done this they would be prosecuted this is blatant criminal damage and trespass throw the book at them ! alasdair1967
  • Score: 16

1:10pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Wackerone says...

kalebmoledirt wrote:
Can bed sit barrister tell us if it's possible to get the police commissioner out on a vote of no confidence?
That's if you can find him.
[quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: Can bed sit barrister tell us if it's possible to get the police commissioner out on a vote of no confidence?[/p][/quote]That's if you can find him. Wackerone
  • Score: 8

1:19pm Fri 8 Aug 14

kalebmoledirt says...

S,Bowes wrote:
Baysider wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers?

It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption.

Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.
Now, without reference to their accent or where they might have a vehicle registered as these are clearly nonsense when considering ones ethnicity, share with us how YOU would go about satisfying a court that these people are NOT travellers Muzzy?
Do have documentation of a passport proving they are travellers??
Sure it would easier to prove they are NOT travellers as described in the original charter. Than this collection of anarchists to prove they are genuinely travellers or show people. .They have no documentation to say they anything other a group of people that turn up in Poole to mock the car bound police and canteen bound council
[quote][p][bold]S,Bowes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: And once more we have to ask who is deciding that these people are ethnic 'travellers' and not just a bunch of lawless UK holidaymakers? It's probably safe to say it will be the usual culprits in our public services whose life is simply made a lot easier if they make this assumption. Regrettably ineffective, cowardly and bone idle are the words that now unavoidably keep coming to mind.[/p][/quote]Now, without reference to their accent or where they might have a vehicle registered as these are clearly nonsense when considering ones ethnicity, share with us how YOU would go about satisfying a court that these people are NOT travellers Muzzy?[/p][/quote]Do have documentation of a passport proving they are travellers??[/p][/quote]Sure it would easier to prove they are NOT travellers as described in the original charter. Than this collection of anarchists to prove they are genuinely travellers or show people. .They have no documentation to say they anything other a group of people that turn up in Poole to mock the car bound police and canteen bound council kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 5

1:23pm Fri 8 Aug 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Wackerone wrote:
kalebmoledirt wrote:
Can bed sit barrister tell us if it's possible to get the police commissioner out on a vote of no confidence?
That's if you can find him.
He'll respond when his river dance video ends
[quote][p][bold]Wackerone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: Can bed sit barrister tell us if it's possible to get the police commissioner out on a vote of no confidence?[/p][/quote]That's if you can find him.[/p][/quote]He'll respond when his river dance video ends kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 1

1:26pm Fri 8 Aug 14

martinsim34 says...

wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure
wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure martinsim34
  • Score: -4

1:32pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Teddy 1 says...

Lots of nice open spaces and wooded areas in branksome park. We would welcome them here.
Lots of nice open spaces and wooded areas in branksome park. We would welcome them here. Teddy 1
  • Score: 9

1:36pm Fri 8 Aug 14

BigAlfromsunnyBournemouth says...

"LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE ON FIRE JUST SEEN TWO FIRE ENGINES ARRIVE AT THIS SITE :)"

Petrol bombed ?
"LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE ON FIRE JUST SEEN TWO FIRE ENGINES ARRIVE AT THIS SITE :)" Petrol bombed ? BigAlfromsunnyBournemouth
  • Score: 0

1:51pm Fri 8 Aug 14

nobull says...

Just asking. If they are above the law. does the Law protect them from the rest of us having some bonfire type fun?
Just asking. If they are above the law. does the Law protect them from the rest of us having some bonfire type fun? nobull
  • Score: 5

1:54pm Fri 8 Aug 14

DiggerRuss says...

For those that think the park and ride is the most suitable place, why not share the pain equally.

If travellers can use the park and ride car park, let them use:

1. A small portion of Baiter car park.
2. The the old school car park at oakdale.
3 the site at tower park.
4.Part of adastral road car park.
5. Turin more rec car park etc etc.

Why do you always want to ***t on creekmoor? Probably because you don't live here?

Those of you so keen to crap on creekmoor do not say where you live? Let them also come to a car park near you, after all we are all in it together!
For those that think the park and ride is the most suitable place, why not share the pain equally. If travellers can use the park and ride car park, let them use: 1. A small portion of Baiter car park. 2. The the old school car park at oakdale. 3 the site at tower park. 4.Part of adastral road car park. 5. Turin more rec car park etc etc. Why do you always want to ***t on creekmoor? Probably because you don't live here? Those of you so keen to crap on creekmoor do not say where you live? Let them also come to a car park near you, after all we are all in it together! DiggerRuss
  • Score: 1

1:55pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Marty Caine says...

martinsim34 wrote:
wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure
The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are.

I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.
[quote][p][bold]martinsim34[/bold] wrote: wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure[/p][/quote]The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are. I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem. Marty Caine
  • Score: 3

1:59pm Fri 8 Aug 14

kalebmoledirt says...

nobull wrote:
Just asking. If they are above the law. does the Law protect them from the rest of us having some bonfire type fun?
Who arrived first the social worker,or the fire men? The cops will right behind the burger van
[quote][p][bold]nobull[/bold] wrote: Just asking. If they are above the law. does the Law protect them from the rest of us having some bonfire type fun?[/p][/quote]Who arrived first the social worker,or the fire men? The cops will right behind the burger van kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 3

2:05pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Peroni says...

Gtx2014 wrote:
LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE ON FIRE JUST SEEN TWO FIRE ENGINES ARRIVE AT THIS SITE :)
Ssssssshhhhhhh
Don't phone the Fire Brigade , and let's keep it quiet ......
Any marshmallows lol
[quote][p][bold]Gtx2014[/bold] wrote: LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE ON FIRE JUST SEEN TWO FIRE ENGINES ARRIVE AT THIS SITE :)[/p][/quote]Ssssssshhhhhhh Don't phone the Fire Brigade , and let's keep it quiet ...... Any marshmallows lol Peroni
  • Score: 2

2:29pm Fri 8 Aug 14

speedy231278 says...

DiggerRuss wrote:
For those that think the park and ride is the most suitable place, why not share the pain equally.

If travellers can use the park and ride car park, let them use:

1. A small portion of Baiter car park.
2. The the old school car park at oakdale.
3 the site at tower park.
4.Part of adastral road car park.
5. Turin more rec car park etc etc.

Why do you always want to ***t on creekmoor? Probably because you don't live here?

Those of you so keen to crap on creekmoor do not say where you live? Let them also come to a car park near you, after all we are all in it together!
How about let them use somewhere they've PAID to use?
[quote][p][bold]DiggerRuss[/bold] wrote: For those that think the park and ride is the most suitable place, why not share the pain equally. If travellers can use the park and ride car park, let them use: 1. A small portion of Baiter car park. 2. The the old school car park at oakdale. 3 the site at tower park. 4.Part of adastral road car park. 5. Turin more rec car park etc etc. Why do you always want to ***t on creekmoor? Probably because you don't live here? Those of you so keen to crap on creekmoor do not say where you live? Let them also come to a car park near you, after all we are all in it together![/p][/quote]How about let them use somewhere they've PAID to use? speedy231278
  • Score: 9

3:03pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Creekmoron says...

Marty Caine wrote:
martinsim34 wrote:
wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure
The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are.

I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.
Probably Tony Trent
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]martinsim34[/bold] wrote: wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure[/p][/quote]The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are. I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.[/p][/quote]Probably Tony Trent Creekmoron
  • Score: 3

3:15pm Fri 8 Aug 14

JustForPoole says...

TRULY AMAZING :- From Poole Council website

Harbourside Car Park Baiter
14 Caravans
Notes
A court eviction order was obtained today, and is being serviced this afternon. The travellers will then be legally required to vacate the land within 24 hours.
Location
Park and Ride Site Creekmoor
7 Caravans
Notes
We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order.
Location
Beach Road Car Park, Pinecliff Road
Notes
We served Direction Orders yesterday, the travellers have now left this site. The site is clean.
Location
The Old Camping Field - North of Napier Road
7 Caravans
Notes
We are aware of this encampment. The land is privately leased and the encampment will be managed by the leasee
TRULY AMAZING :- From Poole Council website Harbourside Car Park Baiter 14 Caravans Notes A court eviction order was obtained today, and is being serviced this afternon. The travellers will then be legally required to vacate the land within 24 hours. Location Park and Ride Site Creekmoor 7 Caravans Notes We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order. Location Beach Road Car Park, Pinecliff Road Notes We served Direction Orders yesterday, the travellers have now left this site. The site is clean. Location The Old Camping Field - North of Napier Road 7 Caravans Notes We are aware of this encampment. The land is privately leased and the encampment will be managed by the leasee JustForPoole
  • Score: 4

4:07pm Fri 8 Aug 14

JustForPoole says...

Townee wrote:
Perhaps the British Caravan club could take note. Travel in groups, use car parks to rest up in, don't worry about paying and if asked just say you are a group of travellers going about your lawful business.
Brilliant "Townee" .... I think you have just saved me a fortune ... I was about to go and pay at a campsite !!!
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: Perhaps the British Caravan club could take note. Travel in groups, use car parks to rest up in, don't worry about paying and if asked just say you are a group of travellers going about your lawful business.[/p][/quote]Brilliant "Townee" .... I think you have just saved me a fortune ... I was about to go and pay at a campsite !!! JustForPoole
  • Score: 5

4:20pm Fri 8 Aug 14

cromwell9 says...

susi.m wrote:
They wont like the park and ride because there is no water there.
If any of us broke down a fence that belonged to the council then we would be prosecuted.
Why is it one rule for them and one rule for us?
The law MUST be changed.
Lobby your MP's
NO CHANCE,
[quote][p][bold]susi.m[/bold] wrote: They wont like the park and ride because there is no water there. If any of us broke down a fence that belonged to the council then we would be prosecuted. Why is it one rule for them and one rule for us? The law MUST be changed. Lobby your MP's[/p][/quote]NO CHANCE, cromwell9
  • Score: 3

4:34pm Fri 8 Aug 14

alasdair1967 says...

Having just ridden past the creekmoor site more at leisure than rushing to get to work ,there are still caravans on the site however not as many as this morning .the entry point is protected by gate metal removable bollards and more substantial concrete blocks ,the travellers last night found the only section of fence that was unprotected by bushes/hedge ripped that section of fence down and drove in close to the mini roundabout,this has now been blocked by a concrete barrier however the exit gate at some point today has been opened and the concrete barriers have been removed to allow freedom of movement no sign of any security ,
Having just ridden past the creekmoor site more at leisure than rushing to get to work ,there are still caravans on the site however not as many as this morning .the entry point is protected by gate metal removable bollards and more substantial concrete blocks ,the travellers last night found the only section of fence that was unprotected by bushes/hedge ripped that section of fence down and drove in close to the mini roundabout,this has now been blocked by a concrete barrier however the exit gate at some point today has been opened and the concrete barriers have been removed to allow freedom of movement no sign of any security , alasdair1967
  • Score: 3

4:41pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Big Man 2 says...

A lot of interesting comments on here from people who do not live any where near Creekmoor and are taking the opportunity for a bit of Creekmoor bashing, and insulting posters from this area !!

Just remember WE are all council tax payers throughout the entire borough of Poole, and therefore are fully entitled the full support of the council to remove these criminals from the our borough, not just allow to commit criminal damage and camp where they like.

It is very interesting to note how quickly the council can move them on from Beach Road ,Canford Cliffs, but other areas have to wait whilst the council drags it's heels following the rule of law, they must have their own laws in Canford Cliffs to deal with this so quickly !!!

For the people under the misconception that the P&R site is ideal, then you could not be further from the truth for many reasons, there are toilet facilities, or foul sewers on the site, there is no water supply, the nearest being the Fire Station.

Despite many comments regarding Green Belt , this land is definelty Green Belt which was only allowed to be surfaced over for the sole use of transport purposes, as deemed by the Government Grant which provided the funding for it. The land can be used for no other purposes, should the council no longer require the P&R then then the land would have to be re landscaped back into Green Belt land.

As for the LibDems on Poole Council, I have never witnessed such a poor shower of lily livered nimby's , grow some balls and deal with this problem once and for all before it becomes your demise !!

