Residents had no say on site

Bournemouth Echo: DECISION: Travellers on Whitecliff Recreation Ground DECISION: Travellers on Whitecliff Recreation Ground

I have this evening, 27 January, attended a very stormy council meeting at Poole Civic Centre, for the council to vote on a proposal to place a travellers encampment at Creekmoor.

Basically the meeting, which was also attended by about 100 Creekmoor residents, was a complete whitewash to which the residents were given no voice. In fact several times the Mayor threatened to eject members of the public for trying to speak out.

Whilst a large percentage of the councillors made statements regarding the costs involved and how exorbitant they will be, they still voted to pass the scheme and proceed with the encampment, as Poole residents you may think this will relieve you of traveller incursions this summer, think again.

The site will be for 12 caravans only, and a second site by B&Q, right alongside the children’s Skate Park for four caravans. However, if a group of 20 caravans roll up and can’t get in they will still end up on your parks and open spaces around Poole, and stay for their usual two weeks.

Well done Poole Council for another monumental non solution, wether you choose to believe it or not, the council informed all at the meeting that the site may never be used, or if so just for a few weeks a year, therefore another white elephant for the town, just like our wonderful park & ride.

Now for the kick in the shins, a fact that all Poole residents should be aware of, the cost to set up the site is a estimate by the council of £250,000, and then annual costs of circa £35,000 to maintain and control the site, even though it may never be used.

It was very interesting to hear Councillor Dion express her concerns about the costs involved but still voted for the site.

This is the lady that announced in the Echo last Friday that the council was cutting £100,000 subsidy from Wilts & Dorset buses, and that the council has to find cuts of up to £22 million in the next four years.

I have to give credit to Councillors Judy Butt, Les Burden, and John Rampton who fought hard to allow a deferment so that the public could be consulted properly. However they were defeated and no consultation would be afforded to the residents of the Borough.

The Lib Dems stuck together and produced a wonderful display of smoke and mirrors, to the cost of all Poole residents. Democracy in Poole is now dead.

I urge all residents of Poole to question their ward councillors as to why they feel that to waste vast amounts of taxpayers money, whilst depriving the electorate services for vulnerable people, toddler groups, and books for children at school is ok.

The reason the council state that this site is required, is because you as the residents Poole told them you wanted it, I would be very interested to know if that is true, if so thanks everybody.

Terry Hughes

Swallow Close

Creekmoor

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:13pm Fri 31 Jan 14

muscliffman says...

I think it is fairly clear to all who have followed this 'traveller' site issue that many of the Poole Councillors were blatantly NOT representing the majority views of their own electorate.

Therefore perhaps the question Poole residents should be asking both themselves and in particular these Councillor's is exactly WHOSE interests were they representing!
I think it is fairly clear to all who have followed this 'traveller' site issue that many of the Poole Councillors were blatantly NOT representing the majority views of their own electorate. Therefore perhaps the question Poole residents should be asking both themselves and in particular these Councillor's is exactly WHOSE interests were they representing! muscliffman

1:40pm Fri 31 Jan 14

we-shall-see says...

The councillors who voted for this idea, despite their electorate's wishes are weak leaders who have been pulled into line by their party leader - in other words they get told how to vote and the consequences for their political careers if they do not - and being weak, sheep-like creatures they go with their "orders", despite knowing it is not the preferred option for the people they represent.

I sincerely hope the residents of Poole will remember this come election time ….. but I fear many residents are also like sheep and will vote for the "X" party because that's who they have always voted for - rather than making informed choices about policy and representation of the people and possibly make a vote for another party with different or better policies …….. sheep as far as the eye can see in Poole :o/
The councillors who voted for this idea, despite their electorate's wishes are weak leaders who have been pulled into line by their party leader - in other words they get told how to vote and the consequences for their political careers if they do not - and being weak, sheep-like creatures they go with their "orders", despite knowing it is not the preferred option for the people they represent. I sincerely hope the residents of Poole will remember this come election time ….. but I fear many residents are also like sheep and will vote for the "X" party because that's who they have always voted for - rather than making informed choices about policy and representation of the people and possibly make a vote for another party with different or better policies …….. sheep as far as the eye can see in Poole :o/ we-shall-see

2:09pm Fri 31 Jan 14

speedy231278 says...

