Weather
Diggers brought in to keep travellers out (From This is Hampshire)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
|
|
|
|
Diggers brought in to keep travellers out
10:20am Monday 7th September 2009
DEFENCES have been put into place by a major housing developer to try to keep travellers at bay after its land was repeatedly invaded.
Taylor Wimpey deployed diggers to its land in Popley Way to create an earth “bund” (pictured) while a group of travellers were illegally camping on the site.
The group left last Tuesday night via a gap left for them to exit through, and this was then closed up after they had gone.
Taylor Wimpey spokeswoman Amy Taylor said: “Following discussions with the local authority, we have carried out minor works to prevent travellers from re-establishing themselves on the land we own at Popley Way.”
It is understood that the travellers convoy then moved to Priestley Road, near Basingstoke hospital, hours before the borough council was due to install wooden bollards to prevent illegal camps from using that site.
The travellers were camped right next to an underpass used by residents, mums delivering their children to Cornerstone’s Day Nursery and staff from Basingstoke hospital.
Borough council officers have told the travellers they have to leave by the middle of next week or face eviction.
Popley West Councillor Jane Frankum said her ward has seen a huge influx of travellers this year, with 18 incidents of illegal camps being set up compared to last year’s four.
She said: “Until we find a more permanent solution, this will happen again and again.”
Cllr Frankum and Popley East borough Cllr Andrew McCormick said a transit site, where travellers can camp temporarily and pay rent, could solve the problem. They said this would offer somewhere for them to go once they were told to leave illegal camps.
Cllr McCormick said: “If we do nothing, it will be the same next year. These guys are here for a reason. It is because they can get casual work like gardening and building work.”
However local resident Vernon Butcher, who lives in Merton Rise, Popley, questioned why taxpayers money should be used to establish and maintain a transit site.
The 38-year-old accountant said his neighbourhood has been blighted by travellers setting up camp, with dogs off leashes and human faeces left near pavements.
He said: “Travellers come into residential areas and expect us to pick up the tab in cleaning up after them, and providing a site.”
The father-of-two has now launched a petition against any permanent or transit sites being introduced in the borough.
On Friday, Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council had five locations logged on its website where there are illegal camps. The sites are at Jays Close, next to Beverley Close, in Viables, the A33 near Whitmarsh Lane, in Chineham, Priestley Road, near the hospital, Churchill Way West, and Hamilton Close, in Houndmills.
More News stories
- New Bishop for Southampton
- Eleven arrested in immigration raid on Hampshire care home
- Botley workshop blaze
- Anger as asbestos store is approved
- Planners block rooms plans
- Treadmill challenge for Slimming World team
- £4,000 Appeal to help keep son safe
- All that jazz for Rose Road
- Pedalling for Piam
- Family fun day
Your Say YourHampshire
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
6:01pm Mon 7 Sep 09
I say no sites, more police and legislative powers to move them on and a zero tolerance of illegal encampments. I have started an e mail address for a petition at saynototravellers@ho
tmail.co.uk. I have received tacit support from Sir George Young for my campaign and I am pressing Maria Miller for her support. This petition will be going to Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council, Hampshire County Council and Westminster. If need be I will take this to the EU as many of the laws that prohibit the dispersal of these sites were enforced by the EU.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
6:27pm Mon 7 Sep 09
If you are interested in seeing the extracts and more from the debate you are welcome to contact me at the e mail address provided above.
Jo Walke, says...
6:43pm Mon 7 Sep 09
If these 'travellers' are moving around the borough - and welfare checks have been carried out on their members - then why, oh why does the process have to start from the beginning just because they shunt their vehicles around a corner?!!!!
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
7:22pm Mon 7 Sep 09
Thank you for your comment - I said that I was in favour of any solution that could be used as a viable strategy to end this situation. I have looked further into what is happening and I have consulted with others. One should never just think that your view is static and is right totally. That would border on arrogance. I believe in social justice for all not just the wealthy or the poor. I do not believe that taxpayers should be made to finance sites - that is consistent. I have always been asking the question about how and where these sites will be situated that is consistent. I have asked how they will be maintained policed and financed that is consistent too. The only thing that has changed is my view that anyway I look at this - transit and permanent sites are not viable long term as there are too many ifs and buts.
A persons views are or should be evolving mine are no different to anyone elses. We are never totally right or totally wrong.
Jo Walke, says...
10:01pm Mon 7 Sep 09
What in your opinion makes a transit site unviable?
I too have been giving this issue some more thought. Hence the query above - if the borough is dealing with the same persons why does the entire movement process have to be restarted because of a change of (nearby) site?
I still think a transit site may have its place. It's not a case of being bullied, it could be ANYWHERE IN THE BOROUGH. (I'm not saying close to town or residents.)
If there is a designated place this could be patrolled/enforced more easily and have a benefit - residents wouldn't have to endure them pitching up and all the recently published 'nasties' that accompany them.
I think there are rules on this subject, I by no means agree with them all, and as such the quickest method to assist residents would be to work with them/round them.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
10:42pm Mon 7 Sep 09
s or a mixture - If travellers are made to pay who will collect their dues? Why should the taxpayer be made to pay when this is a traveller issue? How will the sites be maintained and by whom? Who will police and administer these sites? If travellers are evicted where will they go - they will probably end up back in town?
Finally as I previously stated if they know they have one site here then other travellers will come and we will have a whole huge community asking for sites - that is what happened I believe near London where a site was provided and the travellers extended and took over other adjoining land. Once a transit site hs been provided how long will the travellers be allowed to stay before going and if as Jane Frankum el al have stated about transit sites that evicted travellers will be allowed to go to these sites we will still have the initial clean up and court costs of the eviction. If the transit site will only cater for 12 caravans (as stated in Jane Frankums Popley Matters - September edition) - bearing in mind we had 30+ in Sherborne St John during July where will the others go? On my reckoning that makes at least 3 sites in and around Basingstoke.
Under EU law the welfare of the travellers has to be looked after and I think that the reason the process has to start again is that each new camp has to be individually assessed. By having sites you will encourage travellers to Basingstoke in greater numbers.
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
11:39pm Mon 7 Sep 09
It's not as easy as dialling 999 and screaming "GYPSIES" and seeing them moved off within minutes. The Police have resource and legal constraints placed on them.
We have spent many hundreds of thousands on repeat welfare checks, eviction proceedings, clear up operations and erection of defences this year, purely as a result of having insufficient resources to deal with treavellers.
The very reason why we are talking about transit sites, which would not have permanent facilities, is that in addition to saving substantial sums of money, the Police want them to enable them to use their Section 61 powers to move trespassers off illegal sites onto somewhere else much quicker.
If Vernon Butcher could be bothered to talk to the Police he would know this.
As for selectively quoting MPs out of context, once again Vernon Butcher is not in possession of the full facts. Jim Sheridan just happens to be the local MP for Renfrew where my Dad comes from. AS we have a connection I might just seek him out at the forthcoming Party Conference and talk to him about travellers.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
8:19am Tue 8 Sep 09
Thank you for getting involved in this debate - with regards to my extract, I have a draft of the adjournment debate that was quite clear in condemning the notion of transit or permanent sites you are more than welcome to a copy - it was forwarded to me by Maria Miller MP. I also have the full backing of Sir George Young MP for my campaign. Whether or not you have contacts with Renfrewshire has no bearing on this - this is about Basingstoke. As for the transit sites you have not answered any of the questions posed by me above. In an ideal world transit sites may be the answer but travellers are extraordinary people so there is no guarantee that they will use the said sites or that they will be suitably located.
I find your petulance unbecoming of a councillor when I have not advocated anyone screaming 999 and getting travellers instantly removed. I think you had better read my e mail properly and then discuss the issues instead of resorting to personal attacks - or is the truth, you have nothing constructive say on the matter and you have been rumbled.
I posed legitimate questions on the line being taken by the Labour councillors - which should be encouraged for good debate so that others can make up their own minds.
I am entitled to my opinion as you are entitled to yours. If you cannot accept that then may I suggest you get out of politics.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
8:25am Tue 8 Sep 09
You also stated that you have been involved in your fair share of evictions - it was my campaigning and lobbying of Hampshire County Council that had the undeveloped land at Merton Rise fenced off. I have been active in notifying the police and councils of any new camps in Popley and Merton Rise therefore I do not need you to lecture me what you have or have not done in the past. I have a letter from Cllr Thornber at Hampshire County Council recognising my efforts. This is about future policy not about what has previously happened.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
10:19am Tue 8 Sep 09
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
12:10pm Tue 8 Sep 09
Transit sites would allow the police to use the section 61 powers immediately for illegal encampments, thereby reducing the time to make a mess and intimidate local people, restricting the number of necessary welfare visits and eviction proceedings thereby reducing the cost to the tax payer dramatically. Providing them with a patch of land they CAN park on legally, while freeing up resources and tax payers money makes sense.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
12:40pm Tue 8 Sep 09
This is a strategy that in a normal situation may work, but I will quote from the adjournment debate in 2008 the passage from Jim Sheridan
'in my experience, where there is the provision of traveller sites they end up being trashed'
Who will pick up the tabs for maintaining and rectifying any damage caused - not the travellers but the taxpayer. Remember Peaks Copse - many people have stated that the site was not well run but will there be a 24 hour security presence on any site(s)?