Poole People get behind this problem and share the pain, please don't keep trying to dump on someone else !!!

The Park & Ride site is not the answer, we look forward to seeing the travellers moved off in three days just like Canford Cliffs !!!
A lot of interesting comments on here from people who do not live any where near Creekmoor and are taking the opportunity for a bit of Creekmoor bashing, and insulting posters from this area !! Just remember WE are all council tax payers throughout the entire borough of Poole, and therefore are fully entitled the full support of the council to remove these criminals from the our borough, not just allow to commit criminal damage and camp where they like. It is very interesting to note how quickly the council can move them on from Beach Road ,Canford Cliffs, but other areas have to wait whilst the council drags it's heels following the rule of law, they must have their own laws in Canford Cliffs to deal with this so quickly !!! For the people under the misconception that the P&R site is ideal, then you could not be further from the truth for many reasons, there are toilet facilities, or foul sewers on the site, there is no water supply, the nearest being the Fire Station. Despite many comments regarding Green Belt , this land is definelty Green Belt which was only allowed to be surfaced over for the sole use of transport purposes, as deemed by the Government Grant which provided the funding for it. The land can be used for no other purposes, should the council no longer require the P&R then then the land would have to be re landscaped back into Green Belt land. As for the LibDems on Poole Council, I have never witnessed such a poor shower of lily livered nimby's , grow some balls and deal with this problem once and for all before it becomes your demise !! Poole People get behind this problem and share the pain, please don't keep trying to dump on someone else !!! The Park & Ride site is not the answer, we look forward to seeing the travellers moved off in three days just like Canford Cliffs !!! Big Man 2
  • Score: 13

4:42pm Fri 8 Aug 14

alasdair1967 says...

To me there are two ideal sites that could be utilised at this time of year firstly why don't Bournemouth and Poole councils share the cost and utilise canford magna show ground provide skips and loos not that the rubbish has to be taken far as there is a waste disposal plant on the door step ,secondly the waste ground next to the twin sales bridge again easy managed easy to clean large area relatively far away from residential property's ,canford magna in my opinion would be ideal ,how much are the councils spending each year on court orders eviction costs and cleanups ,it's not rocket science is it share the cost and try to avoid this cat and mouse game which happens year in year out at the same time and no matter what certain people say the problem disappears around about the time the steam fair closes
To me there are two ideal sites that could be utilised at this time of year firstly why don't Bournemouth and Poole councils share the cost and utilise canford magna show ground provide skips and loos not that the rubbish has to be taken far as there is a waste disposal plant on the door step ,secondly the waste ground next to the twin sales bridge again easy managed easy to clean large area relatively far away from residential property's ,canford magna in my opinion would be ideal ,how much are the councils spending each year on court orders eviction costs and cleanups ,it's not rocket science is it share the cost and try to avoid this cat and mouse game which happens year in year out at the same time and no matter what certain people say the problem disappears around about the time the steam fair closes alasdair1967
  • Score: 0

4:43pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Big Man 2 says...

alasdair1967 wrote:
Having just ridden past the creekmoor site more at leisure than rushing to get to work ,there are still caravans on the site however not as many as this morning .the entry point is protected by gate metal removable bollards and more substantial concrete blocks ,the travellers last night found the only section of fence that was unprotected by bushes/hedge ripped that section of fence down and drove in close to the mini roundabout,this has now been blocked by a concrete barrier however the exit gate at some point today has been opened and the concrete barriers have been removed to allow freedom of movement no sign of any security ,
Wouldn't by surprised if they were directed there by a Lib Dem councillor, no names no pack drill !!
[quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: Having just ridden past the creekmoor site more at leisure than rushing to get to work ,there are still caravans on the site however not as many as this morning .the entry point is protected by gate metal removable bollards and more substantial concrete blocks ,the travellers last night found the only section of fence that was unprotected by bushes/hedge ripped that section of fence down and drove in close to the mini roundabout,this has now been blocked by a concrete barrier however the exit gate at some point today has been opened and the concrete barriers have been removed to allow freedom of movement no sign of any security ,[/p][/quote]Wouldn't by surprised if they were directed there by a Lib Dem councillor, no names no pack drill !! Big Man 2
  • Score: 5

4:46pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Big Man 2 says...

Big Man 2 wrote:
A lot of interesting comments on here from people who do not live any where near Creekmoor and are taking the opportunity for a bit of Creekmoor bashing, and insulting posters from this area !!

Just remember WE are all council tax payers throughout the entire borough of Poole, and therefore are fully entitled the full support of the council to remove these criminals from the our borough, not just allow to commit criminal damage and camp where they like.

It is very interesting to note how quickly the council can move them on from Beach Road ,Canford Cliffs, but other areas have to wait whilst the council drags it's heels following the rule of law, they must have their own laws in Canford Cliffs to deal with this so quickly !!!

For the people under the misconception that the P&R site is ideal, then you could not be further from the truth for many reasons, there are toilet facilities, or foul sewers on the site, there is no water supply, the nearest being the Fire Station.

Despite many comments regarding Green Belt , this land is definelty Green Belt which was only allowed to be surfaced over for the sole use of transport purposes, as deemed by the Government Grant which provided the funding for it. The land can be used for no other purposes, should the council no longer require the P&R then then the land would have to be re landscaped back into Green Belt land.

As for the LibDems on Poole Council, I have never witnessed such a poor shower of lily livered nimby's , grow some balls and deal with this problem once and for all before it becomes your demise !!

Poole People get behind this problem and share the pain, please don't keep trying to dump on someone else !!!

The Park & Ride site is not the answer, we look forward to seeing the travellers moved off in three days just like Canford Cliffs !!!
correction


There are no toilet facilities !!
[quote][p][bold]Big Man 2[/bold] wrote: A lot of interesting comments on here from people who do not live any where near Creekmoor and are taking the opportunity for a bit of Creekmoor bashing, and insulting posters from this area !! Just remember WE are all council tax payers throughout the entire borough of Poole, and therefore are fully entitled the full support of the council to remove these criminals from the our borough, not just allow to commit criminal damage and camp where they like. It is very interesting to note how quickly the council can move them on from Beach Road ,Canford Cliffs, but other areas have to wait whilst the council drags it's heels following the rule of law, they must have their own laws in Canford Cliffs to deal with this so quickly !!! For the people under the misconception that the P&R site is ideal, then you could not be further from the truth for many reasons, there are toilet facilities, or foul sewers on the site, there is no water supply, the nearest being the Fire Station. Despite many comments regarding Green Belt , this land is definelty Green Belt which was only allowed to be surfaced over for the sole use of transport purposes, as deemed by the Government Grant which provided the funding for it. The land can be used for no other purposes, should the council no longer require the P&R then then the land would have to be re landscaped back into Green Belt land. As for the LibDems on Poole Council, I have never witnessed such a poor shower of lily livered nimby's , grow some balls and deal with this problem once and for all before it becomes your demise !! Poole People get behind this problem and share the pain, please don't keep trying to dump on someone else !!! The Park & Ride site is not the answer, we look forward to seeing the travellers moved off in three days just like Canford Cliffs !!![/p][/quote]correction There are no toilet facilities !! Big Man 2
  • Score: -2

4:53pm Fri 8 Aug 14

skydriver says...

bourne free wrote:
dogsoftheworld wrote:
Isn't it amazing how some of the trolls on here find it acceptable for Creekmoor to be saddled so long as they're ok...
This is why the travellers do so well- the settled community aren't a community at all, just a selfish bunch of "i'm allright jack" types whilst the travellers work in concert.
If you want any chance of beating these invaders then you have to work together as one. Some of the comments on here display a total disregard for the local POOLE people in Creekmoor just across the road from this site, and that is very sad, and says a lot more about them than the travellers!
I don't know how many travellers we have in Poole at the mo- but its a lot. The demand will always outstrip supply, whatever sites are provided- it would just draw more in.
They have to go somewhere and that site is perfect for the majority as is shown by the responses on here ,its big enough and not used for anything else ?
Tristan de Cuna might be a good idea.............Ind
ian Ocean.
[quote][p][bold]bourne free[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dogsoftheworld[/bold] wrote: Isn't it amazing how some of the trolls on here find it acceptable for Creekmoor to be saddled so long as they're ok... This is why the travellers do so well- the settled community aren't a community at all, just a selfish bunch of "i'm allright jack" types whilst the travellers work in concert. If you want any chance of beating these invaders then you have to work together as one. Some of the comments on here display a total disregard for the local POOLE people in Creekmoor just across the road from this site, and that is very sad, and says a lot more about them than the travellers! I don't know how many travellers we have in Poole at the mo- but its a lot. The demand will always outstrip supply, whatever sites are provided- it would just draw more in.[/p][/quote]They have to go somewhere and that site is perfect for the majority as is shown by the responses on here ,its big enough and not used for anything else ?[/p][/quote]Tristan de Cuna might be a good idea.............Ind ian Ocean. skydriver
  • Score: -1

4:56pm Fri 8 Aug 14

DiggerRuss says...

The council site states there is no reason to obtain an eviction order despite the illegal entry and another poster has stated the gates to the park and tide are open with no security.

14 caravans at Baiter have just been served an eviction order, I wonder where they will now go!

So if you live anywhere but creekmoor it is illegal enter council land and camp! It I'd easy to see that another 14 caravans will be at the park and ride by tomorrow.
The council site states there is no reason to obtain an eviction order despite the illegal entry and another poster has stated the gates to the park and tide are open with no security. 14 caravans at Baiter have just been served an eviction order, I wonder where they will now go! So if you live anywhere but creekmoor it is illegal enter council land and camp! It I'd easy to see that another 14 caravans will be at the park and ride by tomorrow. DiggerRuss
  • Score: 3

5:00pm Fri 8 Aug 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Councillor Judy Butt should share her concerns with the Environments ministers MP Eric Pickles ,who will probably tell her there already robust legislation to manage these people who have evolved in to a bunch of anarchist ,while the council and police commissioner found it easier to hide behind exscuses..Will be interesting to see what the response will be when the police are told forget the Dixie horn and protect the people
Councillor Judy Butt should share her concerns with the Environments ministers MP Eric Pickles ,who will probably tell her there already robust legislation to manage these people who have evolved in to a bunch of anarchist ,while the council and police commissioner found it easier to hide behind exscuses..Will be interesting to see what the response will be when the police are told forget the Dixie horn and protect the people kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 5

5:03pm Fri 8 Aug 14

JackCracker says...

"We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order."

Other than a frickin great hole in the fence, and the vulnerable residents of a quiet residential neighbourhood bracing themselves for thumping great navvies banging the door and offering to 'fix your driveway'.

It seems our council has managed to achieve cheap and easy space flight. They hop between our world and whatever planet they live on at will.
"We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order." Other than a frickin great hole in the fence, and the vulnerable residents of a quiet residential neighbourhood bracing themselves for thumping great navvies banging the door and offering to 'fix your driveway'. It seems our council has managed to achieve cheap and easy space flight. They hop between our world and whatever planet they live on at will. JackCracker
  • Score: 6

5:08pm Fri 8 Aug 14

justsayithowitis says...

Tony Trent wrote:
Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
Mannings Heath not good enough for them
[quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.[/p][/quote]Mannings Heath not good enough for them justsayithowitis
  • Score: 1

6:09pm Fri 8 Aug 14

madras says...