Caravan using nomadic travelling society 1 - 0 Taxpayers.
Caravan using nomadic travelling society 1 - 0 Taxpayers. speedy231278

4:41pm Fri 31 Jan 14

hcharding says...

Of course the residents had a say in this matter; they elected the councillors. There is only one thing to do at the next election.
Of course the residents had a say in this matter; they elected the councillors. There is only one thing to do at the next election. hcharding

5:49pm Fri 31 Jan 14

i have heard it all now says...

Named and shamed below,Make your objections known to these individuals.


THE motion to support options for the two temporary stopping places for travellers and gypsies in Poole was passed, with more than half the councillors present backing the scheme.

Proposals for the two sites at Creekmoor and Oakdale were carried with 24 members voting in favour, 11 against and two abstentions. Five members of the council were absent from the meeting.

Councillors who voted in favour were: Elaine Atkinson (C), Mike Brooke (LD), David Brown (LD), Brian Clements (LD), Jo Clements (LD), Sandra Cox (LD), Xena Dion (C), Phil Eades (LD), Phil Goodall (LD), Roy Godfrey (LD), Jennie Hodges (LD), Marion Le Poidevin (LD), Chris Matthews (LD), Charles Meachin (LD), Sandra Moore (LD), Ron Parker (C), Vikki Slade (LD), Neil Sorton (C), Ann Stribley (C), Tony Trent (LD), Mike White (C), Lindsay Wilson (LD), Graham Wilson (LD), Tony Woodcock (C).


Those voting against were: Peter Adams (C), Les Burden (C), Judy Butt (C), Sally Carpenter (PP), May Haines (C), Mark Howell (PP), Charmaine Parkinson (PP), Ian Potter (C), John Rampton (C), Janet Walton (C), Chris Wilson (PP).

Cllrs Carol Evans (C) and Karen Rampton (C) abstained.
Named and shamed below,Make your objections known to these individuals. THE motion to support options for the two temporary stopping places for travellers and gypsies in Poole was passed, with more than half the councillors present backing the scheme. Proposals for the two sites at Creekmoor and Oakdale were carried with 24 members voting in favour, 11 against and two abstentions. Five members of the council were absent from the meeting. Councillors who voted in favour were: Elaine Atkinson (C), Mike Brooke (LD), David Brown (LD), Brian Clements (LD), Jo Clements (LD), Sandra Cox (LD), Xena Dion (C), Phil Eades (LD), Phil Goodall (LD), Roy Godfrey (LD), Jennie Hodges (LD), Marion Le Poidevin (LD), Chris Matthews (LD), Charles Meachin (LD), Sandra Moore (LD), Ron Parker (C), Vikki Slade (LD), Neil Sorton (C), Ann Stribley (C), Tony Trent (LD), Mike White (C), Lindsay Wilson (LD), Graham Wilson (LD), Tony Woodcock (C). Those voting against were: Peter Adams (C), Les Burden (C), Judy Butt (C), Sally Carpenter (PP), May Haines (C), Mark Howell (PP), Charmaine Parkinson (PP), Ian Potter (C), John Rampton (C), Janet Walton (C), Chris Wilson (PP). Cllrs Carol Evans (C) and Karen Rampton (C) abstained. i have heard it all now

6:35pm Fri 31 Jan 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

The meeting on the 27th was held in the Council Chambers and not in the much larger room downstairs which is usually used for public council meetings, this meant that a lot of people who had turned up to express their concerns were unable to actually get into the meeting, me being one of them. Now that the plan was voted on and passed it will go in front of the planning committee, which happens to be most of those who voted it through. Also at that meeting Cllr John Rampton tabled an amendment calling for a 'meaningful' consultation with Poole residents and businesses and a full social impact assessment, This also got out voted and that does raise concerns because it was a reasonable request. I have started a petition which I hope many sign to insist on Cllr Rampton's proposal being accepted. You can sign the petition by using this link.

http://www.thepetiti

onsite.com/910/393/6

24/demand-an-investi

gation-and-consultat

ion-in-regards-to-po

ole-travelers-sites/

?cid=headerClick#sig

n
The meeting on the 27th was held in the Council Chambers and not in the much larger room downstairs which is usually used for public council meetings, this meant that a lot of people who had turned up to express their concerns were unable to actually get into the meeting, me being one of them. Now that the plan was voted on and passed it will go in front of the planning committee, which happens to be most of those who voted it through. Also at that meeting Cllr John Rampton tabled an amendment calling for a 'meaningful' consultation with Poole residents and businesses and a full social impact assessment, This also got out voted and that does raise concerns because it was a reasonable request. I have started a petition which I hope many sign to insist on Cllr Rampton's proposal being accepted. You can sign the petition by using this link. http://www.thepetiti onsite.com/910/393/6 24/demand-an-investi gation-and-consultat ion-in-regards-to-po ole-travelers-sites/ ?cid=headerClick#sig n Marty Caine UKIP

7:27pm Fri 31 Jan 14

fireflier says...