We may be staring at false economies in the hope of grasping at a solution.
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
12:49pm Tue 8 Sep 09
I am painfully aware of the problems we've had in Winklebury and Popley this summer having seen things first hand. I know Jane Frankum and myself have put in a massive amount of work this summer. Sure others may have complained about individual sites as well but between us Me and Jane have dealt with over 20 such cases and have followed the travellers from site to site round the north of the town as they exploit every loophole in the existing set-up.
Then when we talk to the various agencies and propose change, up pops someone like VB saying he opposes it, showing a complete lack of understanding of the issues which indicates he's done a lot less work than he would have others believe.
If only other readers could get their facts right before rushing into print with lengthy diatribes attacking local councillors who dare to set the record straight, this web site would be a better place.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:06pm Tue 8 Sep 09
Instead of attacking me - answer my questions please. I am a reasonable person, if you have justifiable answers to the questions posed I will be more than willing to back down. At present though I have heard nothing to back up this call for the use of taxpayers money. Is it more of the Labour policies of spend today - pay tomorrow (typical promises of a utopian tomorrow - if we just spend a little more here and give a little there). If Basingstoke offers a site then watch and see - it will become a safe haven for more travellers. As for attacking councillors - there are two glorious sayings....if you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen....and....if you have something to whinge about...put up or shut up.
Therefore cllr McCormick the best thing you can do is have a constructive debate. I have put my side but you chose to lower the tone - I have merely reacted to your comments.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:21pm Tue 8 Sep 09
You sound like a arrogant and self - righteous person. If anyone disagrees with something you have to say then they are a know nothing and should keep quiet or go away. I am not going anywhere and I will fight for what I believe in. No amount of political bile will make me shut up and be quiet. I believe that sites for travellers are wrong and that is final. You are entitled to your views and I will not condemned you for holding those views we are all individuals who hold different values.
R_Johnson, Oakley says...
2:37pm Tue 8 Sep 09
I'm sure if I put a caravan on down grange with an unlicensed shot gun inside of it, I would have an armed response in minutes.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
2:59pm Tue 8 Sep 09
...and you would have paid your taxes for the pleasure of it.
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
3:23pm Tue 8 Sep 09
Site locations have yet to be decided but Dummer has been mentioned. The maximum length of stay would be in the region of three months. Any transit site would have to cope with the traveller problems we have now but it's unlikely to exceed 30 caravans. In the event that there are more caravans than the transit site can accommodate then they will be moved to neighbouring authorities. There is a whole wealth of information out there but I'd recommend www.communities.gov.
uk where there is a guide to local authority responsibilitis and powers setting out what is expected of councils. The weight of evidence suggests more well managed sites need to be provided as these reduce unauthorised encampments and tension with the settled community.
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
3:33pm Tue 8 Sep 09
"I'm sure if I put a caravan on down grange with an unlicensed shotgun inside of it, I would have an armed response in minutes".
Apparently there are travellers on Down Grange at the moment. Not sure if R_Johnson is part of them or wants to join them to see what response he'll get.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
3:40pm Tue 8 Sep 09
I believe the abuse started from you. I was engaged in a debate with someone else and merely pointed to the inconsistencies within the Labour Party. That is politics. If you cannot handle deep heated debate get out of the way and let someone else take your place.
As for answering the questions only part answers were provided but I suppose that it is better than nothing.
I do not agree with you that sites will solve anything but you are entitled to your opinion and me to mine.
JacquesMeahof, Hampshire says...
3:49pm Tue 8 Sep 09
Plus it will be great fun for all those that use Junction 7 of the M3 to try and squeeze past the queue of unlicensed caravans etc when the site is 'full' but more want to get in.
I can't wait....
If you want these people to move on, then check them every day to ensure their vehicles are legal, check for illegal activities, taxes being paid etc. They will soon move on.
Before someone says that they don't have the manpower - provide it. the Police manage to find enough manpower for the political parties annual conferences and things such as the G20 demonstations, why can't they find the manpower to police the travellers?
cool paul, basingstoke says...
4:20pm Tue 8 Sep 09
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
4:55pm Tue 8 Sep 09
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
5:52pm Tue 8 Sep 09
When did Jane frankum state that a site for twelve caravans will be provided in Merton Rise?????
You have some resentment toward Labour Councillors I.E Popley, is this because you or a family member has aspirations or in fact had aspirations of becoming a Councillor and failed miserably.
You mentioned Maria Miller as being one of your supporters; well unlike Maria Miller residents don’t have the luxury of two homes, (one paid for at tax payer’s expense) therefore, she can always move home if and when Travellers Park near her old basing home, sadly however, the residents don’t have such luxuries in life.
Vernonbutcher
Please don’t use the travellers as a platform to further any political ambitions you, family or friends have in Popley.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
6:21pm Tue 8 Sep 09
Oh dear if this is the level of councillor we have in Basingstoke we are in trouble. You just have a bee in your bonnet because I have rumbled you. That is ok - I will send some Kleenex and baby wipes to Jane with my regards, she'll be able to clean you up.
As I have said if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.
I am not going to dwell on someone who has not got a proper answer to the questions raised.
The issue was raised in Jim Sheridans comments - I have the full House of Commons adjournment debate text from January 2008 and here it is:
In my experience, the problem is that when we provide camps for travelling people or Gypsies, they then trash the camps. If there is a camp they have to live in it, but they want to travel throughout the country.The legislation means that if a camp is provided, they have to go to it. In my experience, they trash the camp so that they can go wherever they want in the community'.
This is a parliamentary Labour MP and is damning to what Jane Frankum and Cllr McCormick are proposing.
Brian Donohoe (Labour MP, Ayrshire Central) went as far as to say:
'My hon friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire, North (Jim Sheridan) has mentioned litter already, but another problem is the dumping of waste. For example, the local authority in my area gave travellers Portaloos, but they were dumped in the skips that the authority had supplied for their rubbish and set alight. That is the sort of person that we are dealing with: I know that there are some good ones among them, but that story is typical of our experiences with them. Other problems include people on the beach park at Irvine being intimidated while out running or walking their dogs, and being told that they have no right to be there.Constituents of mine have also been shot at be the travelling people.
These are the words of Labour MP's not mine so make up your own minds as to what you want. I personally say no to traveller sites.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
6:38pm Tue 8 Sep 09
How sad - that you have to bring my wife and personal life into this debate. It proves that Labour have nothing to say. This is a personal campaign from myself and does not concern anyone else. The hound dogs are out in force now - I will not back away from what I believe though regardless of what you people say. No to traveller sites
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
6:39pm Tue 8 Sep 09
You ask questions and expect answers, therefore, please answer my question,
I will repeat the question as you might have been looking at the letter you received from Cllr Thornber (HCC), (does it hang in pride of place in your front room?????)
When did Jane Frankum state that a site for twelve caravans will be provided in Merton Rise???????
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
6:44pm Tue 8 Sep 09
In the September Popley Matters in the councillors page it clearly states that - a travellers site for 12 caravans is needed - I suggest you read up before questioning.
This article is ended with Jane Frankums phone number and e mail address
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
7:17pm Tue 8 Sep 09
" The travellers are back on Popley Way at the moment, though by the time the magazines are delivered they could be anywhere. A site for 12 caravans is needed out there in the borough and properly managed. Travellers are now the responsibility of the Borough Council and they are looking at the problem and I hope they come to a solution soon as the surrent situation can not continue. At least with a suitable site out there in the country somewhere they can be moved on very quickly and we the tax payers wont keep footing the bill for the damage and clearing mountains of rubbish"
Merton Rise was not mentioned.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
7:22pm Tue 8 Sep 09
The full quote is here just for you - taken from page 6 of September's Popley Matters:
A site for twelve caravans is needed out there in the borough and properly managed. Travellers are now the responsibility of the Borough Council and they are looking at the problem and I hope they come to a solution soon as the current situation can not continue.
I have answered you - I have nothing to hide and I have been straight. No to taxpayers funding travellers sites and no to the misuse of council tax.
