Not 100% sure where I stand on this one. But the long and short of it as it seems to me is that they have built on land without planning permission. Would anyone be allowed to get away with that?

Have they been offered an alternative site and or homes?

Two things that stagger me though. Firstly their denial that the land is Green belt. And the hazardous waste FFS talk about not doing yourself a favour.

What don’t I know

Que??

Sadly I think it will really kick off and cement a lot of people opinions about travellers.

Would anyone be allowed to get away with that?

Have they been offered an alternative site and or homes?

1) No, they shouldn’t be

2) Yes, and they refused.

Seems quite clear cut to me…except that they’re travellers and own the land.

I think you have to see past those view on this one, we are talking about a lot of people.

Seems quite clear cut to me…except that they’re travellers and own the land

Ah they do keep saying they bought it. So are we saying it was never their intention to play by the rules?

Evicting Gypsies isn’t the best idea in my opinion. Where do they expect them to go???

I really think its best in this case to work with them. Near where I live we used to get serious problem with travellers. Not trouble but caravans, horses etc all down the sides of the a19.

Now there is a purpose built community for them. Out of the way with facilities. Works for both sides.

Where do they expect them to go???

Is one of the problems the fact they offered them homes rather than a site. Or was a site on the table?

The figure to move them being banded about was £19Million! i would rather 40 set’s of travelers all stayed in one place that they payed for themselves than blow millions of taxpayers money making a point about planning, more than likely they will just do the same thing else where. Im no sticking up for them it just looks like we are wasting money.
Tell me more about the hazardous waste bit.

I haven’t read anywhere about a site. I thought it was just homes.

Which they will never go for, A site with water facilities would be the cheapest to sort and would provide them with what they need.

This is the one near me.

Clicky

Tell me more about the hazardous waste bit.

Videos show what claims to be asbestos, roofing mainly I think . The fly tipping around the site is very bad

This is the one near me.

Very nice, passed there last night, lots of kids in waistcoats on mountain bikes.

Basildon council have spent around £10million, and nearly 10 years trying to get rid of them – source local basildon free paper.

Also, they have all been offered council houses, or similar. According to local paper they have refused them.

There is no disputing the fact that some of them are there without planning permission. This is fact, and has been agreed by both sides – published in many newspapers and bbc news etc etc.

I live about 5 miles away. It appears to be difficult to have a sensible conversation about this without people shouting “pikey scum”, or alternatively “racist”

I wonder where they are going to go. Most of the fields around here have had large heavy implements put in the gateways over the last few months.

Ahhh ha.. travellers.

Up Norfolk way there be a lot of em’ Wisbech in Cambs has always had an issue with them. It’s one of those age old arguments, freedom to roam/travel without prejudice etc. Well if you ask most they just want to be left alone to do as they please, who can really argue with that, hand on heart. All this talk about putting them in sites is based upon a more sedate society who crave settlement. It’s ignorant to place your own thoughts and ideas on someone else’s point of view. The un subtle argument of “it’d be fine if they pay taxes like the rest of us and scam all benefits” is a limited argument and the easiest thing to pick up on. Get to the root of their being and then decide the best course of action for them, not your own limited POV.
I’m a bit controversial today, a bit angsty for some reason, must be cos’ my boilers just packed up and I’m in no doubt I’ll need a new one.

godzilla, I think the number 40 is the figure that was allowed. It’s now in excess of 100 families.
The best solution seems to be a cap now and some mutual agreements regards the waste.
Left to go on it could be 200 families.

I’ll just put the kettle on.

Vanessa Redgrave has lots of land and wants to be the travellers friend , sounds like a solution to me .

I’m interested to know if that’s where they call home? Do they even travel anymore?

By all accounts, no they do not, except when evicted. Certainly the ones in the fens (Smithy, Willingham, etc) seem to stay in the same place for ages. The one by the Science Park/A14 has had the same families in for as long as I can remember.