Suggestion for ALL caravan owners in the Poole area.

Claim yourself to be a particular ethnic group.....Dorset Born and Bred may do ..... then park up you caravan on any piece of public land that takes your fancy.

Better still if you can get another half dozen others to join your ethnic group!

If you make the right claims and noises you should be OK for a week or so free camping anywhere in Poole. Possibly spill over next week into Bournemouth or East Dorset.
Suggestion for ALL caravan owners in the Poole area. Claim yourself to be a particular ethnic group.....Dorset Born and Bred may do ..... then park up you caravan on any piece of public land that takes your fancy. Better still if you can get another half dozen others to join your ethnic group! If you make the right claims and noises you should be OK for a week or so free camping anywhere in Poole. Possibly spill over next week into Bournemouth or East Dorset. fireflier

10:30pm Fri 31 Jan 14

pete woodley says...

Ukip jumping on the vote catching wagon again,The residents do not need them and should fight on their ." Possibly spill over next week into Bournemouth or East Dorset.own" VERY POSSIBLE.
Ukip jumping on the vote catching wagon again,The residents do not need them and should fight on their ." Possibly spill over next week into Bournemouth or East Dorset.own" VERY POSSIBLE. pete woodley

10:53pm Fri 31 Jan 14

pete woodley says...

(Correction).Ukip jumping on the vote catching wagon again,The residents do not need them and should fight on their own." Possibly spill over next week into Bournemouth or East Dorset." VERY POSSIBLE.
(Correction).Ukip jumping on the vote catching wagon again,The residents do not need them and should fight on their own." Possibly spill over next week into Bournemouth or East Dorset." VERY POSSIBLE. pete woodley

6:36am Sat 1 Feb 14

Jeff in Parkstone says...

Well said Terry. Absolutely first rate on all the crtical points : the cost £250,000, the non-consultation wtih local residents, and to beggar all belief the site may never be used - travellers may say not for us mate.

My own view is below as sent to the Echo (but has not gone in). Many local residents may not like this but I would say to all this will not cost us £250,000 - it will cost the cost of refuse and perhaps toilet faciltities.. And the period in question lets face it around one month in August.

As for Cllrs many of these people are only Cllrs in the first place because they joined polical parties - not because they have any significant qualifications or professional or business experience. For many I've long past expecting them to take any major initiative or reponsibility and actually make significant changes.

And if that doesn't ring true just check out attendance at meetings or any listing or blog telling us what a Cllr has done the past six months. All you get on BoP site is a list of committees - and that's it for four years. I've arrived - here's what I've joined - but don't ask me what I've actually acheived. We don't do that.

For instance check out Cllr Peter Pawlowski - former Head of Environment then policy director retired in 2011 I think it was - within a year a Cllr (£12K a year) in Penn Hill - his web-site as frozen in time since the day he was elected gives us : This member was elected to Borough of Poole in May 2011. A full profile will be available as soon as possible.

And that friends is the going rate for many (but not all) Cllrs. They are there for no other reason than to make up the numbers. So sorry but we can't be too outraged can we when we end up with third rate Cllrs and third rate chaotic managemernt. the expertise is simply not there - they have no in-depth pofessional qualification and there is no lengthy professional training - to "be" a Cllr ....

***********

With regard to Poole Council committing to spend £250,000 on developing a temporary site for travellers I can personally only see this in terms of the huge cost as sheer lunacy.

Meaning an entirely unnecessary cost when there is clearly at hand a very simple distributed solution.

And that is allow small groups of summer travellers for limited periods onto designated sections of all the open space recreation grounds in Poole.

I can see no reason why not. A matter of residents having the courage to accommodate and give travellers a chance to show they can reciprocate. Not developing expensive segregation compounds to keep "them" away from "us".