When will you people answer the questions that I have posed or is the truth you have no answers - same old spend, spend, spend Labourites.
Where has cllr McCormick gone is he crying into Jane Frankums pinafore?
Please give him my regards.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
7:34pm Tue 8 Sep 09
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
7:54pm Tue 8 Sep 09
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
8:04pm Tue 8 Sep 09
Please read my quote carefully - I said that 'Jane Frankum el al have been stating that a site should be provided for 12 caravans, in Merton Rise we has an encampment of 30+ caravans......' (which is the truth as I and my wife reported it to the police and David Wilson Homes on the night they arrived in July). I was not saying Jane Frankum had called for a site of 12 caravans in Merton Rise. I hope this clarifies any misunderstanding.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
9:46pm Tue 8 Sep 09
tmail.co.uk
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
11:50pm Tue 8 Sep 09
As for travellers, it must be hard for you to understand that travellers have been travelling for many years and most if not all think too many years.
However, many years ago under Thatcher the travellers were allowed to travel and it was only when they had the cheek to invade the gentry (rich land owner) that Tories stood up and took notice, sadly however, their attempts to protect the rich fell on death ears as their hand were already tied, proving the protection of travellers goes back many years.
You have quoted many prominent people, one of which is Sir George Young; well George was a member of the Government when the Tories tried to protect the gentry against travellers, and let’s be honest, if the rich under Thatcher couldn’t get protection then the protection for the travellers was set in stone.
Asking Sir George Young for advice/support would be a negative approach as his Government had no idea in first place.
As for Merton Rise, its private property and it’s the responsibility of the developers (land owners) to evict the travellers, however, Carpenters Down (Popley Fields) is Council and our Popley Councillors must be commended for the action taken to protect the fields.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
8:11am Wed 9 Sep 09
The only sour grapes are coming from the Loony Left. I have no animosity towards the Labour Party - I have criticised the Tories in this paper as well. (Read previous articles for confirmation). Just a word in your shell though - I am not a paid up member of any political party. I therefore do not take my marching orders from any party and I make up my mind on the issues not on political expediency.
As for the landed gentry - they can and have to answer for themselves. I personally focus on Basingstoke and the issues facing it. The only bitter and twisted ones here are you lot. Get over it and grow up - the Kleenex and baby wipes are still on offer if you need them.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
8:16am Wed 9 Sep 09
No to the misuse of tax payers funds.
No to the misuse of Basingstokes resources.
No to the taking of greenfield land to provides sites
No to brownfield land in town being used to create sites.
JacquesMeahof, Hampshire says...
9:12am Wed 9 Sep 09
vernonbutcher wrote:+1
No to travellers sites. No to the misuse of tax payers funds. No to the misuse of Basingstokes resources. No to the taking of greenfield land to provides sites No to brownfield land in town being used to create sites.
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
10:30am Wed 9 Sep 09
You have spent much time and effort reviling other peoples opinions and efforts to find a solution, yet have not provided any yourself.
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
10:49am Wed 9 Sep 09
No confidence in his own ability to debate therefore relies on other (sleeping partners) to add credibility to his agenda.
Throwing your toys out the pram is not the response/actions of person that’s in total control, Vernon Butcher is on a mission to discredit Jane Frankum and Andy McCormick and I believe that to be “PERSONAL” therefore, has no place in local politics.
Vernon Butcher couldn’t hold a candle to either of them.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
10:53am Wed 9 Sep 09
I asked questions above of the feasibility of transit or permanent sites but no reasonable answer has been given. If you make Basingstoke an attractive place to be for travellers then you will not only have the ones already here, but you will encourage more to arrive. Hence no win situation, more sites, more land, more resources needed including court costs. Reference has to be paid to a site (which was in the news - I think it was in Essex but I am not sure), where travellers settled on a farmers land and he sold the land to them. Eventually over time a whole community of travellers settled on the adjoining land - illegally and it has taken years to evict them.
(Which entailed police time. welfare officer time, court fees,etc).
My aim is to change legislation to give the police more powers to remove them, speed up the court process, target EU law which makes the bureaucracy involved a hinderance. I would make it harder and tougher for the travellers to settle in residential areas.
As for not wanting to hear other peoples view - I have said on this article numerous times that others are entitled to their view and I am entitled to mine. if you want to criticize intransigence - look at cllr McCormicks comments stating I do not know what I am talking about, that I have not put in the effort that I say I have.....etc etc.
I do not and will not revile other peoples views - but they should also respect mine, I have said above that we are all individuals with different values.
I have answered every question posed of me - but no one seems to be able to give a reasoned and coherent answer to my questions.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
11:02am Wed 9 Sep 09
What is wrong - are you afraid that I do know what I am talking about. I merely add those people to show where my sources/information have come from. I have noticed that none of you want to debate the issues at hand - is that not personal. You are a hypocrite of the highest order. If you have nothing reasonable to say I suggest you keep quiet.
No to transit sites
No to the misuse of council tax
No to the misuse of Basingstoke resources
No to the misuse of brownfield and greenfield land.
With not being able to debate - I have kept you, cllr McCormick & Julie 44 occupied by my arguments alone.
Jane Frankum and cllr McCormick will discredit themselves in time as all politicians eventually do, they do not need my help in that.
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
11:07am Wed 9 Sep 09
You have said you want to change the current legislation, but to what?
I repeat - what is your solution?
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
11:15am Wed 9 Sep 09
If they want to travel that is exactly what they should do travel. They should not be allowed to spend 3-4 weeks in a location to disrupt the lives of others.
You are so intensely trying to find out my views, you obviously have no answers to my questions then.
BasingBloke, Basingstoke says...
11:16am Wed 9 Sep 09
some comments here makes me think its either political pointscoring from those who take umbridge with others incroaching on 'there patch' or resent others, who takeactive interests in lots of important local issues who strive for changes, by criticizing and doing little or nothing themselve.more people like that are needed imo and it easy for others to criticize,actions speak louder than the words those who criticize use. competition is a good thing for the electerate and communitys and helps to stop complacentcy with those elected imo
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
11:22am Wed 9 Sep 09
Under Jane Frankum's scheme the travellers would be able to stay for up to 3 months - where will they go then? Same question that you asked me - what is YOUR answer. I have provided mine.
BasingBloke, Basingstoke says...
12:04pm Wed 9 Sep 09
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
12:12pm Wed 9 Sep 09
You said "in Merton Rise we had one encampment that had 30+ caravans during the summer" If there was a site for travellers, they wouldnt have been on your doorstep would they. The suggested transit site is for 12 caravans, any over that number could be moved to the next available site with the section 61 powers the police currently have. If all sites in Hampshire were full at that point, then they could be escorted out of the county. There are 4 permanent 20 pitch traveller sites in Hampshire currently (2 of those in the north of the county), but I notice no mention has been made of those yet. Perhaps that is because they are well managed and arent causing problems.
If you truly understood the position of travellers, you would know that where they would have been dispersed in country locations years ago, modern farming methods have meant less and less work for them. Therefore the move to more urban areas where casual work is more likely to be found. Unfortunately because of lack of spaces for them to pitch, they tend to congregate in illegal encampments wherever the opportunity arises to be able to make a living. Those people providing them with work are perpetuating the problem, which is why we see the same caravans moving from one place to another within the borough.
Their continuing presence in the north of Basingstoke would suggest plenty of offers of work. You haven't had your drive tarmaced recently, or shrubs cut back have you Mr Butcher?
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
12:12pm Wed 9 Sep 09
What is your answer, how do you think we as Borough can stop the travellers entering our Borough.
And more to the point, what more can our Councillors (throughout the Borough) do as this is not just restricted to Popley.
You have come up with prominent names in support of your campaign, therefore, what is your campaign, what are you campaigning for.
Councils throughout the Country are apposed to travellers and our Council is no exception, I don’t think there is a ward in the Borough that has not suffered because of travellers.
Where you live Merton Rise, Travellers had easy access because the developers fail to protect their land and that is not the Council responsibility.
Do we just move them on, do we have police liner the roads just in case they turn up,
I’m not a supporter of the travellers, however, this problem has not just jumped and bit us on bum, this has been going for decades.
If there was an easy answer I’m sure Thatcher and George young would have found it and protected the gentry all those years ago.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
12:33pm Wed 9 Sep 09
I would first like to point out that none of you have answered my questions on the sites - where will they be...I have had a hmm maybe Peaks Copse, nothing definite though. Do you think that the residents of Basingstoke will want traveller sites on their doorsteps - be realistic. What about the site maintenance costs, policing costs, site collection fee costs, administration costs.....or have you all conveniently forgotten about those? What happens if Jane Frankums pay as you go system fails and the travellers do not pay - will you close the site or will taxpayers pick up the tab as usual.Will you evict those who do not pay and to where?