As an alternative to the usual procedure of getting order to evict them and then playing cat-and-mouse / putting the county on lock down how about a different tack:

- lock the gates and put up barricade while they are in there - put the site on lockdown to prevent escape?!
As an alternative to the usual procedure of getting order to evict them and then playing cat-and-mouse / putting the county on lock down how about a different tack: - lock the gates and put up barricade while they are in there - put the site on lockdown to prevent escape?! madras
  • Score: 3

6:23pm Fri 8 Aug 14

alasdair1967 says...

madras wrote:
As an alternative to the usual procedure of getting order to evict them and then playing cat-and-mouse / putting the county on lock down how about a different tack:

- lock the gates and put up barricade while they are in there - put the site on lockdown to prevent escape?!
The reason being you would be arrested for false imprisonment ,a local farmer not far from the park and ride blocked the entry to his field when the travellers first arrived only to be told by the police he would be arrested for false imprisonment ,when he moved the second trance of travellers arrived and set up camp he was left with a clean up bill of thousands but had fun with his muck spreader !
[quote][p][bold]madras[/bold] wrote: As an alternative to the usual procedure of getting order to evict them and then playing cat-and-mouse / putting the county on lock down how about a different tack: - lock the gates and put up barricade while they are in there - put the site on lockdown to prevent escape?![/p][/quote]The reason being you would be arrested for false imprisonment ,a local farmer not far from the park and ride blocked the entry to his field when the travellers first arrived only to be told by the police he would be arrested for false imprisonment ,when he moved the second trance of travellers arrived and set up camp he was left with a clean up bill of thousands but had fun with his muck spreader ! alasdair1967
  • Score: 7

6:28pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

JackCracker wrote:
"We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order."

Other than a frickin great hole in the fence, and the vulnerable residents of a quiet residential neighbourhood bracing themselves for thumping great navvies banging the door and offering to 'fix your driveway'.

It seems our council has managed to achieve cheap and easy space flight. They hop between our world and whatever planet they live on at will.
They broke in. If they've broken into other council owned sites, an eviction order has been sought. If they don't seek an eviction order for the park and ride, the council be seen as punishing the residents of Creekmoor for upsetting Akinson and Eades with the wrongly perceived notion that they stopped the TSP, or they will be suggesting that Creekmoor residents don't matter.

And as for BigAlfromsunnyBourne
mouth's thoughts that if they were charged for using the park and ride they'd leave the area - no they wouldn't; Joseph Jones has already said that if they don't want to use a provided site then they'll pitch up on private land. It won't solve the problem - they'll still come here because they want to camp for free.
[quote][p][bold]JackCracker[/bold] wrote: "We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order." Other than a frickin great hole in the fence, and the vulnerable residents of a quiet residential neighbourhood bracing themselves for thumping great navvies banging the door and offering to 'fix your driveway'. It seems our council has managed to achieve cheap and easy space flight. They hop between our world and whatever planet they live on at will.[/p][/quote]They broke in. If they've broken into other council owned sites, an eviction order has been sought. If they don't seek an eviction order for the park and ride, the council be seen as punishing the residents of Creekmoor for upsetting Akinson and Eades with the wrongly perceived notion that they stopped the TSP, or they will be suggesting that Creekmoor residents don't matter. And as for BigAlfromsunnyBourne mouth's thoughts that if they were charged for using the park and ride they'd leave the area - no they wouldn't; Joseph Jones has already said that if they don't want to use a provided site then they'll pitch up on private land. It won't solve the problem - they'll still come here because they want to camp for free. Carolyn43
  • Score: -1

6:44pm Fri 8 Aug 14

geoffro says...

yes getting ready for the bloody dorset steam fair should be banned move the thing to another county
yes getting ready for the bloody dorset steam fair should be banned move the thing to another county geoffro
  • Score: 6

7:09pm Fri 8 Aug 14

carrrob says...

No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site !
No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site ! carrrob
  • Score: -5

7:10pm Fri 8 Aug 14

MotorbikeSam says...

geoffro wrote:
yes getting ready for the bloody dorset steam fair should be banned move the thing to another county
the GDSF is I well loved and very reputable event so Ge Off Ro on ya bike
[quote][p][bold]geoffro[/bold] wrote: yes getting ready for the bloody dorset steam fair should be banned move the thing to another county[/p][/quote]the GDSF is I well loved and very reputable event so Ge Off Ro on ya bike MotorbikeSam
  • Score: -2

7:12pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

carrrob wrote:
No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site !
So you think Creekmoor residents are inferior and should be treated differently from everyone else in Poole and have to put up with them. Nice.
[quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site ![/p][/quote]So you think Creekmoor residents are inferior and should be treated differently from everyone else in Poole and have to put up with them. Nice. Carolyn43
  • Score: -2

7:22pm Fri 8 Aug 14

ashleycross says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
carrrob wrote:
No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site !
So you think Creekmoor residents are inferior and should be treated differently from everyone else in Poole and have to put up with them. Nice.
Judging by the behaviour at the council meeting that would have put a site in in Poole it's more like the travellers who will have to put up with the residents of Creekmore
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site ![/p][/quote]So you think Creekmoor residents are inferior and should be treated differently from everyone else in Poole and have to put up with them. Nice.[/p][/quote]Judging by the behaviour at the council meeting that would have put a site in in Poole it's more like the travellers who will have to put up with the residents of Creekmore ashleycross
  • Score: 0

7:23pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Desperado says...

You would think the local yobs would have a bit of fun with them !
If you get my drift ;-)
You would think the local yobs would have a bit of fun with them ! If you get my drift ;-) Desperado
  • Score: -1

7:25pm Fri 8 Aug 14

BigAlfromsunnyBournemouth says...

alasdair1967 says... why don't Bournemouth and Poole councils share the cost and utilise canford magna show ground

Canford Magna Show Ground is all privately owned and the landowner rigorously enforces security of the site.
alasdair1967 says... why don't Bournemouth and Poole councils share the cost and utilise canford magna show ground Canford Magna Show Ground is all privately owned and the landowner rigorously enforces security of the site. BigAlfromsunnyBournemouth
  • Score: -1

7:27pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Enaj2057 says...

Perhaps someone could tell me where I can park with my motorhome to watch the Bmth Air Show. Of course, I will require it to be free parking and I would expect an excellent view. I'm a Poole resident, tax payer, homeowner and a motorhome owner. I shall expect the same privileges as these travellers are receiving. Can anyone help please?
Perhaps someone could tell me where I can park with my motorhome to watch the Bmth Air Show. Of course, I will require it to be free parking and I would expect an excellent view. I'm a Poole resident, tax payer, homeowner and a motorhome owner. I shall expect the same privileges as these travellers are receiving. Can anyone help please? Enaj2057
  • Score: 5

7:30pm Fri 8 Aug 14

ashleycross says...

carrrob wrote:
No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site !
The council can divert the budget for putting all those ridiculous boulders all over every park and open space we have to security to protect the travellers and the councillors from the residents of Creekmoor.
[quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site ![/p][/quote]The council can divert the budget for putting all those ridiculous boulders all over every park and open space we have to security to protect the travellers and the councillors from the residents of Creekmoor. ashleycross
  • Score: -3

7:39pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Big Man 2 says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
JackCracker wrote:
"We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order."

Other than a frickin great hole in the fence, and the vulnerable residents of a quiet residential neighbourhood bracing themselves for thumping great navvies banging the door and offering to 'fix your driveway'.

It seems our council has managed to achieve cheap and easy space flight. They hop between our world and whatever planet they live on at will.
They broke in. If they've broken into other council owned sites, an eviction order has been sought. If they don't seek an eviction order for the park and ride, the council be seen as punishing the residents of Creekmoor for upsetting Akinson and Eades with the wrongly perceived notion that they stopped the TSP, or they will be suggesting that Creekmoor residents don't matter.

And as for BigAlfromsunnyBourne

mouth's thoughts that if they were charged for using the park and ride they'd leave the area - no they wouldn't; Joseph Jones has already said that if they don't want to use a provided site then they'll pitch up on private land. It won't solve the problem - they'll still come here because they want to camp for free.
If the council fail to treat the taxpayers of Creekmoor with equality and fairness by not following the same procedures as used in all other parts of the borough, then there may solid grounds for residents to withhold payment of council tax.

It may not suit tellytubbies Eades & Atkinson but have a duty and responsibility to ALL residents, therefore if this is the councils idea of revenge on Creekmoor then it is blatant disregard for ratepayers.

If the travellers are not served with eviction notices as per normal, then the council will be in default of the government grant for the park and ride, and also in default of the regulations by allowing green belt land to be used for residential purposes.

It was interesting to note that the hallowed Branksome Rec ,which was deemed totally unacceptable for travellers was in fact last week full of caravans, The Moscow State Circus, different type of travellers you may say, but still caravans none the less.

COME ON POOLE COUNCIL GET YOUR BACKSIDES IN GEAR AND TREAT CREEKMOOR RESIDENTS EQUALLY AND FAIRLY !!!!
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JackCracker[/bold] wrote: "We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order." Other than a frickin great hole in the fence, and the vulnerable residents of a quiet residential neighbourhood bracing themselves for thumping great navvies banging the door and offering to 'fix your driveway'. It seems our council has managed to achieve cheap and easy space flight. They hop between our world and whatever planet they live on at will.[/p][/quote]They broke in. If they've broken into other council owned sites, an eviction order has been sought. If they don't seek an eviction order for the park and ride, the council be seen as punishing the residents of Creekmoor for upsetting Akinson and Eades with the wrongly perceived notion that they stopped the TSP, or they will be suggesting that Creekmoor residents don't matter. And as for BigAlfromsunnyBourne mouth's thoughts that if they were charged for using the park and ride they'd leave the area - no they wouldn't; Joseph Jones has already said that if they don't want to use a provided site then they'll pitch up on private land. It won't solve the problem - they'll still come here because they want to camp for free.[/p][/quote]If the council fail to treat the taxpayers of Creekmoor with equality and fairness by not following the same procedures as used in all other parts of the borough, then there may solid grounds for residents to withhold payment of council tax. It may not suit tellytubbies Eades & Atkinson but have a duty and responsibility to ALL residents, therefore if this is the councils idea of revenge on Creekmoor then it is blatant disregard for ratepayers. If the travellers are not served with eviction notices as per normal, then the council will be in default of the government grant for the park and ride, and also in default of the regulations by allowing green belt land to be used for residential purposes. It was interesting to note that the hallowed Branksome Rec ,which was deemed totally unacceptable for travellers was in fact last week full of caravans, The Moscow State Circus, different type of travellers you may say, but still caravans none the less. COME ON POOLE COUNCIL GET YOUR BACKSIDES IN GEAR AND TREAT CREEKMOOR RESIDENTS EQUALLY AND FAIRLY !!!! Big Man 2
  • Score: 1

8:33pm Fri 8 Aug 14

alasdair1967 says...

Enaj2057 wrote:
Perhaps someone could tell me where I can park with my motorhome to watch the Bmth Air Show. Of course, I will require it to be free parking and I would expect an excellent view. I'm a Poole resident, tax payer, homeowner and a motorhome owner. I shall expect the same privileges as these travellers are receiving. Can anyone help please?
Heard there is a very good pitch directly behind the bic ,however as a law abiding citizen sadly you would be moved along within a couple of minutes of arrival and prosecuted if you didn't
[quote][p][bold]Enaj2057[/bold] wrote: Perhaps someone could tell me where I can park with my motorhome to watch the Bmth Air Show. Of course, I will require it to be free parking and I would expect an excellent view. I'm a Poole resident, tax payer, homeowner and a motorhome owner. I shall expect the same privileges as these travellers are receiving. Can anyone help please?[/p][/quote]Heard there is a very good pitch directly behind the bic ,however as a law abiding citizen sadly you would be moved along within a couple of minutes of arrival and prosecuted if you didn't alasdair1967
  • Score: -2

8:37pm Fri 8 Aug 14

alasdair1967 says...

alasdair1967 wrote:
Enaj2057 wrote:
Perhaps someone could tell me where I can park with my motorhome to watch the Bmth Air Show. Of course, I will require it to be free parking and I would expect an excellent view. I'm a Poole resident, tax payer, homeowner and a motorhome owner. I shall expect the same privileges as these travellers are receiving. Can anyone help please?
Heard there is a very good pitch directly behind the bic ,however as a law abiding citizen sadly you would be moved along within a couple of minutes of arrival and prosecuted if you didn't
However try going onto a vehicle registration site and purchase some Irish plates might get away with it ,top morning to yah
[quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Enaj2057[/bold] wrote: Perhaps someone could tell me where I can park with my motorhome to watch the Bmth Air Show. Of course, I will require it to be free parking and I would expect an excellent view. I'm a Poole resident, tax payer, homeowner and a motorhome owner. I shall expect the same privileges as these travellers are receiving. Can anyone help please?[/p][/quote]Heard there is a very good pitch directly behind the bic ,however as a law abiding citizen sadly you would be moved along within a couple of minutes of arrival and prosecuted if you didn't[/p][/quote]However try going onto a vehicle registration site and purchase some Irish plates might get away with it ,top morning to yah alasdair1967
  • Score: 0

8:47pm Fri 8 Aug 14

joetheman says...

