The Politics Thread

[Worthy4England]

I dunno, seems like a reasonable approach to trading. Where there's muck, there's brass.

[William the White]

I dunno, seems like a reasonable approach to trading. Where there's muck, there's brass.

A joke with a seriously chilling feel to it... capitalism into one of its periodic serious crises built into the system...

[Worthy4England]

I dunno, seems like a reasonable approach to trading. Where there's muck, there's brass.

A joke with a seriously chilling feel to it... capitalism into one of its periodic serious crises built into the system...

well at least we're distributing the debt much more equally.

[Worthy4England]

The best way to shoo the theiving pikey bastards away is to fire air rifle pellets into the individual panels of their caravans (which they'll have nicked anyway). Costs a fortune to replace.

I have made a note of this.

Still not seen any responses yet from the ardent defenders of travellers rights, as to exactly how near their particular properties, the gypsies haul up on a regular basis...

So Will, we've got the gypsies 500m from Boris, 1.2m from Bish and directly opposite me. How about yourself? Do you have the quaint traditional Romany songs around the campfire right next door to Chez Blanc?

[thebish]

I dunno, seems like a reasonable approach to trading. Where there's muck, there's brass.

A joke with a seriously chilling feel to it... capitalism into one of its periodic serious crises built into the system...

well at least we're distributing the debt much more equally.

I'm still waiting to hear just exactly how close to your house these traders roll up on a regular basis, Worthy...

[Worthy4England]

I dunno, seems like a reasonable approach to trading. Where there's muck, there's brass.

A joke with a seriously chilling feel to it... capitalism into one of its periodic serious crises built into the system...

well at least we're distributing the debt much more equally.

I'm still waiting to hear just exactly how close to your house these traders roll up on a regular basis, Worthy...

Think it's about 210 miles to the square mile - so they're just quaint little market traders, misunderstood by the wider society at large, blamed for problems outside of their control, just making an honest buck within the laws that are laid down for them by Parliament...

[Lord Kangana]

So a bit like speeding then.

[Worthy4England]

So a bit like speeding then.

Nothing so dangerous! Lend someone a few quid to get them up and running, and how do they repay you??! By not repaying you and precipitating a global financial crisis. All they're doing is trying to help those less well off. It's almost charitable.

[William the White]

The best way to shoo the theiving pikey bastards away is to fire air rifle pellets into the individual panels of their caravans (which they'll have nicked anyway). Costs a fortune to replace.

I have made a note of this.

Still not seen any responses yet from the ardent defenders of travellers rights, as to exactly how near their particular properties, the gypsies haul up on a regular basis...

So Will, we've got the gypsies 500m from Boris, 1.2m from Bish and directly opposite me. How about yourself? Do you have the quaint traditional Romany songs around the campfire right next door to Chez Blanc?

Oh - I missed this... No i don't have any of those, but have got several recordings on CD (actually, I do have some, from Romania)... I'm interested in music... 'World music' even... My two favourite, to the point of near-worship, singers, are North American and Portuguese/Mozambique...

I'm not sure if you feel my lack of experience of 'gypsy' encroachment in my life disables me from commenting about the issue... to be clear, I haven't any whatsoever...

But I don't think I've ever sought to trivialise or demean the stories of others...

And I think I'm allowed a thoughtful view (but no other kind) if i haven't been through it myself...

Are you implying I shouldn't?

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

What is your thoughtful view again, William?

That our travelling community is not a problem, or that it is, but not one that can be solved by solution that isn't worse than the problem? Or something else?

[William the White]

What is your thoughtful view again, William?

That our travelling community is not a problem, or that is, but not one that can be solved by solution that isn't worse than the problem? Or something else?

Thank you... bastard!

My preliminary position is that most of the time our travelling community - even when static [if you know what I mean] - is not a significant problem... People get on with life and even find ways of reaching each other, the kids in school make friends etc... (we are clearly on the list for knife sharpening, because about once every 6 months, the knock comes on the door, the traveller says do you want the knives sharpening, and you can come and watch if you like, and it will cost you a fiver... we say yes, we get brilliantly sharp knives for a bargain)...

There are clearly other times when the interface is much less happy - to which I'd say - every time a 'gyppo' does a bad deed it's possible to take the view that it's because they are a 'gyppo'... Whereas when caucasian fecked up idiot kid does the same on top o'th brow it ain't because they are white...