I agree that it’s probably going to turn nasty. I seem to reall helpful citizens of the free world showing them how to make petrol bombs and gas bombs to resist the eviction. That will end well.

half listening to C4 news last night it’s not all of the families that are getting evicted it’s the ones who built houses (without permission) on green belt land, the families concerned don’t want to travel, indeed don’t have caravans anymore – which makes me wonder why they refused alternative housing (didn’t mention alt housing on C4)

Does sound like
they bought the land
it was clearly stated as green belt and building would not be allowed without permission
they built
they now get kicked off

Any facts I’m missing?

As soon as Vanessa wedgwave got involved they lost me.

Anyone remember the Rik Mayall(Kevin Turvey possibly) poem about Vanessa Wedgwave?

Donk I agree with the theory, but it just means they will end up some where else.. personally I don’t know what the solution is.

Can’t you just ask for some free yoghurt?

Can’t you just ask for some free yoghurt?

8)

Most travellers don’t travell any more as local councils and land owners have made it almost imposible to do so legaly by blocking access to land , failing to provide the sites they agreed to ,and adopting an aggresive eviction policy .

I am opposed to green belt developmont but find it ironic that 18 million is being spent on evicting travellers from a partial green belt plot that they own when central govt is changing the law to open up rural developmemt and remove planning restrictions wholesale for home builders and supermarkets.

They have not been offered alternative sites, The most vunerable have been offerered alternative accomodation but only in a way that would split up their wider familys.

the #travellers hashtag on twitter has been quite entertaining.

My 2p;

You can’t expect to live how you want and where you want with no repercussions or questions.

If you live in a country then you are a part of that society and comuunity and you have to accept that there will be rules.

Agrees with wwaswas – look at that bloke who built a house inside a barn (on a green belt) then removed the barn claiming it had always been there (or something like that). They tore the house down. Its da roolz.

central govt is changing the law to open up rural developmemt and remove planning restrictions

this bothers me. I can see the point of evicting dale farm coz otherwise I assume you open th egates for others doig similar but if govt is making it a free for all anyway….. 🙄

The land they bought may have been “green belt” but wasn’t it actually a bit of a scrapyard before?

I suspect there are good arguments on both sides, although I’d love to see the travellers tax returns and vehicle insurance…

You just cannot completely declare yourself free of all the rules and restrictions of society.

But yes – the deciding issue for me was Vanessa Redgrave… 👿

So, the “travellers” were told they couldn’t build on some land because of the unavailability of planning permission and presumably (having been stupid enough to buy this worthless land in the first place) were told that the penalty for ignoring this was to be moved out, in time.

So they built without planning permission.

They also assumed that the rules didn’t apply to them, so they didn’t formulate a fall-back plan for when they got moved out so they’d have somewhere to go and – we’re supposed to feel sorry for them?

Vanessa redgrave’s property sounds like a good move, to me.

There is a bloke living in a caravan on green belt between Knaresborough and Harrogate – he has been there a while, slowly making it more of a permanent home – paved areas outside, security lighting, fences etc. Then he put in an application to make it a permanent residence, arguing he had been living there, unobstructed, for x years.

Not sure what the current state of play is on that one – although I know the local residents were trying to block the application (they were powerless to stop him being on the land * temporarily in a caravan*as it was his own but you can see what could happen at Dale Farm – they suddenly put in an application for permanent housing and another piece of green belt gone forever…

EDIT:

The land they bought may have been “green belt” but wasn’t it actually a bit of a scrapyard before?

And not far from the place I mention above, someone had a piece of land (not sure if it was green belt) and couldn’t get planning on it so started dumping waste metal on there until it became an eyesore and eventually the council passed permission to build a house…

why don’t they just hide the houses with hay?

Genius

why don’t they just hide the houses with hay?

Genius wahey a chance to try out my tea and kittens plugin 🙂

peterfile – that is the one I was talking about – I think they did rip it down.

Is that the one that is two completely different styles cut and shut together?

BBC News – Travellers wanted £6m to leave.