A matter of learning to communicate and relate to different people with different ways and building some mutual respect. And in doing that save £250,000 which could be very well spent in our area alone on so many very pressing issues.

And if giving peace a chance does not work then if council has no other option then they will clearly have to take the hugely expensive temporary site option. And that is huge expense at our cost, in our council tax - all but for trying to accommodate a few dozen travelling families on wide open recreation grounds with space to spare ten times over.

Jeff Williams
Well said Terry. Absolutely first rate on all the crtical points : the cost £250,000, the non-consultation wtih local residents, and to beggar all belief the site may never be used - travellers may say not for us mate. My own view is below as sent to the Echo (but has not gone in). Many local residents may not like this but I would say to all this will not cost us £250,000 - it will cost the cost of refuse and perhaps toilet faciltities.. And the period in question lets face it around one month in August. As for Cllrs many of these people are only Cllrs in the first place because they joined polical parties - not because they have any significant qualifications or professional or business experience. For many I've long past expecting them to take any major initiative or reponsibility and actually make significant changes. And if that doesn't ring true just check out attendance at meetings or any listing or blog telling us what a Cllr has done the past six months. All you get on BoP site is a list of committees - and that's it for four years. I've arrived - here's what I've joined - but don't ask me what I've actually acheived. We don't do that. For instance check out Cllr Peter Pawlowski - former Head of Environment then policy director retired in 2011 I think it was - within a year a Cllr (£12K a year) in Penn Hill - his web-site as frozen in time since the day he was elected gives us : This member was elected to Borough of Poole in May 2011. A full profile will be available as soon as possible. And that friends is the going rate for many (but not all) Cllrs. They are there for no other reason than to make up the numbers. So sorry but we can't be too outraged can we when we end up with third rate Cllrs and third rate chaotic managemernt. the expertise is simply not there - they have no in-depth pofessional qualification and there is no lengthy professional training - to "be" a Cllr .... *********** With regard to Poole Council committing to spend £250,000 on developing a temporary site for travellers I can personally only see this in terms of the huge cost as sheer lunacy. Meaning an entirely unnecessary cost when there is clearly at hand a very simple distributed solution. And that is allow small groups of summer travellers for limited periods onto designated sections of all the open space recreation grounds in Poole. I can see no reason why not. A matter of residents having the courage to accommodate and give travellers a chance to show they can reciprocate. Not developing expensive segregation compounds to keep "them" away from "us". A matter of learning to communicate and relate to different people with different ways and building some mutual respect. And in doing that save £250,000 which could be very well spent in our area alone on so many very pressing issues. And if giving peace a chance does not work then if council has no other option then they will clearly have to take the hugely expensive temporary site option. And that is huge expense at our cost, in our council tax - all but for trying to accommodate a few dozen travelling families on wide open recreation grounds with space to spare ten times over. Jeff Williams Jeff in Parkstone

7:47am Sat 1 Feb 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

Clearly these MP-wannabe, amateur politicians have forgotten who they are representing.
Clearly these MP-wannabe, amateur politicians have forgotten who they are representing. Letcommonsenseprevail

7:57am Sat 1 Feb 14

hcharding says...

Jeff Williams would make a good councillor. As he fails to keep within the Echo guide lines of 200 words in a letter it is clear he will not follow the rules in local government. Just like the Halifax; we need you Jeff.
Jeff Williams would make a good councillor. As he fails to keep within the Echo guide lines of 200 words in a letter it is clear he will not follow the rules in local government. Just like the Halifax; we need you Jeff. hcharding

9:45am Sat 1 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

Google Marty Caine,and you will have a shock,he called the parents of murdered soldier Lee Rigby idiots and colludes with the EDL.Is this the type of person to hhelp the residents ?.
Google Marty Caine,and you will have a shock,he called the parents of murdered soldier Lee Rigby idiots and colludes with the EDL.Is this the type of person to hhelp the residents ?. pete woodley

1:33pm Sat 1 Feb 14

RM says...