Both are vile and totally reprehesible behaviours, btw...

In response to your previous posts... I don't think people can be forced to 'settle and pay tax' in a society that has any claim to freedom... Forced settlement is what? Concentration camps? I think that the reason it's really difficult to know what to do with our traveller communities is that we close down, in practice, all options... We instruct them to move on, we forbid them to stay...

Is this too hard to understand? Is it too hard to offer the alternative? It's been in the law for decades. Proper, negotiated, sites for travelling communities. Put the law into practice...

[malcd1]

Just a few articles from the Bolton News.

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/bol ... ers__site/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/392 ... ds_seized/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/420 ... ers__site/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I also remember a recent 'theft amnesty' where the police asked our traveller friends to hand in stolen goods and there would be 'no questioned asked'. Generators, cars, trailers and lorries were handed in.


I don't have any statistics to back-up my claims but I would think that as a percentage more crimes are committed by travellers than the rest of the general public. Just my personal opinion.

[Worthy4England]

The best way to shoo the theiving pikey bastards away is to fire air rifle pellets into the individual panels of their caravans (which they'll have nicked anyway). Costs a fortune to replace.

I have made a note of this.

Still not seen any responses yet from the ardent defenders of travellers rights, as to exactly how near their particular properties, the gypsies haul up on a regular basis...

So Will, we've got the gypsies 500m from Boris, 1.2m from Bish and directly opposite me. How about yourself? Do you have the quaint traditional Romany songs around the campfire right next door to Chez Blanc?

Oh - I missed this... No i don't have any of those, but have got several recordings on CD (actually, I do have some, from Romania)... I'm interested in music... 'World music' even... My two favourite, to the point of near-worship, singers, are North American and Portuguese/Mozambique...

I'm not sure if you feel my lack of experience of 'gypsy' encroachment in my life disables me from commenting about the issue... to be clear, I haven't any whatsoever...

But I don't think I've ever sought to trivialise or demean the stories of others...

And I think I'm allowed a thoughtful view (but no other kind) if i haven't been through it myself...

Are you implying I shouldn't?

No, I'm not suggesting you shouldn't be allowed a thoughtful view. I'm suggesting you think about it a little more, you often seem happy to leap to the defence of anything you consider to be a minority view, whilst generally having no regard to impacts on wider society. By what stretch of the imagination, should my local community have to pay for the Council to come and clear up the shit-tip they leave (including human shit) every time they roll up on adjoining fields? I'm happy for them to have a travelling way of life, but why shouldn't they pay for the privilege themselves? Go through planning permission, pay for their own sites etc. The rocks that have now been put round the bits of land came at a cost, which part of the travelling community is offering to meet that cost?

Your response to mummy suggests that people can't be forced "to settle and pay tax". I think the former part would be difficult to police and enforce, but why should they get away with the latter (anymore than any other section of society)? Given that you're asking for proper negotiated sites, are you comfortable with the notion that they cover the costs of their upkeep (after all, it's to satisfy their choice)? How do we protect already resident communities if they don't want the proposed site on their doorstep - they should be given a yes or no choice too, shouldn't they? What do you propose we do if they all say "no"?

[BWFC_Insane]

The best way to shoo the theiving pikey bastards away is to fire air rifle pellets into the individual panels of their caravans (which they'll have nicked anyway). Costs a fortune to replace.

I have made a note of this.

Still not seen any responses yet from the ardent defenders of travellers rights, as to exactly how near their particular properties, the gypsies haul up on a regular basis...

So Will, we've got the gypsies 500m from Boris, 1.2m from Bish and directly opposite me. How about yourself? Do you have the quaint traditional Romany songs around the campfire right next door to Chez Blanc?

Oh - I missed this... No i don't have any of those, but have got several recordings on CD (actually, I do have some, from Romania)... I'm interested in music... 'World music' even... My two favourite, to the point of near-worship, singers, are North American and Portuguese/Mozambique...

I'm not sure if you feel my lack of experience of 'gypsy' encroachment in my life disables me from commenting about the issue... to be clear, I haven't any whatsoever...

But I don't think I've ever sought to trivialise or demean the stories of others...

And I think I'm allowed a thoughtful view (but no other kind) if i haven't been through it myself...

Are you implying I shouldn't?