Gtx2014 wrote:
LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE ON FIRE JUST SEEN TWO FIRE ENGINES ARRIVE AT THIS SITE :)
just giving them a free bath
[quote][p][bold]Gtx2014[/bold] wrote: LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE ON FIRE JUST SEEN TWO FIRE ENGINES ARRIVE AT THIS SITE :)[/p][/quote]just giving them a free bath joetheman
  • Score: 0

9:54pm Fri 8 Aug 14

The Liberal says...

The trouble with trying to arrest someone for criminal damage is that the police don't know who exactly did it. You can't really arrest a whole group of people for a crime that may or may not have been committed by one of them. Maybe CCTV at the entrances of the usual traveller sites is one answer?
The trouble with trying to arrest someone for criminal damage is that the police don't know who exactly did it. You can't really arrest a whole group of people for a crime that may or may not have been committed by one of them. Maybe CCTV at the entrances of the usual traveller sites is one answer? The Liberal
  • Score: 1

9:58pm Fri 8 Aug 14

The Liberal says...

Marty Caine wrote:
martinsim34 wrote:
wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure
The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are.

I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.
What a load of rubbish. And why have you dropped the ‘UKIP’ from your username? Have they kicked you out of the party yet?
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]martinsim34[/bold] wrote: wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure[/p][/quote]The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are. I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.[/p][/quote]What a load of rubbish. And why have you dropped the ‘UKIP’ from your username? Have they kicked you out of the party yet? The Liberal
  • Score: 4

10:00pm Fri 8 Aug 14

The Liberal says...

alasdair1967 wrote:
Enaj2057 wrote:
Perhaps someone could tell me where I can park with my motorhome to watch the Bmth Air Show. Of course, I will require it to be free parking and I would expect an excellent view. I'm a Poole resident, tax payer, homeowner and a motorhome owner. I shall expect the same privileges as these travellers are receiving. Can anyone help please?
Heard there is a very good pitch directly behind the bic ,however as a law abiding citizen sadly you would be moved along within a couple of minutes of arrival and prosecuted if you didn't
Well, why don't you try it and find out?
[quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Enaj2057[/bold] wrote: Perhaps someone could tell me where I can park with my motorhome to watch the Bmth Air Show. Of course, I will require it to be free parking and I would expect an excellent view. I'm a Poole resident, tax payer, homeowner and a motorhome owner. I shall expect the same privileges as these travellers are receiving. Can anyone help please?[/p][/quote]Heard there is a very good pitch directly behind the bic ,however as a law abiding citizen sadly you would be moved along within a couple of minutes of arrival and prosecuted if you didn't[/p][/quote]Well, why don't you try it and find out? The Liberal
  • Score: 1

10:06pm Fri 8 Aug 14

The Liberal says...

Tony Trent wrote:
Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
Honestly Tony, I appreciate that you come on here to defend the council's position but I don't know why you bother. This is no place for sensible, logical debate!
[quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.[/p][/quote]Honestly Tony, I appreciate that you come on here to defend the council's position but I don't know why you bother. This is no place for sensible, logical debate! The Liberal
  • Score: -1

10:45pm Fri 8 Aug 14

dubchek says...

Just watched a documentary on how police were pleased with their increased powers on untaxed and uninsured vehicles with failure to produce documents on demand were taken away and crushed.What a shame this is not enforced on this minority when they chose to travel here.
Just watched a documentary on how police were pleased with their increased powers on untaxed and uninsured vehicles with failure to produce documents on demand were taken away and crushed.What a shame this is not enforced on this minority when they chose to travel here. dubchek
  • Score: 3

11:08pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Sarah Bennett Harrison says...

Anyone seen my muck spreader?!!!
Anyone seen my muck spreader?!!! Sarah Bennett Harrison
  • Score: 2

11:09pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Yankee1 says...

I understand Poole Council's car parks are nice. They can accommodate a whole host of caravans.

If only................
.......
I understand Poole Council's car parks are nice. They can accommodate a whole host of caravans. If only................ ....... Yankee1
  • Score: 0

11:44pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Yankee1 says...

Heh.

Hah.

Hehehhahahahhahhhahh
ahhahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Even Jascha Heifetz could not play his fiddle as well as these fiddlers are fiddling the Councils............
....and they applaud.

Thanks for the laugh!
Heh. Hah. Hehehhahahahhahhhahh ahhahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Even Jascha Heifetz could not play his fiddle as well as these fiddlers are fiddling the Councils............ ....and they applaud. Thanks for the laugh! Yankee1
  • Score: 0

11:56pm Fri 8 Aug 14

Jo__Go says...

The Liberal wrote:
Tony Trent wrote:
Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
Honestly Tony, I appreciate that you come on here to defend the council's position but I don't know why you bother. This is no place for sensible, logical debate!
The Liberal eh?
Good to know there's the one of you left.
Could get lonely next May...
[quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.[/p][/quote]Honestly Tony, I appreciate that you come on here to defend the council's position but I don't know why you bother. This is no place for sensible, logical debate![/p][/quote]The Liberal eh? Good to know there's the one of you left. Could get lonely next May... Jo__Go
  • Score: -2

11:59pm Fri 8 Aug 14

RM says...

alasdair1967 wrote:
Both entrance and exit to this site are gated and blocked with concrete blocks these so called travellers have caused criminal damage to access this site come on someone grow a pair and prosecute them
Good suggestion but pigs will fly before that happens with cops & a Council with the backbone of a jellyfish.
[quote][p][bold]alasdair1967[/bold] wrote: Both entrance and exit to this site are gated and blocked with concrete blocks these so called travellers have caused criminal damage to access this site come on someone grow a pair and prosecute them[/p][/quote]Good suggestion but pigs will fly before that happens with cops & a Council with the backbone of a jellyfish. RM
  • Score: 2

12:14am Sat 9 Aug 14

RM says...

city guy wrote:
bournemouth is on lockdown ? by what we hear/ read on here when the travellers try to gain access and security guards call the police they say "let them on " i suppose they are trying to stop a breach of the peace but they say they cant do anything about damage etc as it is a civil matter.
as long as the authorities take a "couldnt care less attitude"this will continue year after year
as for an offical travellers site even if one is provided they wont go there as they will be charged a fee(you would hope) for services but as it stands now they are geeting everything for free
i read on here that portsmouth council can move theses people on within 24 hours if this is true why cant all councils ?
In three simple words LACK OF GUTS
[quote][p][bold]city guy[/bold] wrote: bournemouth is on lockdown ? by what we hear/ read on here when the travellers try to gain access and security guards call the police they say "let them on " i suppose they are trying to stop a breach of the peace but they say they cant do anything about damage etc as it is a civil matter. as long as the authorities take a "couldnt care less attitude"this will continue year after year as for an offical travellers site even if one is provided they wont go there as they will be charged a fee(you would hope) for services but as it stands now they are geeting everything for free i read on here that portsmouth council can move theses people on within 24 hours if this is true why cant all councils ?[/p][/quote]In three simple words LACK OF GUTS RM
  • Score: 1

12:31am Sat 9 Aug 14

mumble says...

The Liberal wrote:
The trouble with trying to arrest someone for criminal damage is that the police don't know who exactly did it. You can't really arrest a whole group of people for a crime that may or may not have been committed by one of them. Maybe CCTV at the entrances of the usual traveller sites is one answer?
They may be able to arrest on a charge of 'joint enterprise', I think a whole group can be arrested for one persons crime if there is no direct evidence of the main perpetrator, but then you've got the problem of childcare if all the adults in a group are arrested and on top of that, the police time involved in processing them all. Unfortunately, I don't think that a CCTV camera would last very long in mint condition either. Best idea is probably a rota of beefy locals knocking on their caravans every five minutes asking if they want their drives tarmacing.
[quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: The trouble with trying to arrest someone for criminal damage is that the police don't know who exactly did it. You can't really arrest a whole group of people for a crime that may or may not have been committed by one of them. Maybe CCTV at the entrances of the usual traveller sites is one answer?[/p][/quote]They may be able to arrest on a charge of 'joint enterprise', I think a whole group can be arrested for one persons crime if there is no direct evidence of the main perpetrator, but then you've got the problem of childcare if all the adults in a group are arrested and on top of that, the police time involved in processing them all. Unfortunately, I don't think that a CCTV camera would last very long in mint condition either. Best idea is probably a rota of beefy locals knocking on their caravans every five minutes asking if they want their drives tarmacing. mumble
  • Score: 2

1:27am Sat 9 Aug 14

Marty Caine says...

The Liberal wrote:
Tony Trent wrote:
Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
Honestly Tony, I appreciate that you come on here to defend the council's position but I don't know why you bother. This is no place for sensible, logical debate!
There is nothing logical about spouting nonsense, a lesson you LibDems are going to learn the hard way in 9 months time. I would have thought the EU election would have been a warning for you all but it certainly does not appear that way.
[quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.[/p][/quote]Honestly Tony, I appreciate that you come on here to defend the council's position but I don't know why you bother. This is no place for sensible, logical debate![/p][/quote]There is nothing logical about spouting nonsense, a lesson you LibDems are going to learn the hard way in 9 months time. I would have thought the EU election would have been a warning for you all but it certainly does not appear that way. Marty Caine
  • Score: -1

1:36am Sat 9 Aug 14

Marty Caine says...

The Liberal wrote:
Marty Caine wrote:
martinsim34 wrote:
wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure
The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are.

I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.
What a load of rubbish. And why have you dropped the ‘UKIP’ from your username? Have they kicked you out of the party yet?
No actually I left, when far too many clueless and disgruntled Tory/ Libdems joined and started to turn the party in to a more politically correct party that we used to be against when I joined.

If I cannot be honest to myself why should I expect others to believe in my honesty. That is a lesson you should try to learn someday.
[quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]martinsim34[/bold] wrote: wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure[/p][/quote]The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are. I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.[/p][/quote]What a load of rubbish. And why have you dropped the ‘UKIP’ from your username? Have they kicked you out of the party yet?[/p][/quote]No actually I left, when far too many clueless and disgruntled Tory/ Libdems joined and started to turn the party in to a more politically correct party that we used to be against when I joined. If I cannot be honest to myself why should I expect others to believe in my honesty. That is a lesson you should try to learn someday. Marty Caine
  • Score: -3

7:09am Sat 9 Aug 14

Creekmoron says...

Let them stay at the Park and Ride in Creekmoor, I am sure the residents wont mind if they are there for a month or so, until the travellers get bored and move on.
Let them stay at the Park and Ride in Creekmoor, I am sure the residents wont mind if they are there for a month or so, until the travellers get bored and move on. Creekmoron
  • Score: -1

7:23am Sat 9 Aug 14

Creekmoron says...

It may not suit tellytubbies Eades & Atkinson but have a duty and responsibility to ALL residents, therefore if this is the councils idea of revenge on Creekmoor/Judy Butt then it is blatant disregard for ratepayers.
It may not suit tellytubbies Eades & Atkinson but have a duty and responsibility to ALL residents, therefore if this is the councils idea of revenge on Creekmoor/Judy Butt then it is blatant disregard for ratepayers. Creekmoron
  • Score: 1

8:06am Sat 9 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

Love the photo of the three ward councillors and Syms. That'll show the travellers how strong the council is and put fear into them, and they'll be gone before you can say traveller!
Love the photo of the three ward councillors and Syms. That'll show the travellers how strong the council is and put fear into them, and they'll be gone before you can say traveller! Carolyn43
  • Score: 1

8:15am Sat 9 Aug 14

Mad Karew says...

Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time.

As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central.

This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance.

Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.
Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time. As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central. This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance. Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing. Mad Karew
  • Score: 4

8:38am Sat 9 Aug 14

Baysider says...