Thank you Jeff Williams for an interesting suggestion that we should 'welcome' the travellers& allow them to use all our green spaces. I think perhaps you should discuss this proposition with residents who had travellers in their area last summer. Residents who were unable to use their local green spaces, children's playground or walk their dogs - the list goes on...... and who had to watch as fences were broken, plants, trees destroyed, kiddies threatened by knife wielding traveller children, rubbish strewn everywhere - knowing that at the end they would be paying for the Council to clean & repair. Do you live near any green space & if so was there a traveller camp on it last year? I seem to remember letters/comments from you last summer being very supportive of the travellers until the final one where I think you said you'd changed your opinions after travellers had gone into a friend's cafe & been disruptive - have I got my facts right?
Thank you Jeff Williams for an interesting suggestion that we should 'welcome' the travellers& allow them to use all our green spaces. I think perhaps you should discuss this proposition with residents who had travellers in their area last summer. Residents who were unable to use their local green spaces, children's playground or walk their dogs - the list goes on...... and who had to watch as fences were broken, plants, trees destroyed, kiddies threatened by knife wielding traveller children, rubbish strewn everywhere - knowing that at the end they would be paying for the Council to clean & repair. Do you live near any green space & if so was there a traveller camp on it last year? I seem to remember letters/comments from you last summer being very supportive of the travellers until the final one where I think you said you'd changed your opinions after travellers had gone into a friend's cafe & been disruptive - have I got my facts right? RM

1:39pm Sat 1 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

RM,fair comments,i have witnessed some of it.
RM,fair comments,i have witnessed some of it. pete woodley

4:52pm Sat 1 Feb 14

Ebb Tide says...

hcharding wrote:
Of course the residents had a say in this matter; they elected the councillors. There is only one thing to do at the next election.
Naturally ! Elect people that can take those hard decisions necessary when having to balance the need of the whole Borough to be protected from widespread civil unrest against the need for those in the vicinity of some open space (capable of complying with an insensitive law) to be adequately protected to preserve a reasonable level of tranquillity.

Policing the whole Borough to prevent wildcat civil unrest -v- policing the behaviour in one localised area, could have been one aspect that the Councillors considered. So I was surprised that the 'mothballed' car-park (with its surveillance systems ?) was nor the Councils choice and the risk of environmental issues created.

However, the law does not allow any scope for a 'win win' decision because for this desirable crowded coastal resort there could only be scope for an eventual 'lose lose' decision. We need dedicated eager MPs capable of getting the relevant law revised to allow some exceptions to the law. Perhaps the LibDems perceive this - only they can clarify their thinking for us.

Meanwhile it is possible that 2015 will not be disrupted by unauthorised encampments to the same extent as in recent years, given the fact that the Police Commissioner appears to be getting the necessary 'levers' that public consultations learnt that he considered to be essential.
[quote][p][bold]hcharding[/bold] wrote: Of course the residents had a say in this matter; they elected the councillors. There is only one thing to do at the next election.[/p][/quote]Naturally ! Elect people that can take those hard decisions necessary when having to balance the need of the whole Borough to be protected from widespread civil unrest against the need for those in the vicinity of some open space (capable of complying with an insensitive law) to be adequately protected to preserve a reasonable level of tranquillity. Policing the whole Borough to prevent wildcat civil unrest -v- policing the behaviour in one localised area, could have been one aspect that the Councillors considered. So I was surprised that the 'mothballed' car-park (with its surveillance systems ?) was nor the Councils choice and the risk of environmental issues created. However, the law does not allow any scope for a 'win win' decision because for this desirable crowded coastal resort there could only be scope for an eventual 'lose lose' decision. We need dedicated eager MPs capable of getting the relevant law revised to allow some exceptions to the law. Perhaps the LibDems perceive this - only they can clarify their thinking for us. Meanwhile it is possible that 2015 will not be disrupted by unauthorised encampments to the same extent as in recent years, given the fact that the Police Commissioner appears to be getting the necessary 'levers' that public consultations learnt that he considered to be essential. Ebb Tide

8:03pm Sat 1 Feb 14

Jeff in Parkstone says...

RM - yes I did take note of the very upsetting behaviour in the cafe last summer and that did change my views - made me think twice and hard - but I don't apply this to all travellers and still of the view the best solution is to try and accommodate small numbers on all the open grounds ...

As well as the cafe incident I did also walk round Branksome Rec three different morning and evening times when travellers were there - I didn't see any problems. I didn't see any reason why a small number - with refuse faciltities - could not peacefully be accomodated for a a few weeks ...

So I am saying because of the problems and worries small groups on recs maybe the best way to deal with the issue that is not going to go away.

