Just ask em for 10 years back tax--- 10 years back DVLA tax---10 years council tax-----10 years car insurance for the £50k cars and watch them "travel" back to their estates in Eire.
Yes but... Does no one else think the police operation looks a bit heavy-handed; a bit sledgehammer to crack a nut-ish?
I'm afraid the inteligence and records of those concerned suggests that they have lengthy histories of violence and access to firearms. Its gone much better than i expected tbh but doubt sending a couple of vans would have had acheived the same result.
To be fair, it wasn't the travellers who wanted the ruck - it was the Jemima's and the Quinten's whose mummys and daddys put a silver spoon in their mouth and they are now rebelling against society by refusing to wash and support every 'no hope cause' going. I'm actually glad the the OB were heavy handed towards them. If my kids acted that that I would be mortified.
To be fair, it wasn't the travellers who wanted the ruck - it was the Jemima's and the Quinten's whose mummys and daddys put a silver spoon in their mouth and they are now rebelling against society by refusing to wash and support every 'no hope cause' going. I'm actually glad the the OB were heavy handed towards them. If my kids acted that that I would be mortified.
This thing about the law, and it should be the same for travellers and for those that stay put in houses, and after all the planning permission shenanigans, appeals, reviews and so on, then the law is the law and should be obeyed and enforced.
Well I heard somebody on the wireless say there is also a law that Basildon, and other councils, have to provide sites for travellers by law.
Apparantly the providing sites law is swerved left right and centre, but after 10 years of shenanigans the law regarding Dale Farm is one that the authorities have chosen to apply and enforce, at an estimated cost to date of some 18-20 million pounds.
Do you think that Basildon council, such champions of the law, will now apply the law to all people above the age of criminal responsibility regarding the illegality of riding their bicycles on the pavement?
Would you have a lower age limit (or upper one) regarding who gets the kicking? Or should they all get a kicking because each and every person on Dale Farm is scum?
Apparantly the providing sites law is swerved left right and centre, but after 10 years of shenanigans the law regarding Dale Farm is one that the authorities have chosen to apply and enforce, at an estimated cost to date of some 18-20 million pounds.
Do you think that Basildon council, such champions of the law, will now apply the law to all people above the age of criminal responsibility regarding the illegality of riding their bicycles on the pavement?
Just asking.
I don't know the true figure for the bill that Basildon Council have incurred but most of it is probably due to the unexpected and protracted legal action taken by the people who illegally built on part of the Dale Farm site and the cost of the police and bailiff operation to remove people from the site.
Basildon Council is democratically accountable to its residents. If residents object to the illegal buildings then surely any council has a duty to enforce the law.
Enforcement of the law isn't necessarily cheap but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be done - would you be happy for speeding motorists not to be pursued because it costs money to apprehend, charge and prosecute offenders or for fraudsters to go unpunished because of the high cost of investigation? If Basildon council had turned a blind eye they would have set a legal precedent for other illegal developments across the country.
Do Basildon Council have a policy of tolerance of breaching this law? If not, I am sure that its residents will bring transgressions to its attention because riding bicycles on the pavement is prohibited by Section 72 of the Highway Act 1835, amended by Section 85(1) of the Local Government Act 1888. This is punishable by a fixed penalty notice of £30 under Section 51 and Schedule 3 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
You and I might not agree with every law but everyone is subject to them. If we feel strongly enough we get them changed by changing society's attitude so that our elected representatives understand the need for change. I'm not convinced that the people of Dale Farm have done anything to persuade society that the planning laws need changing in a way that helps there cause.
Do you think that Basildon council, such champions of the law, will now apply the law to all people above the age of criminal responsibility regarding the illegality of riding their bicycles on the pavement?
Just asking.
Good question. Probably not, because enforcing that law is seen as responsibility of the police, rather than local councils. Most police forces have taken a stance of deliberately turning a blind eye to this particular offence because the consequences are far less serious than the possible consequences of upholding the law: An accident involving a cyclist and a pedestrian on the pavement will in most cases result in only a few bumps and bruises. An accident involving that same cyclist and a motor vehicle could well result in death. No police service would want that on their hands.
ok fella, still cant compare it to what happend in yugoslavia and africa tho, plus if i built an extension on my house without planning permission i would expect it to be pulled down at some point thats why normal law abiding citizens dont do it.
They do! and Greenwich Council ignore it, despite neighbors protests.
Apparantly the providing sites law is swerved left right and centre, but after 10 years of shenanigans the law regarding Dale Farm is one that the authorities have chosen to apply and enforce, at an estimated cost to date of some 18-20 million pounds.
Do you think that Basildon council, such champions of the law, will now apply the law to all people above the age of criminal responsibility regarding the illegality of riding their bicycles on the pavement?
Just asking.
I don't know the true figure for the bill that Basildon Council have incurred but most of it is probably due to the unexpected and protracted legal action taken by the people who illegally built on part of the Dale Farm site and the cost of the police and bailiff operation to remove people from the site.
Basildon Council is democratically accountable to its residents. If residents object to the illegal buildings then surely any council has a duty to enforce the law.
Enforcement of the law isn't necessarily cheap but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be done - would you be happy for speeding motorists not to be pursued because it costs money to apprehend, charge and prosecute offenders or for fraudsters to go unpunished because of the high cost of investigation? If Basildon council had turned a blind eye they would have set a legal precedent for other illegal developments across the country.