Before you both lecture me - please read above to what members of your OWN party have said about travellers - condemn them right here and now for their views on traveller sites. Or is this political expediency - it seems like it to me. Read the comments carefully and then get back.
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
12:33pm Wed 9 Sep 09
We've had a bumper crop of illegal encampments this year. Things must change next year. No more illegal encampments and dumping of human waste next to schools or youth clubs or peoples' back gardens. But to say "No sites" and "no resources" (even those expended securing evictions?) fundamentally misundestands the problem. If we do nothing, we'll have the same problems next year. By siting travellers away from residents in the settled community we will best contain the problem. Much has been said about Peak Copse being trashed. We know why this is: insufficient oversight. Some people don't accept this and descend into puerile comments aimed at Jane Frankum and myself (e.g. "baby wipes"). Once they start doing this, you know they've lost the argument. Travellers have been discussed at two council meetings in recent months. Strange, then, that we have not had any public input on the issue from the likes of VB when the papers inviting public participation are published weeks in advance on the Council web site. The meetings are held in the evening to encourage public participation.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
12:53pm Wed 9 Sep 09
It seems to me the only people here who have no answers are you and your cronies. I have answered almost all of the questions posed to me, but you all have no answers to the questions posed by me. I suggest you get your facts correct. Obviously expediency is the order of the day and none of you will condemn your own party.
You are very arrogant when ever a person does not agree with you and has something else to say - they do not know what they are talking about.
Why do I need to go to council meetings to make my opinions - is this the only forum in which I can do so. If that is the case the majority of residents in Basingstoke who do not attend council meetings have no right to form opinions on any subject or any thing.
Puerile comments you also say - you seem to spend a lot of time whingeing and moaning about how nasty and horrible I am - I just thought you were in need of some comforting poor man.
Where are YOUR answers to my comments? Why should I indulge you when you are not prepared to answer questions posed by me?
Grow up.
I have my thoughts and opinions you have yours:
No to traveller sites
No to misuse of council tax
No to misuse of greenfield and brownfield sites
No misuse of Basingstokes resources
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
1:06pm Wed 9 Sep 09
I still await your suggestions to solve the issue. But please remember these people are a recognised ethnic minority group, and we are all covered by human rights legislation.
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
1:11pm Wed 9 Sep 09
You say in early post,
“My aim is to change legislation to give the police more powers to remove them, speed up the court process; target EU law which makes the bureaucracy involved a hinderance. I would make it harder and tougher for the travellers to settle in residential areas”.
Vernon you are living in cloud-cuckoo-land,
You also said in earlier post
“With not being able to debate - I have kept you, cllr McCormick & Julie 44 occupied by my arguments alone”
Sorry Vernon, you have kept me amused.
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
1:22pm Wed 9 Sep 09
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:25pm Wed 9 Sep 09
I am also highly amused by your insults. cllr McCormick has the cheek to call me out for 'puerile' comments but look at yours. Just because I do not agree with you I am in cloud-cuckoo-land. That is an insult to the mentally ill and I suggest you retract that. That must also mean that Jim Shreridan and Brian Donohoe also be mentally impaired. Do you want to say it then as they are fellow Labour Party members?
There is nothing mentally unstable about me - I am entitled to my view.
No to traveller sites
No to misuse of council tax
No to misuse of greenfield and brownfield sites
No misuse of Basingstokes resources
More powers to the police to evict travellers.
Changes to EU law to make it easier for traveller encampments to be dealt with. (through lobbying MP's and MEP's).
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:27pm Wed 9 Sep 09
No to misuse of council tax
No to misuse of greenfield and brownfield sites
No misuse of Basingstokes resources
More powers to the police to evict travellers.
Changes to EU law to make it easier for traveller encampments to be dealt with. (through lobbying MP's and MEP's).
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:28pm Wed 9 Sep 09
No to misuse of council tax
No to misuse of greenfield and brownfield sites
No misuse of Basingstokes resources
More powers to the police to evict travellers.
Changes to EU law to make it easier for traveller encampments to be dealt with. (through lobbying MP's and MEP's
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:29pm Wed 9 Sep 09
No to misuse of council tax
No to misuse of greenfield and brownfield sites
No misuse of Basingstokes resources
More powers to the police to evict travellers.
Changes to EU law to make it easier for traveller encampments to be dealt with. (through lobbying MP's and MEP's
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
1:31pm Wed 9 Sep 09
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:35pm Wed 9 Sep 09
You have just shown that you should not have been elected. You are meant to be an elected official and as such you should behave like it. If you cannot debate without getting involved in a slanging match then you do not deserve to be a councillor.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:41pm Wed 9 Sep 09
Read carefully I never claimed to have Maria Millers support - get your facts straight. It was being sought I said.
With regards to the meetings point - are you saying that the only forum people can make up their own minds is in a council meeting? How many of Basingstokes residents attend council meetings?
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:46pm Wed 9 Sep 09
You also highlight abuse - look at that being dished out by you and your cronies. I see that hypocrisy is a happy bed fellow of yours.
No to traveller sites
No to misuse of council tax
No to misuse of greenfield and brownfield sites
No misuse of Basingstokes resources
More powers to the police to evict travellers.
Changes to EU law to make it easier for traveller encampments to be dealt with. (through lobbying MP's and MEP's
R_Johnson, Oakley says...
2:19pm Wed 9 Sep 09
We have Cllr McCormick, Julie Johnson who *failed* to get elected as a local Labour councillor. 'PopleyRebel' - a sock/multipost name clearly coming out to support the Labour forum bullying going on here (and they accused *me* of trolling under different names). Guest appearances from local trolls Phil Heath (using his *other* name - tip *CLOSE YOUR CURTAINS PHIL*)
Vernon may be a little nuts at time - but this Labour Party 'forum' bullying really needs to come to an end. No self respecting councillor would start a fight with anyone on a local newspaper comments section and then call in their 'friends' for support.
You may well *win* the pointless argument you came here looking for Mr McCormick, but it really highlights the way you shamefully conduct yourself in public, and, those nasty dark Labour bullying forces from Popley that are always nefariously at work in our local forums and newspaper feedback sections.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
2:32pm Wed 9 Sep 09
Thank you for the support (apart from the nuts) part!!
The argument they could not 'win' so they have to gang up. Never mind that is politics. It proves these people should never be allowed near a council chamber. I will continue my campaign regardless of what they say or think (which is very little indeed to be honest). Makes one almost glad not to be a Labour member.
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
2:36pm Wed 9 Sep 09
As I understand it your proposal is that we as a Borough shunt our travellers out of the Borough, at the same time however, other Boroughs/ Counties shunt their travellers in to our Borough???
All that shunting reminds me of the old Clapham Junction; therefore, should we call your proposal, Vernon’s Thomas the tank engine proposal???
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
2:39pm Wed 9 Sep 09
I do not have time for your immature games anymore - go and play with cllr McCormick and Jane Frankum.
No to traveller sites
No to misuse of council tax
No to misuse of greenfield and brownfield sites
No misuse of Basingstokes resources
More powers to the police to evict travellers.
Changes to EU law to make it easier for traveller encampments to be dealt with. (through lobbying MP's and MEP's
R_Johnson, Oakley says...
2:52pm Wed 9 Sep 09
People of Basingstoke be very aware of the Popley Five (The Frankums, McCormick and Julie Johnson) - they seek to discredit anyone who dares to challenge them. This is not credible politics - it speaks *volumes* about them.
Popley is stuck in the Politics of the past - that's why it is still the butt of jokes in Basingstoke. It needs modern thinking people to look after it's needs, not old style left wingers saying one thing and looking very much after themselves.
Remember, the turnout in Popley was around 29%. So roughly two thirds of the local people have *not* elected them. Give them a message next time around and show them where the Job Centre is.
R_Johnson, Oakley says...
2:55pm Wed 9 Sep 09
"""As I understand it your proposal is that we as a Borough shunt our travellers out of the Borough,"""
That would clearly suggest the author is part of the council - It's one of the Popley Five - but which one? Sleepy, droopy, mouthy, greedy or Lazy ?
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
3:19pm Wed 9 Sep 09
It just proves what type of people they are. I hope the people of Popley vote them out. They do not deserve to be in politics behaving as they do.
They are disparaging of anyone that has a different view to theirs. This is not Cold War Muscovy. They are entitled to their views as I am entitled to mine.
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
4:10pm Wed 9 Sep 09
We shunt our travellers out, while others shunt theirs in, it’s farcical.
People throughout the Borough want a sensible constructive solution to the problem.
Popley along with other wards has suffered and a long term answer must be found.
