Dale Farm Travellers

Message boards : Politics : Dale Farm Travellers

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 10 · Next

Author	Message
Iona Send message Joined: 12 Jul 07 Posts: 501 Credit: 2,279,288 RAC: 1,937	Message 1153522 - Posted: 18 Sep 2011, 9:13:36 UTC - in response to Message 1153147.
	Oh, believe me, Chris, the ownership of these properties in ROI has been common knowledge around here for years. Hence, there has been little sympathy for these people. It has to be said though, that the main reason that there is so little sympathy for the 'travellers', is because they live 'outside the law'; all their dealings are in cash, so they pay no taxes, they own rather expensive cars and 4X4s and wherever they go, scams and thefts are rife. I have personally, disturbed Irish accented men, attempting to steal sit-on mowers, leaf blowers and other associated machinery from a Council Depot, about five years ago - it might have been foolish, but after calling the Police, I chased after them in my car and lost them on the A127. I only lost them because I was not prepared to drive like a maniac. The Police drew a blank with the number-plate, too - without doubt it was a fake plate and I'll bet that it was not insured or had a valid MOT test certificate and it was fuelled with stolen diesel fuel. Is it pure coincidence, that in recent weeks, the frequency of cable thefts from the nearby railways, has soared, as have the usual scams associated with these people? Would this be because they will soon be having to move on? In the last few weeks, in the Borough in which I work, "men with Irish accents" have scammed a number of elderly people, using their preffered method of conning people out of money....the tarmac drive work. One old lady was conned out of some £800 through this device; basically (perhaps foolishly) because she was of limited means, she agreed to let a gang of these crooks do her driveway, as it was in need of repair. When 'the work' was done they asked her to look at the work, whilst not allowing her to take a close look (they crowded her to her porch) and seeing a nice black surface, she paid the much favoured cash, out of her savings....these nasty pieces of filth had PAINTED the drive and this was only noticed by a neighbour. Personally, I'm not sure what to make of these 'travellers' who don't travel, but in ROI, they are hated. Justifiably so, I'd say. Save your sympathy for the people who are deliberately targetted by these crooks without a conscience. As for the 'UN Delegation', put your own damned house in order, with respect to some of the countries represented, both at the UN and amongst the 'delegation'. Is China really in a position, to lecture anyone on anything? Just don't get me started on some of the African nations! [/b] ____________ Don't take life too seriously, as you'll never come out of it alive!
	ID: 1153522 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1153531 - Posted: 18 Sep 2011, 9:33:23 UTC
	Morning Tom, What has this to do with social classes? One of the main points that the Travellers and their supporters have been banging the drum about, is that the occupants of Dale Farm are simply a persecuted minority ethnic group. They sidestepped the lawbreaking issue. Gypsies and Irish Travellers are recognised ethnic groups for the purposes of the Race Relations Act (1976), identified as having a shared culture, language, and beliefs. Case law established Gypsies as a recognised ethnic group in 1988 (CRE v Dutton), and Irish Travellers in England and Wales in 2000 (O'Leary v Allied Domecq). My contention is that there are a large number of what are termed Pikeys and Tinkers there that only loosely fall under that umbrella. Certainly the rich ones with valuable property in Ireland don't. Are there no zoning laws to control where residences can be built? A former scrap yard is not normally zoned for residential use simply because of the hazardous material that may have leaked into the soil. In the UK we have Greenfield sites, Brownfield sites, and Greenbelt land. The disused scrapyard was designated as Brownfield, bur redesignated as Greenfield upon it's sale to the Travellers. Presumably this was to stop the scrapyard being re-used. The travellers may own the land but they do not have planning permission for residential use. Clearly the judge thinks the settlement is illegal and now it's just a matter of clearing the people off the land. A simple process once the legal decisions have been handed down. They have lived on the land for 10 years without planning permission, that is why it is illegal and they are being evicted. It is obviously not a simple process as evidenced by the resistance being put up, and the high public profile of their supporters, like Vanessa Redgrave, and the UN jumping on the bandwagon. IMO, this is a case of someone (a group) buying a piece of property (which may have been originally purchased for vehicle storage) and then illegally converting it for another purpose. They bought the land without any planning permission attached to it for residential use, and subsequently began to live there anyway. They applied for retrospective permission later which was refused. The matter has gone through many stages of hearings and appeals over the years to get to the stage where we are now. Maybe they thought they would get permission because of the larger number of legal plots nearby. It was probably a gamble that might have paid off given time, and if it didn't well, they would have somewhere to live for 10 years, then they would start again somewhere else. What we have here is a simple matter of law breaking, and their defence of being a persecuted ethnic minority is simply a last ditch attempt to sway public opinion, which of course the press have seized on. This is an important matter for the UK because the future of hundreds more illegal sites up and down the country will be affected by the outcome at Dale Farm.
	ID: 1153531 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1153535 - Posted: 18 Sep 2011, 10:13:28 UTC
	Morning Iona, I have to say that I agree with all of your comments. I posted earlier in this thread about my own experiences a few years ago in my area, which seems to correspond quite closely with your experiences. This is why I have been drawing the distinction between Romany Gypsies, Genuine Traveller Communities, and the itinerant group that we are referring to. As far as I know there aren't many compaints about the legal sites up and down the country, and I haven't heard any about the legal sites at Dale Farm, unless anyone knows any different. I must say that I wasn't aware of the properties back in Ireland until I read about them, and I've learnt quite a lot about all this that I didn't know before. The tarmaccing scam has been going on since WWII, and my parents in Devon nearly got conned once, but luckily I was down there at the time and shooed them off. I reported it to the police but they weren't interested. All they said was that they were from a group that were passing through, and in a couple of days they'd be off their patch and someone elses problem. It's amazing how mmuch money they seem to have from their activities, as evidenced by their state of the art vans and vehicles. I believe these people claim family allowances and social security payments whereever they happen to be, and it has been suggested that these simply be stopped. But the children could end up being be deprived, or more likely the parents will resort to more thieving to to make up the shortfall. Ireland has a law that bans Travellers from congregating anywhere for more than 24 hours. Presumably this is to allow for overnight stops, and to ensure that they move on the next day. Why can't we do that over here?
	ID: 1153535 ·