It's quite refreshing to see amongst the usual ignorant reactionary nonsense posted by the usual suspects one or two posts creeping in by people who have actually thought about this issue a bit more and realised you cannot arrest EVERYONE on site for instance over a broken padlock or piece of cheap fence pulled down. Some appear also to have accepted that neither can they blocked in the camp. Maybe we are finally making some progress on understanding this is not an easy problem to solve?
It's quite refreshing to see amongst the usual ignorant reactionary nonsense posted by the usual suspects one or two posts creeping in by people who have actually thought about this issue a bit more and realised you cannot arrest EVERYONE on site for instance over a broken padlock or piece of cheap fence pulled down. Some appear also to have accepted that neither can they blocked in the camp. Maybe we are finally making some progress on understanding this is not an easy problem to solve? Baysider
  • Score: 6

9:04am Sat 9 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

Mad Karew wrote:
Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time.

As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central.

This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance.

Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.
If that's true, then it's absolutely disgraceful and would prove that Atkinson and Eades are intent on punishing the residents of Creekmoor for something the council's own planning committee did.
[quote][p][bold]Mad Karew[/bold] wrote: Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time. As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central. This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance. Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.[/p][/quote]If that's true, then it's absolutely disgraceful and would prove that Atkinson and Eades are intent on punishing the residents of Creekmoor for something the council's own planning committee did. Carolyn43
  • Score: 2

9:14am Sat 9 Aug 14

carrrob says...

Mad Karew wrote:
Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time.

As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central.

This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance.

Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.
As previously stated best place for them park and ride unused space and can keep an eye on them as there all together as long as they stay away from canford cliffs im not bothered!!
[quote][p][bold]Mad Karew[/bold] wrote: Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time. As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central. This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance. Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.[/p][/quote]As previously stated best place for them park and ride unused space and can keep an eye on them as there all together as long as they stay away from canford cliffs im not bothered!! carrrob
  • Score: -2

9:19am Sat 9 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

carrrob wrote:
Mad Karew wrote:
Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time.

As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central.

This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance.

Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.
As previously stated best place for them park and ride unused space and can keep an eye on them as there all together as long as they stay away from canford cliffs im not bothered!!
I don't live in Creekmoor, but I am bothered - wherever they are. Obviously you don't care at all about any vulnerable elderly who get conned by these people. Bet your mother and father are proud to have bred such a caring considerate person.
[quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mad Karew[/bold] wrote: Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time. As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central. This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance. Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.[/p][/quote]As previously stated best place for them park and ride unused space and can keep an eye on them as there all together as long as they stay away from canford cliffs im not bothered!![/p][/quote]I don't live in Creekmoor, but I am bothered - wherever they are. Obviously you don't care at all about any vulnerable elderly who get conned by these people. Bet your mother and father are proud to have bred such a caring considerate person. Carolyn43
  • Score: 4

9:20am Sat 9 Aug 14

Creekmoron says...

The Creekmoor Park and Ride is supplied under a government grant and is only to be used as such, Poole Council are now in breach of that by allowing these human biengs to camp there. A discrace!!
The Creekmoor Park and Ride is supplied under a government grant and is only to be used as such, Poole Council are now in breach of that by allowing these human biengs to camp there. A discrace!! Creekmoron
  • Score: 3

9:31am Sat 9 Aug 14

Jo__Go says...

Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles.
Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?
Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles. Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle? Jo__Go
  • Score: 1

9:50am Sat 9 Aug 14

some-people says...

Why do the council roll over and encourage the travellers? Skips and toilets for you to use. Oh the access you illegally made is a bit difficult? Don't worry we'll pay to open the gates and move the concrete barriers then you and your friends can come and go freely.
Why do the council roll over and encourage the travellers? Skips and toilets for you to use. Oh the access you illegally made is a bit difficult? Don't worry we'll pay to open the gates and move the concrete barriers then you and your friends can come and go freely. some-people
  • Score: 7

9:58am Sat 9 Aug 14

Kiki1973 says...

Jo__Go wrote:
Tony Trent wrote:
Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
Cllr Trent,
There have been numerous reasonable responses to your postings, that you seem to simply ignore, because they don't fit your picture of the world.
The proposals earlier this year may well have been based on best advice, they may even have been the best available options, but as your own Planning Cttee, and not a few residents pointed out, they simply weren't good enough. Not fit for purpose. Non-starters.
The simple fact of the matter is that as a Unitary Authority with, for the most part, densely populated geography and the rest either green belt or protected heathland, Poole simply has no suitable sites for TSP's or Transit Sites.
The law on this matter is an and the sooner it is changed the better. I'm all for making reasonable provision for true travellers, with adequate safeguards to ensure they fulfill the responsibilities that go alongside their rights, but if there ain't space, there ain't space!
You're right on this one. Loads of proposals were put forward, the council whittled it down to 8 sites, then to 3 and each was vetoed by the closest residents (none were in true residential areas). So, given what we know, that they ARE going to come here because we are a soft touch -- you can't arrest everyone for criminal damage as not everyone cut the chains/ moved the rocks, etc, but you could arrest for criminal trespass, for example-- then, something has to give. Everyone is pro traveller camp until it's near them, and then they revert to the second string argument of 'why should we pay?'. This is going to continue until it reaches boiling point, sadly.
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.[/p][/quote]Cllr Trent, There have been numerous reasonable responses to your postings, that you seem to simply ignore, because they don't fit your picture of the world. The proposals earlier this year may well have been based on best advice, they may even have been the best available options, but as your own Planning Cttee, and not a few residents pointed out, they simply weren't good enough. Not fit for purpose. Non-starters. The simple fact of the matter is that as a Unitary Authority with, for the most part, densely populated geography and the rest either green belt or protected heathland, Poole simply has no suitable sites for TSP's or Transit Sites. The law on this matter is an [synonym of donkey] and the sooner it is changed the better. I'm all for making reasonable provision for true travellers, with adequate safeguards to ensure they fulfill the responsibilities that go alongside their rights, but if there ain't space, there ain't space![/p][/quote]You're right on this one. Loads of proposals were put forward, the council whittled it down to 8 sites, then to 3 and each was vetoed by the closest residents (none were in true residential areas). So, given what we know, that they ARE going to come here because we are a soft touch -- you can't arrest everyone for criminal damage as not everyone cut the chains/ moved the rocks, etc, but you could arrest for criminal trespass, for example-- then, something has to give. Everyone is pro traveller camp until it's near them, and then they revert to the second string argument of 'why should we pay?'. This is going to continue until it reaches boiling point, sadly. Kiki1973
  • Score: -5

10:10am Sat 9 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

"each was vetoed by the closest residents"

The residents did not veto the sites - the Planning Committee turned them down. Have you checked the documents on the planning applications and the reasons given by the Planning Committee for refusal in the Decision Document? I doubt it.

All 209 documents for the Marshes End site are here:

https://boppa.boroug
hofpoole.com/online-
applications/simpleS
earchResults.do;jses
sionid=29AD7847621FB
330DA9E82A7C4590DAE?
action=firstPage

Application number APP/14/00123/F

Where in the decision document does it say that the Planning Committee was influenced by the residents? Nowhere.
"each was vetoed by the closest residents" The residents did not veto the sites - the Planning Committee turned them down. Have you checked the documents on the planning applications and the reasons given by the Planning Committee for refusal in the Decision Document? I doubt it. All 209 documents for the Marshes End site are here: https://boppa.boroug hofpoole.com/online- applications/simpleS earchResults.do;jses sionid=29AD7847621FB 330DA9E82A7C4590DAE? action=firstPage Application number APP/14/00123/F Where in the decision document does it say that the Planning Committee was influenced by the residents? Nowhere. Carolyn43
  • Score: 3

10:23am Sat 9 Aug 14

Creekmoron says...

Park and Ride almost full at Creekmoor, least all the bad eggs are in one place! Perhaps the overflow can go to Upton House?, Thanks BOP
Park and Ride almost full at Creekmoor, least all the bad eggs are in one place! Perhaps the overflow can go to Upton House?, Thanks BOP Creekmoron
  • Score: -4

10:37am Sat 9 Aug 14

Creekmoron says...

Why are the resident’s at Creekmoor being treated differently to other wards in the town? I think its high time the Leader comes out of hiding and makes statement.
Something along the lines I am going to resign….?
Why are the resident’s at Creekmoor being treated differently to other wards in the town? I think its high time the Leader comes out of hiding and makes statement. Something along the lines I am going to resign….? Creekmoron
  • Score: 3

10:41am Sat 9 Aug 14

Baysider says...

Jo__Go wrote:
Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles.
Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?
Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles. Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?[/p][/quote]Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home. Baysider
  • Score: 1

10:49am Sat 9 Aug 14

JustForPoole says...

If a bulldozer went onto an Unauthorised Encampment and "accidentally" rolled a couple of caravans over .... who would be responsible for cleaning up the mess???
If a bulldozer went onto an Unauthorised Encampment and "accidentally" rolled a couple of caravans over .... who would be responsible for cleaning up the mess??? JustForPoole
  • Score: 1

10:54am Sat 9 Aug 14

in-my-opinion says...

I very much doubt any of these 'people' are ethnic travellers, more likely to be a bunch of free-loaders.

It would be great to find out where they live, I'd happily save up a weeks worth of rubbish and human waste to leave on their doorsteps ready for their return.
I very much doubt any of these 'people' are ethnic travellers, more likely to be a bunch of free-loaders. It would be great to find out where they live, I'd happily save up a weeks worth of rubbish and human waste to leave on their doorsteps ready for their return. in-my-opinion
  • Score: 4

10:55am Sat 9 Aug 14

Marty Caine says...

Baysider wrote:
It's quite refreshing to see amongst the usual ignorant reactionary nonsense posted by the usual suspects one or two posts creeping in by people who have actually thought about this issue a bit more and realised you cannot arrest EVERYONE on site for instance over a broken padlock or piece of cheap fence pulled down. Some appear also to have accepted that neither can they blocked in the camp. Maybe we are finally making some progress on understanding this is not an easy problem to solve?
You are often far too quick to criticize others whilst at the same time never actually coming up with any constructive ideas of your own.

I think the thing that is annoying most people is the obvious fact that there are certain laws being broken that the police and council are turning a blind eye to because they are worried they might infringe on their ethnic rights and the travellers are quite rightly laughing at them for doing that. You do not have to arrest 'EVERYONE' to make things a little less inviting but doing absolutely nothing is certainly not giving the taxpayers value for money, is it.

A policeman friend of mine once told me that you could get a brand new car straight from the factory and if the police wanted to, they could find something wrong with it, at least making life a little more difficult might deter them from coming in the first place. The travellers are certainly using the law to their own advantage, so why aren't we?
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: It's quite refreshing to see amongst the usual ignorant reactionary nonsense posted by the usual suspects one or two posts creeping in by people who have actually thought about this issue a bit more and realised you cannot arrest EVERYONE on site for instance over a broken padlock or piece of cheap fence pulled down. Some appear also to have accepted that neither can they blocked in the camp. Maybe we are finally making some progress on understanding this is not an easy problem to solve?[/p][/quote]You are often far too quick to criticize others whilst at the same time never actually coming up with any constructive ideas of your own. I think the thing that is annoying most people is the obvious fact that there are certain laws being broken that the police and council are turning a blind eye to because they are worried they might infringe on their ethnic rights and the travellers are quite rightly laughing at them for doing that. You do not have to arrest 'EVERYONE' to make things a little less inviting but doing absolutely nothing is certainly not giving the taxpayers value for money, is it. A policeman friend of mine once told me that you could get a brand new car straight from the factory and if the police wanted to, they could find something wrong with it, at least making life a little more difficult might deter them from coming in the first place. The travellers are certainly using the law to their own advantage, so why aren't we? Marty Caine
  • Score: 1

11:02am Sat 9 Aug 14

vitodaz says...