Therefore, shunting travellers around is not the answer.
The proposal of the traveller’s sites has been the only constructive idea put forward.
You could argue against the idea, however, has anyone come with a better proposal other than shunting them around.
There are two options, traveller’s sites or shunting, it’s not a political its reality, the travellers are NOT going away.
We in Popley want a solution; our Councillors have come up with a constructive proposal, therefore, I am supporting them as don’t want to see travellers doing the same over the next 20/25 years.
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
4:50pm Wed 9 Sep 09
R_Johnson, Oakley says...
5:36pm Wed 9 Sep 09
McCormick, you and your cronies are clearly seen here bullying this guy. Shame on you.
I'm not surprised the Popley Five have pinned Vernon down whilst they take it in turns to kick him. I'm not surprised that McCormick is one of them. I have a long long memory going back to the 80's and some bullying that went on in B Block. But like you say, it's only a 'very very small minority' that partake in this behaviour. In this case, the Popley Five {sigh} again....
Watch as they now go for the cover-up begging the local rag to remove posts like this that show them for the scum they are.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
5:37pm Wed 9 Sep 09
My heart truly bleeds for you. When you are prepared to dish it out - isn't it also graceful to receive? My disagreement with you was only with regards to transit sites but in light of how you and your cronies have behaved I will not rest until you and them are removed from office. Bringing my wife into this is not only low but wrong. This disagreement was between us and had nothing to do with her. That IS unbecoming of people claiming to be councillors or do you condone Popley Rebel using that?
Once upon a time I was a fervent Labour supporter I am so glad that I have changed.
You are so self-righteous and full of yourself. I put my argument and did you not attack me as well or are you claiming to be a completely innocent party?
If you are that will make you a liar as well. I have attacked you and I will not deny that but this has been a two process. In fact, for most of these two days it has been myself against you and your two cronies Popley Rebel and Julie 44 (Johnson) so therefore do not make out you are so hard done by and save the crocodile tears for another time. Have you heard me crying about your attacks? The truth is if you can't handle the heat then get out of the kitchen.
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
5:42pm Wed 9 Sep 09
However you still have not given a solution Mr Butcher. What legislation changes are you thinking of? How should the illegal encampments be 'dealt with'? Where should the travellers be moved to?
Looks to me like a case of passing the buck.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
5:50pm Wed 9 Sep 09
I do not have to justify myself to an idiot like you. I have made my plans and arguments perfectly clear so you can carry on attacking me it will not deflect me from my course.
No to traveller sites
No to misuse of council tax
No to misuse of greenfield and brownfield sites
No misuse of Basingstokes resources
More powers to the police to evict travellers.
Changes to EU law to make it easier for traveller encampments to be dealt with. (through lobbying MP's and MEP's)
If travellers want to travel that is precisely what they should do. They should travel around and not impinge on others - true romany gipsies do that.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
6:27pm Wed 9 Sep 09
As you nor the others have answered my questions all I am prepared to say is this:
Travellers choose their mode of life - therefore they should travel to where there are sites already provided. My criteria is well documented therefore here it is again:
No to traveller sites
No to misuse of council tax
No to misuse of greenfield and brownfield sites
No misuse of Basingstokes resources
More powers to the police to evict travellers.
Changes to EU law to make it easier for traveller encampments to be dealt with. (through lobbying MP's and MEP's)
If travellers want to travel that is precisely what they should do. They should travel around and not impinge on others - true romany gipsies do that.
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
6:47pm Wed 9 Sep 09
I didn’t name your wife, you did,
However, your wife was an unsuccessful candidate in our (Popley) local elections; therefore, it is right that should been mentioned and then the readers can come to their own conclusions whether or not you had an axe to grind.
As for R Johnson. Do what most people do, totally ignore him, hoping he will go away.
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
7:34pm Wed 9 Sep 09
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
7:51pm Wed 9 Sep 09
I do not care who said what but one of you did mention it. There was absolutely no axe to grind - as I remember my wife was one of the first to congratulate Jane Frankum in chambers after her re-election. Unlike you all we are not bitter at all about the election and hold no grudges over that. That is politics.
It is only you who goes on about that - I have more pressing things to think about and that is the traveller situation. If I am not a threat, a crank, a fool, a know nothing then surely you have nothing to worry about - the electorate will see through me. Or, is the truth there is some potency to what I am saying and that frightens you. Give the electorate more credit.
I will focus on my agenda and let others make up their own minds - No to traveller sites
No to misuse of council tax
No to misuse of greenfield and brownfield sites
No misuse of Basingstokes resources
More powers to the police to evict travellers.
Changes to EU law to make it easier for traveller encampments to be dealt with. (through lobbying MP's and MEP's)
If travellers want to travel that is precisely what they should do. They should travel around and not impinge on others - true romany gipsies do that.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
8:22pm Wed 9 Sep 09
Please show me where I called you a liar?
I said that if you are saying you are completely innocent from attacks then that would make you a liar.
The only one here twisting things is you - as for flimsy, it is your case that is flimsy as you will not answer any of my questions.
How will you finance these sites?
Where will they go?
Who will maintain them?
Who will Police them?
If evicted where will the travellers go?
Will the travellers be expected to pay and if so who will collect the money?
What happens if they do not pay?
Answers in any form will be gratefully accepted.
cllr Andrew McCormick, Basingstoke says...
8:28pm Wed 9 Sep 09
"No to traveller sites" means more illegal encampments next year, more faeces left next to peoples' homes, schools and community buildings.
"No misuse" (x3) to know a problem exists and do nothing about it is in itself a misuse of resources, more is spent on welfare checks, evictions, and clearing up than would be spent on a transit site one-off and Police S61.
"more powers to the Police" they aren't even able to use their existing powers without a transit site.
"change EU law" the first thing the MEPs will consider is travellers' rights. Any EU law change requires EU concensus and this might take years to achieve.
It's obvious that whoever came up with the suggestions above has not read Section 61 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, nor is aware of the ACSO interpretation of them and advice to Police officers, bearing in mind all Police actions must be safe from legal challenge from lawyers acting on behalf of travellers. There really isn't any point going over old ground. Transit sites, that's the answer, there's evidence out there to back it up. QED.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
8:12am Thu 10 Sep 09
You say whoever came up with that does not know anything about the situation - you muct include in that John Sheriden and Brian Donohoe - both Parliamentary Labour MP's. You should either condemn them as vocally as you condemn me or you will be guilty of duplicity, double standards and hypocrisy of the highest order.
I have quoted the adjournment debate in full - come out and criticize them right here and now so that the electorate know fully where you stand.
If not you are unworthy to be a councillor as you are supposed to represent all of your constituents regardless of their political beliefs.
Denounce them - or hold your peace.
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
10:58am Thu 10 Sep 09
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
11:06am Thu 10 Sep 09
When are you going to condemn the said MP's above. The public deserve to see that there is consistency here and this is not just a personal attack on me.
Do the decent thing condemn them for advocating what I have.
R_Johnson, Oakley says...
11:13am Thu 10 Sep 09
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
11:26am Thu 10 Sep 09
What legislation changes are you thinking of? How should the illegal encampments be 'dealt with'? Where should the travellers be moved to?
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
11:36am Thu 10 Sep 09
When are you going to come to terms with the failings in your proposals. Before you criticise others get your own house in order. Have the Popley councillors had enough and pushed you forward now then. If what R_Johnson says is correct and you are Julie Johnson you are well known as being a member/follower of the Basingstoke Labour Party. How can you then claim to not be playing party politics?
R_Johnson, Oakley says...
11:37am Thu 10 Sep 09
Speaking of losing elections Vernon. Didn't Julie Johnson do well in Old Basing!
You tell your wife to keep on going, I'm going to back of Phil Heath and let you get on with dealing with these bullies.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
11:43am Thu 10 Sep 09
I will continue to take on the Popley Labour front and their cronies.
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
11:48am Thu 10 Sep 09
What legislation changes are you thinking of? How should the illegal encampments be 'dealt with'? Where should the travellers be moved to?
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
11:56am Thu 10 Sep 09
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
12:17pm Thu 10 Sep 09
Where are these sites going to be ...err don't know...maybe Peaks Copse...but then may be not...it maybe coming to close or estate near you.
Who will fund the sites....maybe travellers...maybe taxpayers...err don't know
How much will you charge...not considered
Who will collect the charges - they will need paying, supervision (maybe protection)
Who will maintain the sites....err.....no answer at all
Who will police the sites full time to ensure they do not become crime dens.....err no answer...
What happens when the three month term is up..where do the travellers go.....err....don't know
What happens if you have to evict travellers.....no reply
What happens if you have to close the site down....no thoughts on that
What happens if they start to intimidate residents near to the camps...not considered...