Gary Charpentier Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 10315 Credit: 5,077,829 RAC: 6,013	Message 1153657 - Posted: 18 Sep 2011, 18:09:19 UTC - in response to Message 1153535.
	The tarmaccing scam has been going on since WWII, and my parents in Devon nearly got conned once, but luckily I was down there at the time and shooed them off. I reported it to the police but they weren't interested. All they said was that they were from a group that were passing through, and in a couple of days they'd be off their patch and someone elses problem. Same scam across the pond too. Wonder where their scam school is located and if we should call in a NATO strike on it? And you have summed up the police response pretty well which is why they are so damn successful in what they do. ____________
	ID: 1153657 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1153832 - Posted: 19 Sep 2011, 10:56:52 UTC Last modified: 19 Sep 2011, 11:25:52 UTC
	Talks are still ongoing and there is a Police and Council press conference at 12 noon UK time. No evictions have taken place as yet. Update - Nothing new from the press conference. Evictions going ahead, resistance expected.
	ID: 1153832 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1153862 - Posted: 19 Sep 2011, 12:41:36 UTC Last modified: 19 Sep 2011, 12:44:42 UTC
	An interesting situation has arisen. The Travellers say that the land they bought was first designated as "brownfield". Upon the purchase, the local Council re-designated it as "Greenfield". Now we are hearing that the Council are calling it "Greenbelt". Brownfield is the term generally used to describe previously developed land, which may or may not be contaminated. Across the UK there are thousands of sites, which have been contaminated by the legacy of previous industrial uses and may present significant risks to human health and to the wider environment. Greenfield is land "considered" for urban development. Green belt is land that is not intended to be built on in the foreseeable future. Brownfield Greenfield Green Belt It does seem that maybe either the Travellers or the Council were confused as to the correct definition of the ex scrapyard. If Greenfield, did the Travellers have a "reasonable" expectation of being granted residential planning permission, given the legal site nearby. Interesting....
	ID: 1153862 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1153922 - Posted: 19 Sep 2011, 16:11:03 UTC
	All off until the end of the week. New decision
	ID: 1153922 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1155178 - Posted: 23 Sep 2011, 9:18:41 UTC
	The High Court is sitting this morning at 11:00 a.m. UK time in the Royal Courts of Justice at London, to decide whether the evictions at Dale Farm can go ahead. During the preceding week the Council has complied with all the provisions of the previously granted injunction by giving residents a plot-by-plot breakdown of how it plans to clear the site. Unfortunately the Travellers have not removed the main barricade as they were also required to do, and it looks unlikely that they will do. Apparently the Travellers have been offered spaces at a number of other legal sites around the country but have turned them down, saying they prefer not to move. Up to a dozen families that previously voluntarily left have now returned. This may not help their case. It looks most likely that the Court will uphold the eviction, but I wouldn't be surprised if it also curtailed what actions the Council can take, and insist upon other measures being taken. We will see later.
	ID: 1155178 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1155209 - Posted: 23 Sep 2011, 12:19:46 UTC
	The judge told the opening of the hearing that the council had spent "substantial physical and financial resources" and courts had a duty to make sure that "valuable resources" were not wasted. He said "planning avenues" had been exhausted and litigation could not be viewed as "yet another springboard for delay". He said he would not grant a "long stay of execution" to allow "minor squabbles" to be settled. The judge Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart said he did not expect to deliver a judgement on the injunction until Monday. But the Gypsy Council has launched a second action asking for a delay. Gratton Puxon, of the Gypsy Council, said earlier that the second action would also be heard at the High Court on Friday. It is believed to be asking for more time to find alternatives sites. Another legal move, seeking a Judicial Review, is now due to be heard next week.
	ID: 1155209 ·