No, I'm not suggesting you shouldn't be allowed a thoughtful view. I'm suggesting you think about it a little more, you often seem happy to leap to the defence of anything you consider to be a minority view, whilst generally having no regard to impacts on wider society. By what stretch of the imagination, should my local community have to pay for the Council to come and clear up the shit-tip they leave (including human shit) every time they roll up on adjoining fields? I'm happy for them to have a travelling way of life, but why shouldn't they pay for the privilege themselves? Go through planning permission, pay for their own sites etc. The rocks that have now been put round the bits of land came at a cost, which part of the travelling community is offering to meet that cost?

Your response to mummy suggests that people can't be forced "to settle and pay tax". I think the former part would be difficult to police and enforce, but why should they get away with the latter (anymore than any other section of society)? Given that you're asking for proper negotiated sites, are you comfortable with the notion that they cover the costs of their upkeep (after all, it's to satisfy their choice)? How do we protect already resident communities if they don't want the proposed site on their doorstep - they should be given a yes or no choice too, shouldn't they? What do you propose we do if they all say "no"?

It's not quite as simple as that though, plenty of people I don't want to live near, such as DMBs, who are a public nuisance, or folk with teenagers who have fooking karaoke parties on a weekday in their garden when I'm up at 5 the next day.

Not sure giving a choice is entirely right.

I do sympathise with the problem like, it's hard to know what to do about it, without being seen to persecute a minority. I do agree though that many travellers break the law with regards to tax, education of their children and more minor things such as littering and general noise and nuisance. Those things should be examined IMO.

The ones that don't and there are some, should be free to live their lifestyle of choice within reason, and yes it will still inconvenience some people but we probably have to put up with that as long as they are living on the right side of the law!

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

[Thank you... bastard!

My preliminary position is that most of the time our travelling community - even when static [if you know what I mean] - is not a significant problem... People get on with life and even find ways of reaching each other, the kids in school make friends etc... (we are clearly on the list for knife sharpening, because about once every 6 months, the knock comes on the door, the traveller says do you want the knives sharpening, and you can come and watch if you like, and it will cost you a fiver... we say yes, we get brilliantly sharp knives for a bargain)...

There are clearly other times when the interface is much less happy - to which I'd say - every time a 'gyppo' does a bad deed it's possible to take the view that it's because they are a 'gyppo'... Whereas when caucasian fecked up idiot kid does the same on top o'th brow it ain't because they are white...

Both are vile and totally reprehesible behaviours, btw...

In response to your previous posts... I don't think people can be forced to 'settle and pay tax' in a society that has any claim to freedom... Forced settlement is what? Concentration camps? I think that the reason it's really difficult to know what to do with our traveller communities is that we close down, in practice, all options... We instruct them to move on, we forbid them to stay...

Is this too hard to understand? Is it too hard to offer the alternative? It's been in the law for decades. Proper, negotiated, sites for travelling communities. Put the law into practice...

My pleasure.

I'm not sure I understand your point about the caucasian kid... when I think of travellers, I largely picture white people anyway? It certainly isn't a race issue, for me, put it that way...

If you read what I wrote, I think I talked about 'encouraged' rather than 'forced' settlement. And are you really arguing for a 'freedom not to pay tax'? (Resist a discussion of corporate tax avoidance, if you can.)

Anyway, I'm against ghettoisation and low social mobility, whatever the context... it seems a shame that we choose to do nothing about these detached, unwanted communities because the numbers are small enough to make that the easiest thing to do.

[Bruce Rioja]

But I don't think I've ever sought to trivialise or demean the stories of others...

Good, then you won't mind me saying that my having had first-hand experience of them has left me with thoughts aligned with those of Adolf Hilter when it comes to this lot!

[Worthy4England]

It's not quite as simple as that though, plenty of people I don't want to live near, such as DMBs, who are a public nuisance, or folk with teenagers who have fooking karaoke parties on a weekday in their garden when I'm up at 5 the next day.

Not sure giving a choice is entirely right.

I do sympathise with the problem like, it's hard to know what to do about it, without being seen to persecute a minority. I do agree though that many travellers break the law with regards to tax, education of their children and more minor things such as littering and general noise and nuisance. Those things should be examined IMO.

The ones that don't and there are some, should be free to live their lifestyle of choice within reason, and yes it will still inconvenience some people but we probably have to put up with that as long as they are living on the right side of the law!

Good to see the Planet Bollocks view, entering the world of reasoned debate.