What happens if you have an influx of new travellers because you have created a safe haven for existing ones...disregarded and not considered.
To my LEFT...I present to you the err..umm...dither..d
ither...if only...what if...maybe we would or could or should party!!
Can you take anything they say seriously - it may be you paying for it.
saynototravellers@ho
tmail.co.uk
I will campaign for anyone who is not in favour of travellers sites but I need your support. I will take this to the EU if need be. Help me to help you.
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
1:06pm Thu 10 Sep 09
Since the decision has not been made into whether there should or should not be transit sites, why would you expect a definitive answer to where they would be. Thats like deciding on a destination before deciding to go on holiday - pointless.
If you had done yoru research you would know that money has already been allocated by central government to pay for new sites, and any extras in running costs would be far less than we are already paying for clean-ups and evictions. It has already been stated previously that the travellers would be expected to pay rent to stay on a site, as they do on the current local permanent sites which I have also said previously that no-one had mentioned, maybe because they are well managed.
If time is restricted on a site, then eviction is much quicker and easier as there would be some sort of contract. If the rent is not paid to stay, then the same applies. If there is ASB issues, the police have the power to deal with it and the landlord can use it for reasons to evict.
If a site is full, the police can use the section 61 powers to move travellers immediately.
All this information is easily obtained and certainly no secret as it is online.
The only other point I can see that you have made is the worry of travellers buying the site - that would not be an option if it was council owned land, and there are laws to prevent over development of a site eg by more caravans than allowed id it were private land.
The main point you are ignoring is that none of these measures can be effectively implemented until there are sites allocated for travellers. Are this recognised ethnic minority not worthy of the same human rights as the rest of us?
What legislation changes are you thinking of? How should the illegal encampments be 'dealt with'? Where should the travellers be moved to?
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:30pm Thu 10 Sep 09
Do I not hear any condemnation of your MP's?
I think not.
Are you playing party politics?
I think so.
As for time consuming, you people are so bitter and twisted over me that if what I say carried no weight or gumption - then why does it bother you so?
Point 1 - Traveller sites - an idea of where they will set up should be given to the people/residents of Basingstoke so that they can make up their own minds if they want them on their doorstep.
Point 2 - central government funding - ah yes....taxpayers funds being used to fund travellers who pay nothing in taxes...right on...Labour ...see a problem ..must throw taxpayers money at it!!!
Point 3 - Eviction...surely that defeats the point...scenario...d
ecrepit traveller site funded by taxpayers...turned into CRIME DEN....and travellers still on our streets...re...Jim Sheridan....
Point 4 If a site is full..police can move travellers on....what is to stop looking to give police the powers to do so now. I thought if you looked at the word traveller - that meant your aim was to travel - if you have travellers in situ for 3 months+ they are not really travellers they are almost resident. You haven't answered my question of where they go from there..another site...back on the streets. If you keep them in and around Basingstoke they will become almost resident here.
Point 5 - Ethnic minority - the old chestnut - you forget who you are speaking to - an afro-caribbean man....who works hard, pays his taxes, follows the law that looks after his house and family properly - I do not want travellers in and around Basingstoke. I have seen the trouble they have caused this year.
If travellers were made to follow what they claim to be - they would be just that - travellers - hence no encampments of over a night or two anywhere.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:39pm Thu 10 Sep 09
as you mentioned holiday and travellers in your comment - you may wish to take one or two on your next holiday as you are so willing to provide for them.
I remember not so long ago Jane Frankum being in the paper on Aldermaston Open Space denouncing traveller encampments there. If she has the NIMBY about her then why should others have it foisted on them.
JacquesMeahof, Hampshire says...
1:50pm Thu 10 Sep 09
I believe that with Rights come Responsibilities. The travellers have the responsibility to behave in a lawful manner, pay taxes, not intimidate the settled public etc. Until they keep their side of the bargain why on earth should they play the 'Rights' card.
The people that make these rules (local government, UK or EU government) are so far out of step with the people they represent it's obscene.
Could ANYONE please be honest and declare now in public where these proposed transit sites are going to be in Basingstoke? I would bet that no-one would dare to do this.
Unless these sites are in the middle of a field, 20 miles from any housing then whereever you propose them you will be alienating the local residents.
R_Johnson, Oakley says...
1:50pm Thu 10 Sep 09
Point 1 - Traveller sites:
There must be *some* idea or suggested sites for these in mind. The Borough is finite, space is limited.
Point 2 - Paying any money at all to site travellers is sickening, but we have to accept it will be necessary. Ultimately, it will come out of the public purse just as paying benefits to the sick, lame and lazy does.
Point 3 - Eviction just becomes a vicious cycle
Point 4 - If the Police can shoot an innocent man dead in the whim of a moment, why can't they shift travellers? If the police can seize an uninsured car from a low level criminal, why the hell can't they crush the illegal vehicles used by 'travellers'?
Point 5 - This has nothing to do with an ethnic minority. It's the usual old left wing politically correct trash. The simple facts are;
It's not *my* fault you are disabled
It's not *my* fault you are gay
It's not *my* fault you have odd religious beliefs
It's not *my* fault you are a different race from me.
I don't expect *any* of those factors to be an excuse or mitigation for breaking the law or socially unacceptable behaviour.
Personally, I accept they have a right to exist, but I also hold the view of loading large container ships up with them and sinking them half way across the Atlantic would be a perfectly acceptable mode of dealing with them.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:53pm Thu 10 Sep 09
I think that the Popley Labour front and yourself have confirmed the depths and expediency that you will plunge to. I asked one simple little question, Will you or any of the others condemn the words from the House of Commons adjournment debate - January 2008 that I quoted in full from the extract re Jim Sheridan MP and Brian Donohoe MP - no condemnation was given, but you are willing to question my thoughts and reasoning - put your own house in order I suggest.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
1:58pm Thu 10 Sep 09
Thanks for the thoughts - nice to read some commonsense rather than left wing utopian drivel.
Jo Walke, says...
2:45pm Thu 10 Sep 09
It also seems that a transit site would hold no more than 15 vans - so possibly the borough would need more than one?
I think we should remember that the borough does not just consist of Basingstoke.
We'd be better to consider a wider range of evidence relating to the pros/cons of transit sites other than just something which is already over a year old.
How much towing of the party line is required on a subject does occassionally vary but towing of a party line would exist even in the smallest of local parties.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
3:04pm Thu 10 Sep 09
We had at two separate encampments in Sherborne St John over 25-30 caravans. If we provided sites that means two minimum for the here and now. I guarantee that if you provide sites you will encourage more to come so we may end with how ever many dotted in and around the Borough.
I agree that there is always some towing the party line - but you should not condemn someone out of hand for the party line which has happened here. If you have people in your own party who go against what you are saying then should stand yp and admit there is credence to what the person is saying - not just dismiss it as 'cloud cuckoo land etc'.
I am not sure what a temporary stopping place entails - but I will look into it for you.
Jo Walke, says...
3:38pm Thu 10 Sep 09
If a site is full then they would still be moved on.
A temporary stopping point requires less provision than that of a transit site - but the thing is whether it would enable the same powers to police as a transit site would.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
3:50pm Thu 10 Sep 09
I have looked into this and it is in Part 4 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The Act gives planning authorities a new power to be able to issue a temporary stop at the start of unauthorised development, before notice is served , speeding up enforcement. I am reading the text and I will get back to you.
Jo Walke, says...
3:56pm Thu 10 Sep 09
A temporary stopping place.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
4:06pm Thu 10 Sep 09
This is a temporary stopping place/point to travellers before enforcement.
Jo Walke, says...
4:22pm Thu 10 Sep 09
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
4:51pm Thu 10 Sep 09
If it was a matter of changing the Law, legislation then the rich (gentry) who also suffer when travellers move in have the power/wealth to influence (top politicians) and believe me, with wealth and power you can move mountains.
It never happened and it won’t ever happen.
However, the rich (gentry) took evasive action; they protected their land with better security and sturdier fences/gates.
Sadly however, we can’t take such actions, the places the travellers invade are public therefore, public access/safety is paramount, and don’t they know it.
So, do we keep the status quo and the travellers carry on, or do we, at least try to control their movements.
Just moving them on is not the answer.
Jo Walke, says...
5:00pm Thu 10 Sep 09
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
5:00pm Thu 10 Sep 09
That was the terminology used in the act - unauthorised development means unauthorised encampment.
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
6:18pm Thu 10 Sep 09
Option (1) we leave things as they are (status quo) leaving the travellers to their devices, and then move them on after a lengthy legal process, (at the taxpayer
expense) that’s without the clearing up cost.