Iona Send message Joined: 12 Jul 07 Posts: 501 Credit: 2,279,288 RAC: 1,937	Message 1155258 - Posted: 23 Sep 2011, 15:11:58 UTC - in response to Message 1155209.
	Yet another ploy, by people breaking the law, to circumvent the same system of law that they hold in contempt. Puxon is well-known and hugely hated in these parts, as are his band of 'poor innocents'. When the term "Gypsy Council" is used, you also have to be aware of which 'Gypsy Council' is being referred to - there are, actually, two in the UK. The 'other Gypsy Council' is of the opinion that the 'residents' of Dale Farm should move, interestingly. Puxon is a master of exaggeration and has, in the past, tried to 'romantically' imply that these people are penniless nomads and are Roma. Thats 'a bit of a stretch' to say the least! The nearest that any of this lot have been to Romania, is that one of them (name withheld) has a property in Belgium! Housing benefits that have been paid to these 'travellers' are, oddly enough, paid to an acount in ROI, which, also oddly enough, is in the same town that most of them are from. The prosection rests.... ____________ Don't take life too seriously, as you'll never come out of it alive!
	ID: 1155258 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1155345 - Posted: 23 Sep 2011, 17:52:43 UTC
	There is only ever going to be one way out of this situation and that is a politically negotiated settlement. And it is quite clear that the Judge has appreciated that from day one. They are there illegally as they do not have planning permission for residential use. The Judge has to uphold that, else the law of the land will end up being in disarray. There were signs that maybe the Council were going to go in heavy handed and not take any old nonsense. Quite rightly the Judge fired a shot over their bows, and granted a stay of eviction. The police just took a hands off approach and said we are here to maintain law and order. If the law is broken, we'll nick 'em. Of course the travellers are playing for time, that is the only gambit they have left, and the Judge was savvy enough to note that, by his comments about "another springboard for delay". He also pacified the Travellers by his comments about 5 ladies brightening up the court. This chap is a clever lad :-) There are too many activists purporting to speak upon the Travellers behalf, but are really following their own agenda. I have no knowledge of this Puxon guy but Iona clearly knows more than I am aware of, so I defer to her knowledge. There is only going to be one equitable outcome. The Travellers have to go to maintain the law, and they know that. But for them to agree to do that, they will need concessions. That basically boils down to provision of alternative legal accommodation at a not unreasonable distance from where they currently are. At the moment we have a Mexican standoff. Can Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart pull it off?
	ID: 1155345 ·