You have the ability to look around the area you're choosing to live in. You could check whether Lilo Lil, living 2 doors down from your selected abode has 15 teenage kids and if the noise is unwarranted and constant get the Council involved. DMB's are a different problem and should be dealt with by separate legislation.

Either way, totally different than the Council saying "We've allocated this plot of land behind where you live, for the use of the teenage karaoke kids, hope you don't mind, but we're doing it anyhow".

[thebish]

But I don't think I've ever sought to trivialise or demean the stories of others...

Good, then you won't mind me saying that my having had first-hand experience of them has left me with thoughts aligned with those of Adolf Hilter when it comes to this lot!

and you wouldn't be alone. But unless you are actually proposing the Hitler solution - which was to gas/shoot/perform medical experiments on about a quarter of a million of them - or the Ustase solution of murdering of tens of thousands from Croatia and Bosnia at Jasenovac, which - presumably - you aren't, then surely there is a discussion to be had?

[thebish]

By what stretch of the imagination, should my local community have to pay for the Council to come and clear up the shit-tip they leave (including human shit) every time they roll up on adjoining fields? I'm happy for them to have a travelling way of life, but why shouldn't they pay for the privilege themselves? Go through planning permission, pay for their own sites etc.

I'd have no argument with any of that. It isn't my understanding that travellers are demanding free sites with free amenities and tax-exemption (not sure how tax has even entered this discussion.)

There have been several applications very local to me for land to be used for "travelling showman sites" - and all have been denied planning permission by the local authority.

I'm not sure the issue is providing FREE sites or even FREE amenities - the land under dispute in Basildon was bought by the travellers - it is THEIR land - they are quite happy to fund its development and installation of amenities (as I understand it).

The problem is with councils granting planning permission.

councils routinely grant planning permission for the (for the want of a better word) "settler" community - and the Tories are currently lining up thousands of acres of green belt land for development by their construction company fat-cat chums - the same privilege is NOT afforded to traveller communities, at least not on a sufficient scale to prevent the ongoing problem where you find them rolling up on land they should never be on right on your doorstep.

yes - they should pay for their sites - yes, they should pay for their upkeep and installation of amenities - but they can't really do that if councils won't grant planning permissions and will not set aside land that travellers could purchase and develop for the purpose.

I don't think this is the proverbial "rocket science". If travellers were genuinely offered the chance to develop sites of their own in enough places - then (as i said before) - I'd be one step behind you driving the bulldozer to evict them from places they shouldn't be - they would have no reason or excuse to be there. But I don't think we are anywhere near that situation - at the moment, they are pretty much prevented from travelling and blocked from settling...

[BWFC_Insane]

It's not quite as simple as that though, plenty of people I don't want to live near, such as DMBs, who are a public nuisance, or folk with teenagers who have fooking karaoke parties on a weekday in their garden when I'm up at 5 the next day.

Not sure giving a choice is entirely right.

I do sympathise with the problem like, it's hard to know what to do about it, without being seen to persecute a minority. I do agree though that many travellers break the law with regards to tax, education of their children and more minor things such as littering and general noise and nuisance. Those things should be examined IMO.

The ones that don't and there are some, should be free to live their lifestyle of choice within reason, and yes it will still inconvenience some people but we probably have to put up with that as long as they are living on the right side of the law!

!

Good to see the Planet Bollocks view, entering the world of reasoned debate.

You have the ability to look around the area you're choosing to live in. You could check whether Lilo Lil, living 2 doors down from your selected abode has 15 teenage kids and if the noise is unwarranted and constant get the Council involved. DMB's are a different problem and should be dealt with by separate legislation.

Either way, totally different than the Council saying "We've allocated this plot of land behind where you live, for the use of the teenage karaoke kids, hope you don't mind, but we're doing it anyhow".

It is different but you can easily end up with folk moving into the area you'd rather not. I agree that it's not fair, fully sympathise. But equally what do you do with them? Without a silly Hoboh esque answer of course....

What's frustrating is that they have a right to enjoy their chosen lifestyle but equally so do you, and I daresay you infringe on theirs a lot less than they do on yours. They might argue that if they were allocate proper plots that they wouldn't impinge on yours. Tough to really know what to do.

Does piss me off though that in many cases their kids are only schooled for a few weeks a year and then are pulled out and barely see the education system after that. That simply should not be allowed