And as for Hcharing on the 200 words - I am aware of 250 wds for letters but never thought that applied on-line comments. And for the rest below to Poole Cllrs and residents and in particular Colin Lambert in Whitecliffe :

Colin ... felonies is very strong ... (in reply to his catalogue of offences last summer - similar to yours RM - although perhaps RM is another Colin Lambert pseudonym along with Victor Meldrew)

You don't think if efforts were made to accommodate travellers - designated areas, refuse/toilets (they to pay) for limited periods - traveller groups would respond in kind ?

You don't think hostility from local residents might be playing a part in provoking reactions and attacks/anti-social behaviour back on residents and recs ?

And I do have a clue Colin. I do know how one group caused great distress in one cafe in Ashley Road last summer - very aggressive behaviour police had to be called ....

But that said you might like to take note that shop lifting (the thieving elements of the general public) is at endemic levels in Ashley Road - and I mean dozens of thefts every week - four in Coop in one day twice in one week. As also huge issues with alcohol in our town centres causing havoc every weekend - and a ton more anti-socail behaviour every week car thefts burglarly drug issue every day in our areas ...

So as hostile as you seem to be Colin indiscriminately to all travellers can you not accept they do not have a monopoly on anti-social and criminal behaviour ... our society is shot through with drug/alcohol motoring issues/crimes costing a fortune to police every day ....

And you're glad to have the £250,000 paid out - well I am certainly not and not just the sheer waste but it is not even the beginning of a solution - what we will likely end up seeing is poilce officers trying march travellers from one site to another and hard to see that will work out anything but a huge fiasco and all in the glare of the media ...

If fact we might be setting up a scenario for traveller groups to roundly mock the people of Poole - simply running rings around authorities trying to move then from one site to another ....

So my view again accommodate small groups on designated areas of recreation grounds. When travellers are known to be heading for Poole or when they arrive authorities need to make clear where they can stop on recs - for how long - cost of refuse/toilets - assure then they will not be hastled and threatened by groups of angry residents and they to accept they are being given a chance to camp with respect for local people and environment ...

In a word our authorites need to have a conversation with traveller group leaders in-so-far as they can.

Is that just too big a communication challenge to take on - is that beyond our colllective abiltities or dare I say imagination ?

I din't go to the actual meeting last Novemvber but it would not surpise me if there were no traveller representativs at the meeting ... that it seems to me would be a very good start.

As also for instance Mannings Heath campt back to the 1990s the huge problems there are you aware it was different groups of travellers (Romany, Irish, New Age) that simply did not get on - and to the point of wrecking facilities to spite one-another. So that too the case for small individual groups (as they arrive) to be directed to where they can stay maximum I would think a month ...

Jeff Williams
RM - yes I did take note of the very upsetting behaviour in the cafe last summer and that did change my views - made me think twice and hard - but I don't apply this to all travellers and still of the view the best solution is to try and accommodate small numbers on all the open grounds ... As well as the cafe incident I did also walk round Branksome Rec three different morning and evening times when travellers were there - I didn't see any problems. I didn't see any reason why a small number - with refuse faciltities - could not peacefully be accomodated for a a few weeks ... So I am saying because of the problems and worries small groups on recs maybe the best way to deal with the issue that is not going to go away. And as for Hcharing on the 200 words - I am aware of 250 wds for letters but never thought that applied on-line comments. And for the rest below to Poole Cllrs and residents and in particular Colin Lambert in Whitecliffe : Colin ... felonies is very strong ... (in reply to his catalogue of offences last summer - similar to yours RM - although perhaps RM is another Colin Lambert pseudonym along with Victor Meldrew) You don't think if efforts were made to accommodate travellers - designated areas, refuse/toilets (they to pay) for limited periods - traveller groups would respond in kind ? You don't think hostility from local residents might be playing a part in provoking reactions and attacks/anti-social behaviour back on residents and recs ? And I do have a clue Colin. I do know how one group caused great distress in one cafe in Ashley Road last summer - very aggressive behaviour police had to be called .... But that said you might like to take note that shop lifting (the thieving elements of the general public) is at endemic levels in Ashley Road - and I mean dozens of thefts every week - four in Coop in one day twice in one week. As also huge issues with alcohol in our town centres causing havoc every weekend - and a ton more anti-socail behaviour every week car thefts burglarly drug issue every day in our areas ... So as hostile as you seem to be Colin indiscriminately to all travellers can you not accept they do not have a monopoly on anti-social and criminal behaviour ... our society is shot through with drug/alcohol motoring issues/crimes costing a fortune to police every day .... And you're glad to have the £250,000 paid out - well I am certainly not and not just the sheer waste but it is not even the beginning of a solution - what we will likely end up seeing is poilce officers trying march travellers from one site to another and hard to see that will work out anything but a huge fiasco and all in the glare of the media ... If fact we might be setting up a scenario for traveller groups to roundly mock the people of Poole - simply running rings around authorities trying to move then from one site to another .... So my view again accommodate small groups on designated areas of recreation grounds. When travellers are known to be heading for Poole or when they arrive authorities need to make clear where they can stop on recs - for how long - cost of refuse/toilets - assure then they will not be hastled and threatened by groups of angry residents and they to accept they are being given a chance to camp with respect for local people and environment ... In a word our authorites need to have a conversation with traveller group leaders in-so-far as they can. Is that just too big a communication challenge to take on - is that beyond our colllective abiltities or dare I say imagination ? I din't go to the actual meeting last Novemvber but it would not surpise me if there were no traveller representativs at the meeting ... that it seems to me would be a very good start. As also for instance Mannings Heath campt back to the 1990s the huge problems there are you aware it was different groups of travellers (Romany, Irish, New Age) that simply did not get on - and to the point of wrecking facilities to spite one-another. So that too the case for small individual groups (as they arrive) to be directed to where they can stay maximum I would think a month ... Jeff Williams Jeff in Parkstone