Dr Imaginario Send message Joined: 10 Aug 11 Posts: 172 Credit: 22,735 RAC: 0	Message 1155363 - Posted: 23 Sep 2011, 18:37:04 UTC - in response to Message 1155345.
	When we are talking about the gipsy, or in Portugal "Ethnical minorities, I already know what the goal of such people is. They live in the limits of the law, they don’t pay taxes, but they have all the social benefits. I know this minority to well, some/majority are decent people, others they think that tradition is stronger than the law of the land where they are or live. However from the moment you are smart enough to get social benefits then as a minority law should be obeyed. Is good life, when you only have benefits and no obligations whatsoever to society. In this case from what I could understand, they occupied a piece of land, and now due to legal constrains there is an eviction order. I’m sure that with some compensation they would move without hesitation, because in this case money will overcome “traditicion”.
	ID: 1155363 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1155372 - Posted: 23 Sep 2011, 19:35:18 UTC
	Rather interesting article here ..... Genuine travellers Seems to confirm all my earlier points :-)
	ID: 1155372 ·

bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 1704 Credit: 13,288,085 RAC: 6,416	Message 1155393 - Posted: 23 Sep 2011, 20:47:58 UTC - in response to Message 1155372. Last modified: 23 Sep 2011, 20:48:24 UTC
	Rather interesting article here ..... Genuine travellers Seems to confirm all my earlier points :-) All? Here's one at random: Chris wrote: What we are now hearing is that there is another group, who have serious property assets back in Ireland, and obviously not short of money, or an alternative place to live. So why are they here? Why live in a caravan in England when you have a lovely house back home? It doesn't make any sense, unless it is a scam to claim benefits in both countries? While the BBC article says: BBC wrote: Many travellers, including those from Dale Farm, describe Rathkeale in County Limerick as their spiritual home, says BBC Look East correspondent Sally Chidzoy, who visited the Irish town earlier this month. A "spiritual home" is a "serious property asset"? Also the BBC article suggests that the appearance of not being short of money may be deceptive. ____________ I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...
	ID: 1155393 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1155571 - Posted: 24 Sep 2011, 8:50:23 UTC
	All? Here's one at random: OK, I'll modify that to "most" if you want to split hairs. The point I was making was quoted in the article, namely A lot of Romany Gypsies are very angry at Irish Travellers in terms of the way our two identities are confused," says Jake Bowers, a Romany Gypsy journalist who writes for the Travellers' Times There is a group hanging on to the coat tails of another group for their own ends. A "spiritual home" is a "serious property asset"? Of course it isn't and I never suggested it was! Dunno how you came to that conclusion. Also the BBC article suggests that the appearance of not being short of money may be deceptive. Maybe, but I don't see any evidence of poverty down there, most seem in quite rude health and wearing decent clothes. They can find money to buy land without any problem.
	ID: 1155571 ·

bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 1704 Credit: 13,288,085 RAC: 6,416	Message 1155652 - Posted: 24 Sep 2011, 16:07:47 UTC - in response to Message 1155571. Last modified: 24 Sep 2011, 16:19:04 UTC
	All? Here's one at random: OK, I'll modify that to "most" if you want to split hairs. The point I was making was quoted in the article, namely A lot of Romany Gypsies are very angry at Irish Travellers in terms of the way our two identities are confused," says Jake Bowers, a Romany Gypsy journalist who writes for the Travellers' Times There is a group hanging on to the coat tails of another group for their own ends. I'm not sure that a statement saying that two communities are often confused is confirmation that one group "hangs on to the coat tails of another" for any particular reason, though even if I do accept it, that's one confirmed and another not, I would not consider 50/50 "most". Call it more hair splitting if you will, if prefer the term critical thinking, though it is your claim to defend. As it is your latest claim is not supported by the quote you used, the anger of Romany Gypsies towards Irish Travellers does not mean that the Irish Travellers are the cause of the confusion between the two communities, and certainly does not confirm that one group is "hanging on to the coat tails" of the other, nor does it indicate a motive for doing so, and you've already conceded the "serious property asset" as not confirmed by the BBC article, by my count that's 0 for 2. A "spiritual home" is a "serious property asset"? Of course it isn't and I never suggested it was! Dunno how you came to that conclusion. I had thought the context was clear, you had asserted that travellers had serious property assets in Ireland. The only reference to Ireland in the article was the one I quoted. Unless you were asserting that a "spiritual home" should be considered a "serious property asset", your claim that all your earlier points were confirmed by the BBC article is false. Does that help? Also the BBC article suggests that the appearance of not being short of money may be deceptive. Maybe, but I don't see any evidence of poverty down there, most seem in quite rude health and wearing decent clothes. They can find money to buy land without any problem. BBC wrote: They often value visible signs of wealth. [...] Ms O'Malley added that communities also lent money amongst themselves, so people who appeared poor could spend a lot of money on a wedding because the community had given it to them. Perhaps the practice of lending money within a community is also used for land purchases. What you "see" may be masking underlying poverty. Whatever the case, the article does not confirm the assertaion that the Dale Farm (or indeed any) travellers are "not short of money". Nor does it state that the Dale Farm (or indeed any) travellers had no problems finding money to buy land. 0 for 3. ____________ I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...
	ID: 1155652 ·