Do Basildon Council have a policy of tolerance of breaching this law? If not, I am sure that its residents will bring transgressions to its attention because riding bicycles on the pavement is prohibited by Section 72 of the Highway Act 1835, amended by Section 85(1) of the Local Government Act 1888. This is punishable by a fixed penalty notice of £30 under Section 51 and Schedule 3 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
You and I might not agree with every law but everyone is subject to them. If we feel strongly enough we get them changed by changing society's attitude so that our elected representatives understand the need for change. I'm not convinced that the people of Dale Farm have done anything to persuade society that the planning laws need changing in a way that helps there cause.
I have agreed we're all subject to the law, including Basildon (and other) councils who ought by law provide suitable sites for travellers to go to.
The people evicted during this action will end up going somewhere, and personally I don't believe they all have vast estates waiting for them elsewhere.
I have agreed we're all subject to the law, including Basildon (and other) councils who ought by law provide suitable sites for travellers to go to.
The people evicted during this action will end up going somewhere, and personally I don't believe they all have vast estates waiting for them elsewhere.
Agreed. I don't know the ins and outs but Basildon Council have a duty not to let anyone become homeless. The problem is where do they provide the traveller sites within their boundary. I don't know the law on this but it must be a nightmare for a council trying to plan because, presumably you can't be sure how many travellers will turn up in your area at any given time. Similar problems happened to local authorities near ports and airports when they were faced with sudden unexpected influxes of migrants and couldn't cope with providing accommodation/health/schooling etc.
The people evicted during this action will end up going somewhere, and personally I don't believe they all have vast estates waiting for them elsewhere.
A (very) quick Google search reveals that Basildon has 116 legal traveller pitches so I'm sure they'll find somewhere. If not, maybe they could piss off back to Ireland? Except nobody there wants the feckless shites either.
How the f**k are Basildon Coucil making them homeless? They are travellers and they have caravans, i.e homes on wheels. If they no longer have caravans then they're not travellers and should go down the same route as everyone else to be housed. Cake and eat it? They want a frigging cherry on top!
The people evicted during this action will end up going somewhere, and personally I don't believe they all have vast estates waiting for them elsewhere.
A (very) quick Google search reveals that Basildon has 116 legal traveller pitches so I'm sure they'll find somewhere. If not, maybe they could piss off back to Ireland? Except nobody there wants the feckless shites either.
According to another quick google search from a BBC report there are not enough pitches anywhere, let alone in basildon....my own local authority, lewisham, don't provide any at the moment, although there used to be some near Lewisham station.
Comments
This thing about the law, and it should be the same for travellers and for those that stay put in houses, and after all the planning permission shenanigans, appeals, reviews and so on, then the law is the law and should be obeyed and enforced.
Well I heard somebody on the wireless say there is also a law that Basildon, and other councils, have to provide sites for travellers by law.
Apparantly the providing sites law is swerved left right and centre, but after 10 years of shenanigans the law regarding Dale Farm is one that the authorities have chosen to apply and enforce, at an estimated cost to date of some 18-20 million pounds.
Do you think that Basildon council, such champions of the law, will now apply the law to all people above the age of criminal responsibility regarding the illegality of riding their bicycles on the pavement?
Just asking.
I thought it was supposed to be an eviction, is it supposed to be a doing as well?
Would you have a lower age limit (or upper one) regarding who gets the kicking? Or should they all get a kicking because each and every person on Dale Farm is scum?
I don't know the true figure for the bill that Basildon Council have incurred but most of it is probably due to the unexpected and protracted legal action taken by the people who illegally built on part of the Dale Farm site and the cost of the police and bailiff operation to remove people from the site.
Basildon Council is democratically accountable to its residents. If residents object to the illegal buildings then surely any council has a duty to enforce the law.
Enforcement of the law isn't necessarily cheap but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be done - would you be happy for speeding motorists not to be pursued because it costs money to apprehend, charge and prosecute offenders or for fraudsters to go unpunished because of the high cost of investigation? If Basildon council had turned a blind eye they would have set a legal precedent for other illegal developments across the country.
Do Basildon Council have a policy of tolerance of breaching this law? If not, I am sure that its residents will bring transgressions to its attention because riding bicycles on the pavement is prohibited by Section 72 of the Highway Act 1835, amended by Section 85(1) of the Local Government Act 1888. This is punishable by a fixed penalty notice of £30 under Section 51 and Schedule 3 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
You and I might not agree with every law but everyone is subject to them. If we feel strongly enough we get them changed by changing society's attitude so that our elected representatives understand the need for change. I'm not convinced that the people of Dale Farm have done anything to persuade society that the planning laws need changing in a way that helps there cause.
OK, if I understand you correctly you say make all the people there homeless, and then give them a kicking even if they are babies.
I have agreed we're all subject to the law, including Basildon (and other) councils who ought by law provide suitable sites for travellers to go to.
The people evicted during this action will end up going somewhere, and personally I don't believe they all have vast estates waiting for them elsewhere.
At least floss eh.
ffs
According to another quick google search from a BBC report there are not enough pitches anywhere, let alone in basildon....my own local authority, lewisham, don't provide any at the moment, although there used to be some near Lewisham station.
Some maybe a nice warm cell somewhere would be appropriate?
They've all been offered council houses. The offer fulfils the authority's duty to the homeless.
There is no duty on local authorities to provide picthes for Travellers. There used to be but it was abolished in the 1980s.