What I don't get is this. You damage a fence that's criminal damage as other people have claimed on here. But why is it that sites cannot actually be setup for them? The councils say they're trying to help etc, but yet you hear on the news of councillors turning down planning of these said traveller's camps. Surely if somewhere was made for them to stay, then they wouldn't be setting up in places where people dont want them to be. Yes I agree the travellers seem to get away with criminal damage to a fence to obtain access, but if they had somewhere to go where they couldn't intimidate people then this wouldn't happen in the first place! Public should be blaming the councillors refusing planning of these sites, instead of blaming the travellers.
What I don't get is this. You damage a fence that's criminal damage as other people have claimed on here. But why is it that sites cannot actually be setup for them? The councils say they're trying to help etc, but yet you hear on the news of councillors turning down planning of these said traveller's camps. Surely if somewhere was made for them to stay, then they wouldn't be setting up in places where people dont want them to be. Yes I agree the travellers seem to get away with criminal damage to a fence to obtain access, but if they had somewhere to go where they couldn't intimidate people then this wouldn't happen in the first place! Public should be blaming the councillors refusing planning of these sites, instead of blaming the travellers. vitodaz
  • Score: -3

11:11am Sat 9 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

vitodaz wrote:
What I don't get is this. You damage a fence that's criminal damage as other people have claimed on here. But why is it that sites cannot actually be setup for them? The councils say they're trying to help etc, but yet you hear on the news of councillors turning down planning of these said traveller's camps. Surely if somewhere was made for them to stay, then they wouldn't be setting up in places where people dont want them to be. Yes I agree the travellers seem to get away with criminal damage to a fence to obtain access, but if they had somewhere to go where they couldn't intimidate people then this wouldn't happen in the first place! Public should be blaming the councillors refusing planning of these sites, instead of blaming the travellers.
The sites for which they apply for planning permission are for permanent residence to site their caravans permanently (how are they then traveller?), not coming to a seaside town on holiday and to get "work" from the locals and where they intimidate people.

There is a permanent residence site at Mannings Heath - there is nowhere for transit sites for holidays. But there already are holiday caravan sites for people who are prepared to pay and behave themselves.
[quote][p][bold]vitodaz[/bold] wrote: What I don't get is this. You damage a fence that's criminal damage as other people have claimed on here. But why is it that sites cannot actually be setup for them? The councils say they're trying to help etc, but yet you hear on the news of councillors turning down planning of these said traveller's camps. Surely if somewhere was made for them to stay, then they wouldn't be setting up in places where people dont want them to be. Yes I agree the travellers seem to get away with criminal damage to a fence to obtain access, but if they had somewhere to go where they couldn't intimidate people then this wouldn't happen in the first place! Public should be blaming the councillors refusing planning of these sites, instead of blaming the travellers.[/p][/quote]The sites for which they apply for planning permission are for permanent residence to site their caravans permanently (how are they then traveller?), not coming to a seaside town on holiday and to get "work" from the locals and where they intimidate people. There is a permanent residence site at Mannings Heath - there is nowhere for transit sites for holidays. But there already are holiday caravan sites for people who are prepared to pay and behave themselves. Carolyn43
  • Score: 5

11:15am Sat 9 Aug 14

Marty Caine says...

vitodaz wrote:
What I don't get is this. You damage a fence that's criminal damage as other people have claimed on here. But why is it that sites cannot actually be setup for them? The councils say they're trying to help etc, but yet you hear on the news of councillors turning down planning of these said traveller's camps. Surely if somewhere was made for them to stay, then they wouldn't be setting up in places where people dont want them to be. Yes I agree the travellers seem to get away with criminal damage to a fence to obtain access, but if they had somewhere to go where they couldn't intimidate people then this wouldn't happen in the first place! Public should be blaming the councillors refusing planning of these sites, instead of blaming the travellers.
The site that was turned down by planning at Safety Drive was for 16 plots, there are apparently 30 traveler vehicles now at Creekmoor, so it would not have solved the problem. Also as has been seen in other parts of the country, when they spend thousands on building purpose built site the travellers simply refuse to use them. The only way to solve this problem is to overturn the ruling which gave them the ethnic rights in the first. Amazingly though a petition to government created 5 months ago, to try and get this done has received less signatures than there have been comments on this one article.

http://epetitions.di
rect.gov.uk/petition
s/61822
[quote][p][bold]vitodaz[/bold] wrote: What I don't get is this. You damage a fence that's criminal damage as other people have claimed on here. But why is it that sites cannot actually be setup for them? The councils say they're trying to help etc, but yet you hear on the news of councillors turning down planning of these said traveller's camps. Surely if somewhere was made for them to stay, then they wouldn't be setting up in places where people dont want them to be. Yes I agree the travellers seem to get away with criminal damage to a fence to obtain access, but if they had somewhere to go where they couldn't intimidate people then this wouldn't happen in the first place! Public should be blaming the councillors refusing planning of these sites, instead of blaming the travellers.[/p][/quote]The site that was turned down by planning at Safety Drive was for 16 plots, there are apparently 30 traveler vehicles now at Creekmoor, so it would not have solved the problem. Also as has been seen in other parts of the country, when they spend thousands on building purpose built site the travellers simply refuse to use them. The only way to solve this problem is to overturn the ruling which gave them the ethnic rights in the first. Amazingly though a petition to government created 5 months ago, to try and get this done has received less signatures than there have been comments on this one article. http://epetitions.di rect.gov.uk/petition s/61822 Marty Caine
  • Score: 4

11:46am Sat 9 Aug 14

Enaj2057 says...

Pray tell me......what was the point in wasting taxpayers money on installing security posts recently, when the Council has just left the gates open. Come on in !! It's disgusting. I find the whole issue disgraceful waste of money. The police and council need to grow a spine. The travellers have committed criminal damage. Make an arrest, not put on portaloos and skips. Both the police and council should be ashamed. Hang your heads in shame. Respect.............
...you have to earn respect. I no longer support or respect either body.
Pray tell me......what was the point in wasting taxpayers money on installing security posts recently, when the Council has just left the gates open. Come on in !! It's disgusting. I find the whole issue disgraceful waste of money. The police and council need to grow a spine. The travellers have committed criminal damage. Make an arrest, not put on portaloos and skips. Both the police and council should be ashamed. Hang your heads in shame. Respect............. ...you have to earn respect. I no longer support or respect either body. Enaj2057
  • Score: 7

11:49am Sat 9 Aug 14

FlagshipDevice says...

I've thought of a place they can berth - off the face of the earth.
I've thought of a place they can berth - off the face of the earth. FlagshipDevice
  • Score: 4

1:15pm Sat 9 Aug 14

Baysider says...

Marty Caine wrote:
Baysider wrote:
It's quite refreshing to see amongst the usual ignorant reactionary nonsense posted by the usual suspects one or two posts creeping in by people who have actually thought about this issue a bit more and realised you cannot arrest EVERYONE on site for instance over a broken padlock or piece of cheap fence pulled down. Some appear also to have accepted that neither can they blocked in the camp. Maybe we are finally making some progress on understanding this is not an easy problem to solve?
You are often far too quick to criticize others whilst at the same time never actually coming up with any constructive ideas of your own.

I think the thing that is annoying most people is the obvious fact that there are certain laws being broken that the police and council are turning a blind eye to because they are worried they might infringe on their ethnic rights and the travellers are quite rightly laughing at them for doing that. You do not have to arrest 'EVERYONE' to make things a little less inviting but doing absolutely nothing is certainly not giving the taxpayers value for money, is it.

A policeman friend of mine once told me that you could get a brand new car straight from the factory and if the police wanted to, they could find something wrong with it, at least making life a little more difficult might deter them from coming in the first place. The travellers are certainly using the law to their own advantage, so why aren't we?
Well that's a total crock for starters. The same posters make the same points over and over again and can't provide either any evidence for their position or any practical or legal basis for what they spout so regularly they are challenged and they don't have any answers and don't like it. As far as I can see I am one of very, very few who has suggested anything remotely practical to address the problem and that is putting more effort into cutting off the source if their income. If they can't get work they won't come but others prefer to moan about the symptoms rather than the cause (and it's also a very convenient stick to beat the public sector with)...
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: It's quite refreshing to see amongst the usual ignorant reactionary nonsense posted by the usual suspects one or two posts creeping in by people who have actually thought about this issue a bit more and realised you cannot arrest EVERYONE on site for instance over a broken padlock or piece of cheap fence pulled down. Some appear also to have accepted that neither can they blocked in the camp. Maybe we are finally making some progress on understanding this is not an easy problem to solve?[/p][/quote]You are often far too quick to criticize others whilst at the same time never actually coming up with any constructive ideas of your own. I think the thing that is annoying most people is the obvious fact that there are certain laws being broken that the police and council are turning a blind eye to because they are worried they might infringe on their ethnic rights and the travellers are quite rightly laughing at them for doing that. You do not have to arrest 'EVERYONE' to make things a little less inviting but doing absolutely nothing is certainly not giving the taxpayers value for money, is it. A policeman friend of mine once told me that you could get a brand new car straight from the factory and if the police wanted to, they could find something wrong with it, at least making life a little more difficult might deter them from coming in the first place. The travellers are certainly using the law to their own advantage, so why aren't we?[/p][/quote]Well that's a total crock for starters. The same posters make the same points over and over again and can't provide either any evidence for their position or any practical or legal basis for what they spout so regularly they are challenged and they don't have any answers and don't like it. As far as I can see I am one of very, very few who has suggested anything remotely practical to address the problem and that is putting more effort into cutting off the source if their income. If they can't get work they won't come but others prefer to moan about the symptoms rather than the cause (and it's also a very convenient stick to beat the public sector with)... Baysider
  • Score: 1

1:32pm Sat 9 Aug 14

carrrob says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
carrrob wrote:
Mad Karew wrote:
Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time.

As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central.

This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance.

Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.
As previously stated best place for them park and ride unused space and can keep an eye on them as there all together as long as they stay away from canford cliffs im not bothered!!
I don't live in Creekmoor, but I am bothered - wherever they are. Obviously you don't care at all about any vulnerable elderly who get conned by these people. Bet your mother and father are proud to have bred such a caring considerate person.
In what way do the elderly get conned do they buy the gyps lucky heather !
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mad Karew[/bold] wrote: Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time. As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central. This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance. Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.[/p][/quote]As previously stated best place for them park and ride unused space and can keep an eye on them as there all together as long as they stay away from canford cliffs im not bothered!![/p][/quote]I don't live in Creekmoor, but I am bothered - wherever they are. Obviously you don't care at all about any vulnerable elderly who get conned by these people. Bet your mother and father are proud to have bred such a caring considerate person.[/p][/quote]In what way do the elderly get conned do they buy the gyps lucky heather ! carrrob
  • Score: 0

2:28pm Sat 9 Aug 14

kalebmoledirt says...

I would like to see the two serial commenters .the bed sit barrister and the UKIP reject put in amongst them .wouldn't take long to bore them to death or move off them on to escape the misery
I would like to see the two serial commenters .the bed sit barrister and the UKIP reject put in amongst them .wouldn't take long to bore them to death or move off them on to escape the misery kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 1

4:01pm Sat 9 Aug 14

Baysider says...

kalebmoledirt wrote:
I would like to see the two serial commenters .the bed sit barrister and the UKIP reject put in amongst them .wouldn't take long to bore them to death or move off them on to escape the misery
Did your mum help you with that Kaleb? Sorry for making you look the total mug that you are but if you are going to post a steaming pile of rubbish every time time you take a break from one of those 'other' sites I expect you spend a lot of time on then don't be surprised to get pulled up on it eh...
[quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: I would like to see the two serial commenters .the bed sit barrister and the UKIP reject put in amongst them .wouldn't take long to bore them to death or move off them on to escape the misery[/p][/quote]Did your mum help you with that Kaleb? Sorry for making you look the total mug that you are but if you are going to post a steaming pile of rubbish every time time you take a break from one of those 'other' sites I expect you spend a lot of time on then don't be surprised to get pulled up on it eh... Baysider
  • Score: -3

6:16pm Sat 9 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

carrrob wrote:
Carolyn43 wrote:
carrrob wrote:
Mad Karew wrote:
Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time.

As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central.

This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance.

Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.
As previously stated best place for them park and ride unused space and can keep an eye on them as there all together as long as they stay away from canford cliffs im not bothered!!
I don't live in Creekmoor, but I am bothered - wherever they are. Obviously you don't care at all about any vulnerable elderly who get conned by these people. Bet your mother and father are proud to have bred such a caring considerate person.
In what way do the elderly get conned do they buy the gyps lucky heather !
The vulnerable elderly are often frail as well and get conned into having work done, such as hedges cut, grass cut, guttering "put right", and then an extortionate amount is demanded. They get bullied and give in to make it stop.

I have neighbours each side of me living alone, one with advanced Parkinsons who often doesn't understand what's being said to him and the other a 92-year-old lady with osteoporosis and severe arthritis and she would find it very distressing dealing with these people.

Obviously you're fit and healthy and able to resist a couple of heavies, but they're not. You might be in that position yourself one day and then you might understand.
[quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mad Karew[/bold] wrote: Apparently someone on Poole Council including Atkinson has decided to let the travellers stay and not try to evict them until the Steam Fair TSP opens in a couple of weeks time. As a result the P&R is now full of caravans this morning, even on the access road at the far end, estimate at least 30. Obviously the word has gone round that Creekmoor is Traveller Central. This will guarantee that Cons will lose control of Poole Council next year, as residents will definitely want to punish them for this latest betrayal. Not that Eades and co can draw any comfort as they aren't wanted either because of their complicity in the anti-Creekmoor stance. Please, Atkinson, will you resign and go away and let someone take over who has some minimal clue what they are doing.[/p][/quote]As previously stated best place for them park and ride unused space and can keep an eye on them as there all together as long as they stay away from canford cliffs im not bothered!![/p][/quote]I don't live in Creekmoor, but I am bothered - wherever they are. Obviously you don't care at all about any vulnerable elderly who get conned by these people. Bet your mother and father are proud to have bred such a caring considerate person.[/p][/quote]In what way do the elderly get conned do they buy the gyps lucky heather ![/p][/quote]The vulnerable elderly are often frail as well and get conned into having work done, such as hedges cut, grass cut, guttering "put right", and then an extortionate amount is demanded. They get bullied and give in to make it stop. I have neighbours each side of me living alone, one with advanced Parkinsons who often doesn't understand what's being said to him and the other a 92-year-old lady with osteoporosis and severe arthritis and she would find it very distressing dealing with these people. Obviously you're fit and healthy and able to resist a couple of heavies, but they're not. You might be in that position yourself one day and then you might understand. Carolyn43
  • Score: 2

6:21pm Sat 9 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

If here are 30 caravans/motor homes on the Creekmoor Park and Ride, that just proves that the TSPs at Creekmoor and Oakdale would have been a waste of money.

Wonder if the council has bothered to tell whichever government department awarded the grant for the park and ride know that it's being used as a traveller site.
If here are 30 caravans/motor homes on the Creekmoor Park and Ride, that just proves that the TSPs at Creekmoor and Oakdale would have been a waste of money. Wonder if the council has bothered to tell whichever government department awarded the grant for the park and ride know that it's being used as a traveller site. Carolyn43
  • Score: 3

6:43pm Sat 9 Aug 14

peterm8264 says...

carrrob wrote:
No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site !
you don't live in the creekmore area that's obvious ,let us know where you live and we will redirect them to you nimby
[quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site ![/p][/quote]you don't live in the creekmore area that's obvious ,let us know where you live and we will redirect them to you nimby peterm8264
  • Score: 0

7:13pm Sat 9 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

peterm8264 wrote:
carrrob wrote:
No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site !
you don't live in the creekmore area that's obvious ,let us know where you live and we will redirect them to you nimby
He's already said they should keep away from Canford Cliffs so presumably he lives here and obviously thinks he's superior to anyone living in Creekmoor. That statement shows he isn't.
[quote][p][bold]peterm8264[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site ![/p][/quote]you don't live in the creekmore area that's obvious ,let us know where you live and we will redirect them to you nimby[/p][/quote]He's already said they should keep away from Canford Cliffs so presumably he lives here and obviously thinks he's superior to anyone living in Creekmoor. That statement shows he isn't. Carolyn43
  • Score: -1

7:52pm Sat 9 Aug 14

S,Bowes says...

Baysider wrote:
kalebmoledirt wrote:
I would like to see the two serial commenters .the bed sit barrister and the UKIP reject put in amongst them .wouldn't take long to bore them to death or move off them on to escape the misery
Did your mum help you with that Kaleb? Sorry for making you look the total mug that you are but if you are going to post a steaming pile of rubbish every time time you take a break from one of those 'other' sites I expect you spend a lot of time on then don't be surprised to get pulled up on it eh...
This afternoon I built a duck.house on the lake split some logs mowed the lawns walked the dogs And got a reply from you .so who are you exactly not the man that knows about school holidays .
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: I would like to see the two serial commenters .the bed sit barrister and the UKIP reject put in amongst them .wouldn't take long to bore them to death or move off them on to escape the misery[/p][/quote]Did your mum help you with that Kaleb? Sorry for making you look the total mug that you are but if you are going to post a steaming pile of rubbish every time time you take a break from one of those 'other' sites I expect you spend a lot of time on then don't be surprised to get pulled up on it eh...[/p][/quote]This afternoon I built a duck.house on the lake split some logs mowed the lawns walked the dogs And got a reply from you .so who are you exactly not the man that knows about school holidays . S,Bowes
  • Score: 0

8:37pm Sat 9 Aug 14

Jo__Go says...

Baysider wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles.
Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?
Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.
Can I suggest you check the Poole website? To save wearing out your mouse, the relevant detail is below...
"We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order."
Strange then that all other council land incursions went straight to 'seeking an eviction order'.
Spite and incompetence...
[quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles. Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?[/p][/quote]Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.[/p][/quote]Can I suggest you check the Poole website? To save wearing out your mouse, the relevant detail is below... "We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order." Strange then that all other council land incursions went straight to 'seeking an eviction order'. Spite and incompetence... Jo__Go
  • Score: 4

9:03pm Sat 9 Aug 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Jo__Go wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles.
Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?
Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.
Can I suggest you check the Poole website? To save wearing out your mouse, the relevant detail is below...
"We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order."
Strange then that all other council land incursions went straight to 'seeking an eviction order'.
Spite and incompetence...
Amazing wish I had managed to drag myself away from an episode of gardeners world .did you know Vineyard ,salt and washing up liquid kills docks? Wonder if kills bores
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles. Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?[/p][/quote]Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.[/p][/quote]Can I suggest you check the Poole website? To save wearing out your mouse, the relevant detail is below... "We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order." Strange then that all other council land incursions went straight to 'seeking an eviction order'. Spite and incompetence...[/p][/quote]Amazing wish I had managed to drag myself away from an episode of gardeners world .did you know Vineyard ,salt and washing up liquid kills docks? Wonder if kills bores kalebmoledirt
  • Score: -3

10:50pm Sat 9 Aug 14

dogsoftheworld says...

Jo__Go wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles.
Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?
Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.
Can I suggest you check the Poole website? To save wearing out your mouse, the relevant detail is below...
"We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order."
Strange then that all other council land incursions went straight to 'seeking an eviction order'.
Spite and incompetence...
its revenge you see.
The Creekmoor councilors broke ranks, protected their residents instead of paying Follow the Leader. The Creekmoor residents didn't bow down before the Mighty Leader... and now they all have to be punished.. .
Wouldn't be at all surprised if someone tried to scupper the deal to sell the Marshes End site too, just to show them who's the Big, Big Boss!
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles. Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?[/p][/quote]Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.[/p][/quote]Can I suggest you check the Poole website? To save wearing out your mouse, the relevant detail is below... "We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order." Strange then that all other council land incursions went straight to 'seeking an eviction order'. Spite and incompetence...[/p][/quote]its revenge you see. The Creekmoor councilors broke ranks, protected their residents instead of paying Follow the Leader. The Creekmoor residents didn't bow down before the Mighty Leader... and now they all have to be punished.. . Wouldn't be at all surprised if someone tried to scupper the deal to sell the Marshes End site too, just to show them who's the Big, Big Boss! dogsoftheworld
  • Score: 3

12:23am Sun 10 Aug 14

carrrob says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
peterm8264 wrote:
carrrob wrote:
No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site !
you don't live in the creekmore area that's obvious ,let us know where you live and we will redirect them to you nimby
He's already said they should keep away from Canford Cliffs so presumably he lives here and obviously thinks he's superior to anyone living in Creekmoor. That statement shows he isn't.
Try learning how to spell Creekmoor !
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]peterm8264[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]carrrob[/bold] wrote: No one else uses it leave them there and make it a temporary transit site ![/p][/quote]you don't live in the creekmore area that's obvious ,let us know where you live and we will redirect them to you nimby[/p][/quote]He's already said they should keep away from Canford Cliffs so presumably he lives here and obviously thinks he's superior to anyone living in Creekmoor. That statement shows he isn't.[/p][/quote]Try learning how to spell Creekmoor ! carrrob
  • Score: 3

9:11am Sun 10 Aug 14

Creekmoron says...

These people are not true Gypies, there just scammers that just want a cheap holiday provided by Poole Council while ripping off poole residents on a day to day basis.
These people are not true Gypies, there just scammers that just want a cheap holiday provided by Poole Council while ripping off poole residents on a day to day basis. Creekmoron
  • Score: 2

9:16am Sun 10 Aug 14

Creekmoron says...

Jo__Go wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Jo__Go wrote: Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles. Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?
Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.
Can I suggest you check the Poole website? To save wearing out your mouse, the relevant detail is below... "We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order." Strange then that all other council land incursions went straight to 'seeking an eviction order'. Spite and incompetence...
Thaks BOP

Children who ever they are are at risk from the traffic surrounded Pand R site, do tyou want a child to be injured or even worse. This is not a safe site. I have seen children crossing the dual carriageway already.
[quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles. Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?[/p][/quote]Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.[/p][/quote]Can I suggest you check the Poole website? To save wearing out your mouse, the relevant detail is below... "We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order." Strange then that all other council land incursions went straight to 'seeking an eviction order'. Spite and incompetence...[/p][/quote]Thaks BOP Children who ever they are are at risk from the traffic surrounded Pand R site, do tyou want a child to be injured or even worse. This is not a safe site. I have seen children crossing the dual carriageway already. Creekmoron
  • Score: 0

10:54am Sun 10 Aug 14

The Liberal says...

Marty Caine wrote:
The Liberal wrote:
Marty Caine wrote:
martinsim34 wrote:
wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure
The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are.

I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.
What a load of rubbish. And why have you dropped the ‘UKIP’ from your username? Have they kicked you out of the party yet?
No actually I left, when far too many clueless and disgruntled Tory/ Libdems joined and started to turn the party in to a more politically correct party that we used to be against when I joined.

If I cannot be honest to myself why should I expect others to believe in my honesty. That is a lesson you should try to learn someday.
LOL UKIP is not right-wing enough for you! That tells us everything we need to know about you.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]martinsim34[/bold] wrote: wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure[/p][/quote]The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are. I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.[/p][/quote]What a load of rubbish. And why have you dropped the ‘UKIP’ from your username? Have they kicked you out of the party yet?[/p][/quote]No actually I left, when far too many clueless and disgruntled Tory/ Libdems joined and started to turn the party in to a more politically correct party that we used to be against when I joined. If I cannot be honest to myself why should I expect others to believe in my honesty. That is a lesson you should try to learn someday.[/p][/quote]LOL UKIP is not right-wing enough for you! That tells us everything we need to know about you. The Liberal
  • Score: -2

10:56am Sun 10 Aug 14

The Liberal says...