Chris S Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 19 Nov 00 Posts: 22688 Credit: 4,508,608 RAC: 5,700	Message 1155656 - Posted: 24 Sep 2011, 16:32:17 UTC
	0 for 3. Are we having a serious discussion or playing cricket? There is a group down at Dale Farm that are basically New Age Travellers, hoping to gain public support for their lifestyle by associating themselves with genuine Romany Gypsys. I can see that and so can Jake Bowers. At this stage in their campaign they are chucking everything in bar the kitchen sink, which will probably be next. I really haven't got the time to spend on detailed dissection of minutiae. I have to live with this in my country, you don't, so quite why you are getting so het up about it, I'm not sure. It is a nice warm late autumn day out there, so I'm going for a walk in the fresh air, which will be a lot more beneficial to me than posting here. Chris 0, Bobby 3, Bobby wins, all hail Bobby. Rush would be proud of you.
	ID: 1155656 ·

bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 1704 Credit: 13,288,085 RAC: 6,416	Message 1155677 - Posted: 24 Sep 2011, 17:20:07 UTC - in response to Message 1155656. Last modified: 24 Sep 2011, 17:20:52 UTC
	0 for 3. Are we having a serious discussion or playing cricket? Does a serious discussion preclude having fun? There is a group down at Dale Farm that are basically New Age Travellers, hoping to gain public support for their lifestyle by associating themselves with genuine Romany Gypsys. I can see that and so can Jake Bowers. At this stage in their campaign they are chucking everything in bar the kitchen sink, which will probably be next. The same Jake Bowers that says: "We're two separate ethnic groups. Whilst there is some conflict because people inhabit the same social and physical space, there is some kind of harmony; some inter-marry and live alongside each other." ? I do not see anything in the article that suggests Jake Bowers believes that the group at Dale Farm are "New Age Travellers", or that the group at Dale Farm are associating their lifestyles with "Genuine Romany Gypsys", nor that doing so would help them gain public support. Indeed I do not see any comments attributed to Mr Bowers relating directly to Dale Farm. 0 for 4. I really haven't got the time to spend on detailed dissection of minutiae. I have to live with this in my country, you don't, so quite why you are getting so het up about it, I'm not sure. Whose country? Last time I checked my UK passport I was still a British Citizen. All my direct family members live in the UK. That I may live outside of the UK does not mean it's internal matters are of no interest to me. "het up" what leads you to believe that I am angry or upset? It is a nice warm late autumn day out there, so I'm going for a walk in the fresh air, which will be a lot more beneficial to me than posting here. Chris 0, Bobby 3, Bobby wins, all hail Bobby. Rush would be proud of you. Meh. Assertions supported by the BBC article 0, Assertions not supported by the BBC article 4. It's not about me, and I'm not trying to win anything. You made a claim, I challenged it, you modified the claim, I challenged the modified claim and provided my reasons for doing so via a score card. If you want to claim some piece of evidence supports what you are saying, the evidence has to state what you are saying it states, so far you have failed to do so. Hope you enjoy the fresh air. ____________ I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...
	ID: 1155677 ·

John Clark Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 29 Sep 99 Posts: 15814 Credit: 4,356,364 RAC: 130	Message 1155729 - Posted: 24 Sep 2011, 20:27:59 UTC
	Don't feed the Bobby! ____________ It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues
	ID: 1155729 ·

bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 1704 Credit: 13,288,085 RAC: 6,416	Message 1155755 - Posted: 24 Sep 2011, 21:29:28 UTC - in response to Message 1155729. Last modified: 24 Sep 2011, 21:31:32 UTC
	Don't feed the Bobby! DNFTT? Really? That accusation again? You were wrong the last time, and I showed you how. Please take it back. ____________ I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...
	ID: 1155755 ·

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 . . . 10 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Dale Farm Travellers