Option (2) transit sites, traveller’s camps, call them what you like, that is option (2)
That’s all we have got, if the travellers could have be stopped, they would have been stopped.
Rich and powerful people have tried, and the same people have failed, we will never stop the travellers from travelling, we can get them evicted when they trespass, sadly, that a long drawn out procedure.
You can’t stop them from travelling, our hands are tied and as I said, we are trying to the best out of bad deal. And all this talk about no more travellers, “is pie in the sky”
You will never stop them.
Jo Walke, says...
6:42pm Thu 10 Sep 09
PopleyRebel - I dont think it's about stopping them travelling. Its about having some control over where they decide to pitch camp.
The options are pretty much as you have just set out.
What gets peoples goat is that they do use these new found 'rights' to impinge on law-abiding residents. Having trailers draw up willy-nilly is not really what anyone wants. We are all aware that there is expense incurred in moving them on/clearing up and the hindrance to residents whilst this elongated process in undertaken. These processes do not allow police to always intervene. A transit site would allow such intervention and travellers would pretty much have to go where directed. This would see that laybys/play areas in the borough are not frequented as they have been over recent months/years. There is not doubt that such a provision would cost money but it has been shown that such investment can reap rewards not just in terms of residential worries but also in terms of saving money eg Bristol.
The main issue, as I see it, has been the long lasting round of traveller encampments within the borough of late. The concerns that nearby encampment has brought to residents, the reported messes (of all untasteful varieties) and the expense being incurred by the borough.
Its worth noting perhaps also that as a borough we should be taking this issue into our own hands whilst we have the chance - if a need is found (and with the seemingly endless round of encampments of late) for transit sites the secretary of state could decide for us where they end up!
GC31, Basingstoke says...
10:40pm Thu 10 Sep 09
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
12:25am Fri 11 Sep 09
Vernon proposal is without doubt politically naive and misleading; the political process of change that Vernon is proposing will take years to get to the table and many more years to implement, (if you are lucky)
The first obstacle will be getting someone to listen, that could take 2/3 years, any action there after would take a further 3/5 years.
So Vernon what do we do about the travellers while we are waiting for you proposal to cross the first huddle???
Yes, the good old (status quo) travellers will carry on travelling causing havoc at the taxpayer’s expense; however, there is good news on the horizon, we can all shout at the travellers, “you wait, 8/10 years time you won’t doing that”
“Can really wait that long”
Vernon’s proposal is a none starter. “Pie in the sky”
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
8:16am Fri 11 Sep 09
I can see that there is obviously no condemnation of the Hon MP's mentioned above therefore, I and everyone else can see your comments are act of political expediency - no one could ever therefore take you seriously. Come out and say how you feel about YOUR two Labour MP's who have expressed opinions just like mine.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
8:19am Fri 11 Sep 09
Be the person you say you are and condemn them - show some consistency here.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
8:42am Fri 11 Sep 09
As for my pie in the sky - you will end up with 3 or 4 or even more sites in and around Basingstoke...being paid for by the good old taxpayer - more Labournomics. We spend YOU shell out for OUR disastrous policies.
In the process we will take away your green fields and misuse prime brown field sites in the name of protecting travellers rights.
What about my rights to have my council tax spent on roads, education, infrastructure etc.
Am I not entitled to have a say in where my tax is or is not spent?
This is not a dictatorship where we say you shall have transit sites and everyone who disagrees should deal with it and shut up.
You have your opinions and I am ehtitled to mine - let others judge.
Cairns, Basingstoke says...
10:26am Fri 11 Sep 09
Your all very boring, so what if you have moved 20 camps on, it means nothing if they are just moving round the area. Personally I do not want these theiving filthy scumbags anywhere near my house, our schools or our playing fields.
They choose there way of life because it suits them, they do not want temporaty sites. It would be too easy to catch them once they have tured over your garden shed.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
10:28am Fri 11 Sep 09
No condemnation then? Political expediency of the highest order. Denigrate and denounce others of another view - but refuse to condemn those from your own party who agree with their view. You had better keep quiet and learn some good grace and manners.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
10:33am Fri 11 Sep 09
I understand your sentiments - I have been trying to argue your case. I say no to travellers sites as well.
It would have been nice to have had a civil debate...but when the Popley Labour lynch and heckle mob are in town that is impossible.
As for representatives - I am just a member of the public airing his views. I belong and am a member of no political party - I am standing up for what I believe in.
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
10:39am Fri 11 Sep 09
As for the MPs, I have stated my position in that I couldnt care a jot about what they said. Why should I be interested? Arent they Scottish MPs anyway? Doesnt Scotland make its own decisions these days?
All the answers to Mr Butchers questions have been posted, and still no clarification on his vague, pass the buck suggestions. No surprise there.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
10:47am Fri 11 Sep 09
Your attacks are woeful and pitiful. If the conservatives are leading the council so what. I have campaigned for no travellers sites - no political bias there.
The MP's you deride as Scottish are members of the party you stood for in Old Basing? Oh yes, is the PM and your party leader not Scottish?
Have I stood for election in any political party - I don't think so. Why do I need to condemn anyone though?
Tell me - if my views are so shallow and baseless why they grate on you so much. People will no doubt make up their own minds
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
11:03am Fri 11 Sep 09
I must thank you and the Popley Labour Font though!!!
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
11:24am Fri 11 Sep 09
I have never said your views were shallow or baseless, and they certainly dont grate on me. There is a possibility that I might even agree with some of your solutions if you were to let us all know exactly what they were.
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
12:06pm Fri 11 Sep 09
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
12:06pm Fri 11 Sep 09
Let’s say I have landed on your planet,
(1) How long will it be before your proposal takes off and takes effect?
(2) What do we do about the problem in the meantime?
Jo Walke, says...
12:40pm Fri 11 Sep 09
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
12:59pm Fri 11 Sep 09
Jo Walke, says...
1:17pm Fri 11 Sep 09
We didn't get to the bottom of temporary stopping places and whether the same enforcement options apply to those as would transit sites.
ChinehamIan, Chineham says...
1:24pm Fri 11 Sep 09
If I owned a caravan and I camped on your property would you be happy ? I think not.
BasingBloke, Basingstoke says...
1:41pm Fri 11 Sep 09
ChinehamIan, Chineham says...
1:45pm Fri 11 Sep 09
Jo Walke, says...
2:08pm Fri 11 Sep 09
However I would be in favour of a site if this allows for decent residents to not be disturbed and save the time/trouble/money being spent as is happening at the moment.
The way the law and legislation (both UK & Euro) currently stands does not allow for such zero tolerance (rightly or wrongly). Whilst any proposal for change works its way through the system it seems that the quickest and perhaps more cost effective solution (I use solution loosely) would be to provide something site wise - be that at borough or county level - with the enforcement powers that such would allow.
I dont want to see a waste of money or authority time but this is what is happening right now with public funds.
Indeed I would also like to see proper enforcement taken with regards to all the other little foibles that travellers appear to get away with eg litter, criminal damage, road fund etc etc
ChinehamIan, Chineham says...
2:40pm Fri 11 Sep 09
ChinehamIan, Chineham says...
2:59pm Fri 11 Sep 09
JacquesMeahof, Hampshire says...
5:27pm Fri 11 Sep 09
ChinehamIan, Chineham says...
7:08pm Fri 11 Sep 09
ChinehamIan, Chineham says...
7:09pm Fri 11 Sep 09
Julie44, Basingstoke says...
8:00pm Fri 11 Sep 09
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
10:26pm Fri 11 Sep 09
Surprise surprise though - the vitriol was saved for me. ChinehamIan, JacquesMeahof, R_Johnson, BasingBloke & Cairns hopefully our views are the ones that will dictate council policy.
Of course the travellers broke on to Carpenters Down - I have been passed there and how many caravans are there... between 10 - 15. That is one full transit site according to the Popley Labour Front. No one has yet said where these sites are going.....residents of Basingstoke think carefully do you want one next to you. As Jane Frankum said about Aldermaston Open Space....not on my doorstep. To use Julie 44's holiday analogy - would you pay for your holiday, pack you bags and then choose your destination.....well that is what the Labour councillors, etc want us to accept. They want the people of Basingstoke to accept traveller sites without knowing their plans of where they are going to be - those are truly half-baked plans.
JacquesMeahof, Hampshire says...
12:03am Sat 12 Sep 09
PopleyRebel wrote:This kind of post does nothing to foster decent debate, PopleyRebel you should be ashamed of this.
Vernon please answer my questions (1) How long will it be before your proposal takes off and takes effect? (2) What do we do about the problem in the meantime? I sense pleasure in your response to the Popley field invasion, proving once and for all you are pompous arse, with your attitude and childish remarks the people of Popley voted wisely when sending your wife packing. That’s no disrespect to your wife; however, not having her as Cllr we avoided the embarrassment of having you around. Your wife must be very proud you. Now, answer my two questions.