Marty Caine wrote:
The Liberal wrote:
Tony Trent wrote:
Kiki1973 wrote:
JustForPoole wrote:
On the tourist map then
We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"
Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments.
I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.
Honestly Tony, I appreciate that you come on here to defend the council's position but I don't know why you bother. This is no place for sensible, logical debate!
There is nothing logical about spouting nonsense, a lesson you LibDems are going to learn the hard way in 9 months time. I would have thought the EU election would have been a warning for you all but it certainly does not appear that way.
Make assumptions why don’t you? I'm not a Liberal Democrat. In fact, I've never been a member of any political party.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tony Trent[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kiki1973[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JustForPoole[/bold] wrote: On the tourist map then[/p][/quote]We are clearly getting a reputation as a soft touch in the "Travelling Community"[/p][/quote]Might that have something to do with the failure to get a temporary stopping place or transit site? They don't appear to go into Dorset County now, and before you mention the limited spaces that were proposed, the one strike and you can't come back that season comes into play. It will be interesting to see whether the 28 or so vehicles can be traced back to earlier smaller encampments. I suspect I will get the usual thumbs down, but the proposals earlier this year were based on best advice within the law as it currently stands, and the anonymous critics have so far failed to respond to an open invitation to tell us in a more constructive forum what available legal actions are not being taken. One self proclaimed "expert" seemed sure he had all the answers - but no response 3 months on to an invitation to share them. Hopefully there will be a few sensible inputs rather than the right wing vitriol that usually follows.[/p][/quote]Honestly Tony, I appreciate that you come on here to defend the council's position but I don't know why you bother. This is no place for sensible, logical debate![/p][/quote]There is nothing logical about spouting nonsense, a lesson you LibDems are going to learn the hard way in 9 months time. I would have thought the EU election would have been a warning for you all but it certainly does not appear that way.[/p][/quote]Make assumptions why don’t you? I'm not a Liberal Democrat. In fact, I've never been a member of any political party. The Liberal
  • Score: -2

11:00am Sun 10 Aug 14

Carolyn43 says...

Creekmoron wrote:
Jo__Go wrote:
Baysider wrote:
Jo__Go wrote: Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles. Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?
Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.
Can I suggest you check the Poole website? To save wearing out your mouse, the relevant detail is below... "We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order." Strange then that all other council land incursions went straight to 'seeking an eviction order'. Spite and incompetence...
Thaks BOP

Children who ever they are are at risk from the traffic surrounded Pand R site, do tyou want a child to be injured or even worse. This is not a safe site. I have seen children crossing the dual carriageway already.
Well if a child is killed crossing the dual carriageway, it will be down to the traveller parents.

Just been looking at the park and ride background. Seems in the council wanted to put in bays for camper van, but weren't sure if the planning conditions would allow it. Didn't find the answer - there's a lot to go through, but if the conditions don't allow it then they're all now parked there illegally and when Eades (who was supposed to be impartial as mayor) reckoned the park and ride should be opened up as a traveller site during July and August, making the Creekmoor residents feel secure!!!!! (yeah, of course they do now they're on the site), could well have been suggesting the council also do something illegal.

Did he check before spouting that?

Did he think he was fulfilling his remit to be impartial?

Well, he's now got his way and I bet both he and Atkinson were gloating over their breakfasts this morning. Nice people.
[quote][p][bold]Creekmoron[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Baysider[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jo__Go[/bold] wrote: Judging by the negative scores on here, and the superabundance of trolls, Eades and Atkinson must be staying up late to use their multiple logons, and orchestrate their poodles. Basic fact remains, travellers are on council land, after causing criminal damage to enter, and at levels to intimidate the locals, yet through spite or incompetence the council are doing nothing. How do you look at yourselves in the mirror, and live with your utter lack of principle?[/p][/quote]Seems to me this lot are being treated in exactly the same way as the others. You cannot moan about the amount of time it takes at one site to do all the checks but expect a different thing when it's closer to home.[/p][/quote]Can I suggest you check the Poole website? To save wearing out your mouse, the relevant detail is below... "We have visited the site, and confirmed that this is a new group to the area. We will be providing skips and toilets to prevent damage to the environment and reduce the subsequent clean up costs. Alternative access arrangements have been put in place in order to prevent a danger to adjacent road traffic. We will continue to monitor the encampment to ensure that there remains no significant detriment to the neighbourhood. Presently there is no evidence to support an application to the courts for an eviction order." Strange then that all other council land incursions went straight to 'seeking an eviction order'. Spite and incompetence...[/p][/quote]Thaks BOP Children who ever they are are at risk from the traffic surrounded Pand R site, do tyou want a child to be injured or even worse. This is not a safe site. I have seen children crossing the dual carriageway already.[/p][/quote]Well if a child is killed crossing the dual carriageway, it will be down to the traveller parents. Just been looking at the park and ride background. Seems in the council wanted to put in bays for camper van, but weren't sure if the planning conditions would allow it. Didn't find the answer - there's a lot to go through, but if the conditions don't allow it then they're all now parked there illegally and when Eades (who was supposed to be impartial as mayor) reckoned the park and ride should be opened up as a traveller site during July and August, making the Creekmoor residents feel secure!!!!! (yeah, of course they do now they're on the site), could well have been suggesting the council also do something illegal. Did he check before spouting that? Did he think he was fulfilling his remit to be impartial? Well, he's now got his way and I bet both he and Atkinson were gloating over their breakfasts this morning. Nice people. Carolyn43
  • Score: 3

11:23am Sun 10 Aug 14

Creekmoron says...

It’s up to the 3 Creekmoor ward councillors to convince the residents to accept that the council has allowed these people to stay indefinitely at the P and R and to hell with Creekmoor.
It’s up to the 3 Creekmoor ward councillors to convince the residents to accept that the council has allowed these people to stay indefinitely at the P and R and to hell with Creekmoor. Creekmoron
  • Score: 3

12:08pm Sun 10 Aug 14

JackCracker says...

Seems to me that the so-called travellers are grinning as they make mugs of the council, the police, and the residents and taxpayers. Certain councillors also seem to be grinning smugly as the residents of Creekmoor are put upon and treated a mite unfairly. Be interesting to see what the local ombudsman makes of their decisions. Bit of luck the teletubbies will be banned from office for maladministration.
Seems to me that the so-called travellers are grinning as they make mugs of the council, the police, and the residents and taxpayers. Certain councillors also seem to be grinning smugly as the residents of Creekmoor are put upon and treated a mite unfairly. Be interesting to see what the local ombudsman makes of their decisions. Bit of luck the teletubbies will be banned from office for maladministration. JackCracker
  • Score: 1

12:32pm Sun 10 Aug 14

Marty Caine says...

The Liberal wrote:
Marty Caine wrote:
The Liberal wrote:
Marty Caine wrote:
martinsim34 wrote:
wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure
The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are.

I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.
What a load of rubbish. And why have you dropped the ‘UKIP’ from your username? Have they kicked you out of the party yet?
No actually I left, when far too many clueless and disgruntled Tory/ Libdems joined and started to turn the party in to a more politically correct party that we used to be against when I joined.

If I cannot be honest to myself why should I expect others to believe in my honesty. That is a lesson you should try to learn someday.
LOL UKIP is not right-wing enough for you! That tells us everything we need to know about you.
Well actually I am slightly left of center so not sure where you got the idea UKIP was not right wing enough for me. I left because I do not wish to support a party that is turning out to be exactly the same as the other useless lot in parliament. I actually want to see a change in British politics and I think that will be best achieved by removing party politics both locally and nationally. So in 2015 I hope that people will vote for independents, that way they will get someone who represents them, not their chosen party.
[quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]martinsim34[/bold] wrote: wat u all need to do is vote libdem next yrs local election,im on canford heath we saw them sending scouts to our parks they r so obvious,libdems have got areas secure[/p][/quote]The LibDems as a Political Party will bend over backwards to appease anyone who is not British at the expense of those who are. I bet the Judge who gave the travellers ethnic rights in the first place was a LibDem.[/p][/quote]What a load of rubbish. And why have you dropped the ‘UKIP’ from your username? Have they kicked you out of the party yet?[/p][/quote]No actually I left, when far too many clueless and disgruntled Tory/ Libdems joined and started to turn the party in to a more politically correct party that we used to be against when I joined. If I cannot be honest to myself why should I expect others to believe in my honesty. That is a lesson you should try to learn someday.[/p][/quote]LOL UKIP is not right-wing enough for you! That tells us everything we need to know about you.[/p][/quote]Well actually I am slightly left of center so not sure where you got the idea UKIP was not right wing enough for me. I left because I do not wish to support a party that is turning out to be exactly the same as the other useless lot in parliament. I actually want to see a change in British politics and I think that will be best achieved by removing party politics both locally and nationally. So in 2015 I hope that people will vote for independents, that way they will get someone who represents them, not their chosen party. Marty Caine
  • Score: 3

6:20pm Sun 10 Aug 14

dontrews says...

Oi tink oi moight become one of dem Oirish Travellers so I moight. Oi can den park me caravan wheresoever oi might choose fer free and gratis. Oops, oi tink oi can hear de sound of de old P.C. Tort Police comin' to shut me down so oi can. Ta ta now.
Oi tink oi moight become one of dem Oirish Travellers so I moight. Oi can den park me caravan wheresoever oi might choose fer free and gratis. Oops, oi tink oi can hear de sound of de old P.C. Tort Police comin' to shut me down so oi can. Ta ta now. dontrews
  • Score: 3

9:21am Mon 11 Aug 14

peterm8264 says...

They are now walking around creekmoor at 3/4 am seeing what is good pickings and bird calling to each other when they have found something to aquire
They are now walking around creekmoor at 3/4 am seeing what is good pickings and bird calling to each other when they have found something to aquire peterm8264
  • Score: 5

6:06pm Mon 11 Aug 14

Lilliput man says...

Carolyn43 wrote:
Norman Stansfield wrote:
Like I always say : this is the ideal location for them. Massive, empty, tarmac'ed area. Fences, basic hygene facilities, security, job done. Small expenditure here, massive savings clearing up after them all over the place. I feel the pain of creekmorians : nothing personal chaps. You have the faclilty, already built and waiting. It would be the same if it was any other locale. None of this 'green belt, must be used as p&r' nonsense please....both of those arguments have been invalidated by the fact that a, someone put tarmac on the green belt and b, it's not being used as a park and ride..... It's a perfect solution. Someone make it happen.
But the council took money from the government to build it as a park and ride and for no other purpose!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!

It would be an ideal place, but unless the government agree to its additional use, it can't be used as a traveller site. That's why it wasn't included in the survey to try and find somewhere suitable.

Even if additional use was approved, unlike other posting here, I'd still feel for the people who bought houses in good faith opposite what was a green field site on the understanding t would stay that way.
The park and ride is within 400m of Dorset Heathland and as a result no new residential development can take place, hence the Council cannot use the site for travellers. To use the site as a temporary transit site would be considered development. This group of people also have no regard for the environment and therefore we could expect damage to an environmentaly sensitive area in the form of fly tipping.
Bottom line is these parasites are not wanted in our town full stop and we should stop pandering to them
Here is one suggestion the US army use loud music played at those they want to move on. Bit antisocial but but so are the travellers
[quote][p][bold]Carolyn43[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Norman Stansfield[/bold] wrote: Like I always say : this is the ideal location for them. Massive, empty, tarmac'ed area. Fences, basic hygene facilities, security, job done. Small expenditure here, massive savings clearing up after them all over the place. I feel the pain of creekmorians : nothing personal chaps. You have the faclilty, already built and waiting. It would be the same if it was any other locale. None of this 'green belt, must be used as p&r' nonsense please....both of those arguments have been invalidated by the fact that a, someone put tarmac on the green belt and b, it's not being used as a park and ride..... It's a perfect solution. Someone make it happen.[/p][/quote]But the council took money from the government to build it as a park and ride and for no other purpose!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!! It would be an ideal place, but unless the government agree to its additional use, it can't be used as a traveller site. That's why it wasn't included in the survey to try and find somewhere suitable. Even if additional use was approved, unlike other posting here, I'd still feel for the people who bought houses in good faith opposite what was a green field site on the understanding t would stay that way.[/p][/quote]The park and ride is within 400m of Dorset Heathland and as a result no new residential development can take place, hence the Council cannot use the site for travellers. To use the site as a temporary transit site would be considered development. This group of people also have no regard for the environment and therefore we could expect damage to an environmentaly sensitive area in the form of fly tipping. Bottom line is these parasites are not wanted in our town full stop and we should stop pandering to them Here is one suggestion the US army use loud music played at those they want to move on. Bit antisocial but but so are the travellers Lilliput man
  • Score: 3

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