8:22pm Sat 1 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

There you are RM the voice of an "expert", the mayor of Parkstone.
There you are RM the voice of an "expert", the mayor of Parkstone. pete woodley

8:49pm Sat 1 Feb 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

pete woodley wrote:
Google Marty Caine,and you will have a shock,he called the parents of murdered soldier Lee Rigby idiots and colludes with the EDL.Is this the type of person to hhelp the residents ?.
I never called them idiots and I do not know any EDL members personally, I was simply smear attacked for being a UKIP member, very much like you seem to keep on doing actually. Just because I am a member of UKIP that does not stop me from being a resident of Poole and incurring the rate increases that these senseless wastes of money will no doubt create, for all Poole residents. I am sure it will not affect your rates in anyway over in Bournemouth. Looking forward to meeting you for coffee tomorrow ;)
[quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Google Marty Caine,and you will have a shock,he called the parents of murdered soldier Lee Rigby idiots and colludes with the EDL.Is this the type of person to hhelp the residents ?.[/p][/quote]I never called them idiots and I do not know any EDL members personally, I was simply smear attacked for being a UKIP member, very much like you seem to keep on doing actually. Just because I am a member of UKIP that does not stop me from being a resident of Poole and incurring the rate increases that these senseless wastes of money will no doubt create, for all Poole residents. I am sure it will not affect your rates in anyway over in Bournemouth. Looking forward to meeting you for coffee tomorrow ;) Marty Caine UKIP

9:42pm Sat 1 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

"one lump or two"
"one lump or two" pete woodley

5:23pm Sun 2 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

Are the residents now going to align themselves alongside a political party,to try and boost their chances,when other politicians have let them down.Have they not got minds of their own,or do they too follow like troops.
Are the residents now going to align themselves alongside a political party,to try and boost their chances,when other politicians have let them down.Have they not got minds of their own,or do they too follow like troops. pete woodley

6:13pm Sun 2 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

Marty i owe you the coffees,it was good to talk.
Marty i owe you the coffees,it was good to talk. pete woodley

12:51am Mon 3 Feb 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

pete woodley wrote:
Marty i owe you the coffees,it was good to talk.
Nice to meet you today Pete, I'm not a bad guy really ;)
[quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Marty i owe you the coffees,it was good to talk.[/p][/quote]Nice to meet you today Pete, I'm not a bad guy really ;) Marty Caine UKIP

10:08am Mon 3 Feb 14

pete woodley says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
pete woodley wrote:
Marty i owe you the coffees,it was good to talk.
Nice to meet you today Pete, I'm not a bad guy really ;)
You really must get some early nights..will talk again some time.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Marty i owe you the coffees,it was good to talk.[/p][/quote]Nice to meet you today Pete, I'm not a bad guy really ;)[/p][/quote]You really must get some early nights..will talk again some time. pete woodley

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

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

I agree