JacquesMeahof, Hampshire says...
12:14am Sat 12 Sep 09
For those that can't be bothered it involved guns......
Anyone remember that the *travellers* camped at Peak Copse had illegal firearms found when the Police had the gumption to investigate and search the site?
Could anyone that has a vote and an opinion please vote against the candidates that support anything less than moving the travellers on?
Surely we can't be the weakest borough in the area, can we?
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
9:40am Sat 12 Sep 09
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
2:18pm Sat 12 Sep 09
You have shown the depth and level of political expediency in the Laour ranks by refusing to condemn those MP's. You resorting to abuse shows your yobbish dictatorial nature. Your unwillingness to accept that everyone is entitled to their own view shows an incapacity to debate and hold a rational conversation. I do not need to lower myself to your level to get my point across.....in fact it is YOU and your cronies who cannot hold a candle to me. To bring my wife into things takes an extreme base nature that lowers you to amoeba ranks and your brain capacity is no better than one.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
2:38pm Sat 12 Sep 09
1) Do you want travellers site on your doorstep
2) Do you think that taxpayers should pay for sites, be it through local government (council tax) or central government.
3) Do you think that it is rational to accept travellers site in principle when no one knows how many, or where they are likely to be.
4) Do you think that we should have to maintain sites for travellers when they contribute nothing.
BasingBloke, Basingstoke says...
6:04pm Sat 12 Sep 09
jo walke- good reasoned points
but never mind about us being the weakest borough in the area is our country one of the (or the) weakest in eu? travellers, imigration etc? as a nation we have gone to soft and to liberal - to acomodating quite litrally ;-)
and travelers will not change their ways what ever is put in place imo (laws to deal with them or sites for them) the majority of them spoil it for the miniority of them
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
6:47pm Sat 12 Sep 09
You are expecting people to support your campaign without stating the facts, so for the sake of clarity please answer my two questions,
(1) How long will it be before your proposal takes off and takes effect?
(2) What do we do about the problem in the meantime?
Its your call
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
8:33pm Sat 12 Sep 09
You have some resentment toward Labour Councillors I.E Popley, is this because you or a family member has aspirations or in fact had aspirations of becoming a Councillor and failed miserably.
Vernon replied, 6.38 same day
How sad - that you have to bring my wife and personal life into this debate. It proves that Labour have nothing to say.
Its very clear Vernon named his wife,
R_Johnson, Oakley says...
9:19am Sun 13 Sep 09
This is the ongoing attack on Vernon by the Popley Five. Driven by Mrs Frankum - despite her denials;
"Well despite the comments about me and the members of my family not one of us is on, or registered on the Gazette site.
But hey why let a few things like truth or facts get in the way when some people seem to be on a mission. Quite frankly I am too busy working in the wards to have time for such games? "
Quite right! Why let truth or facts get in the way? Like those expenses Jane Frankum claimed. Everytime the are posted here, they magically disappear.... In the politics of bad smells, YOU STINK.
Jo Walke, says...
1:36pm Sun 13 Sep 09
Cllr McCormick/Julie44 - it is not section 61 that relates to the availability of sites but section 62.
Both of these also require that the landowner must request any unauthorised 'campers' to leave prior to use.
Vernon - 1) any sites would not necessarily be on anyone's doorstep.
2) taxpayers are already having to fork out for legal, police and clean-up operations in relation to unauthorised encampments. a transit site most likely would mean taxpayers paying less. It would also mean residents being hindered less and an opportunity to consider taking payment from those using it.
3) Transit sites can be quite small and it would make sense for them to be so and I, as I think others probably do, would not want to see a large one. I think possible location should be looked at.
4) see 2 above - I see it as a way of doing the best for residents/taxpayers not literally providing for travellers. A site could charge rent and there wouldn't be much choice in them having to cough up for it.
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says...
4:34pm Sun 13 Sep 09
1) Have we been told where these proposed site(s) will be - if they are near any residential area you will have real opposition to it. Is this the real reason the Popley Labour Front want to bulldoze this through.
2) We are likely to end up with the worst of both worlds - we will end up with transit sites and traveller encampments as more travellers descend on us as we have created a haven for them.
3) If transit sites are small they will fill up quickly - how many will be needed? We have had over 30 caravans in an encampment in Sherborne St John and at Carpenters Down there are around 20 right now. If you add on the other caravans in and around Basingstoke there may be 40 - 50 at a rough guess. If these sites carry the 12 caravans permitted - as per Jane Frankum, we could be looking at 4 or more sites. Where are these locations in Basingstoke going to come from. This is not even taking into account the fact that you will encourage more travellers here. These are families and communities that network together you will be inundated. What do you do then - build more sites? Let the overflow hit the streets....best of both worlds...traveller sites paid for and maintained by the taxpayer...and additionally travellers on the streets...with clean up costs...etc.
4) Travellers use their way of life to opt out of paying their way - are you certain they will pay. If not, then what will happen...eviction...
and if so to where...back on the streets? If by some miracle they do pay - who will collect this and administer these sites..they will need paying and of course there will be the overheads to be charged. No different to the costs we have now - will the rent cover part of the cost, the whole cost...what level will it be charged at?
It is easy to say sites, sites, sites...reality is another thing. Basingstoke is being bullied into creating sites and with the dithering going on they sense an opportunity to get their way. We need a full and resounding no.
Jo Walke, says...
5:39pm Sun 13 Sep 09
No, we havn't been provided with any site proposals but then I wouldn't necessarily expect that to be the case yet. Naturally there would be opposition to sites near to residential areas - this is not what I am advocating.
(I am sure that there are residents who would rather have these travellers placed somewhere rather than have to pass by irregular road/park side unauthorised encampments)
The largest size (best practice) of transit site gives a number of 15. If a, or even more than one, site was given the go ahead then there should be no reason to provide any further. Given the figures you provide I would suggest that we need room, as a borough, not as a town of 30. The smaller the provision of a site the less impact to residents.
If rents were charged then the cost of maintenance etc should be covered in full. However, if providing a site brings savings against clean up/legal actions then as taxpayers we would still be in pocket if no rent were charged.
Its easy to say no sites, no sites, no sites...but again reality is another thing.
Town Guard, Basingstoke says...
6:16pm Sun 13 Sep 09
The thing is that constantly evicting people doesn’t solve the problem of them camping in unsuitable places and being anti-social.
There are three broad options: 1 Continue the eviction merry go round, and bloc up small sites, ensuring that even the most reasonable of travellers get more and more anti-social and camp in more an more inappropriate places and the cost continues to spiral.
Provide some small sites and sort the “sheep from the goats” – those willing to go to approve sites and pay rent (or even buy their own site) and clamp down hard on those who don’t. Why not get the national lottery to fund it.
The third option is force them off the road and send them to the top of the homeless list. Then of course some of the people complaining loudest that they don’t want travellers on their doorstep might find them living in Housing Association property in Merton Rise. Or they might find them living in large detached houses in Basingstoke with the Tax Payer paying housing benefit to a private landlord.
ChinehamIan, Chineham says...
8:55am Mon 14 Sep 09
2:38pm Sat 12 Sep 09
i would like to throw this open to everyone out there.
1) Do you want travellers site on your doorstep
2) Do you think that taxpayers should pay for sites, be it through local government (council tax) or central government.
3) Do you think that it is rational to accept travellers site in principle when no one knows how many, or where they are likely to be.
4) Do you think that we should have to maintain sites for travellers when they contribute nothing.
Vernon - ABSOLUTELY NO, NO, No & NO to all 4 questions.
JacquesMeahof, Hampshire says...
10:11am Mon 14 Sep 09
ChinehamIan wrote:+1
vernonbutcher, basingstoke says... 2:38pm Sat 12 Sep 09 i would like to throw this open to everyone out there. 1) Do you want travellers site on your doorstep 2) Do you think that taxpayers should pay for sites, be it through local government (council tax) or central government. 3) Do you think that it is rational to accept travellers site in principle when no one knows how many, or where they are likely to be. 4) Do you think that we should have to maintain sites for travellers when they contribute nothing. Vernon - ABSOLUTELY NO, NO, No & NO to all 4 questions.
PopleyRebel, basingstoke says...
9:28am Wed 16 Sep 09
(1) How long will it be before your proposal takes off and takes effect?
(2) What do we do about the problem in the meantime?
A bund is being built on open space along Popley Way, Popley, to stop travellers setting up base there.
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
R_Johnson, Oakley says...
11:56am Mon 7 Sep 09