Letter from Our Leader Regarding Gypsy Sites...

[mk1]

Read more here:

http://www.travellerstimes.org.uk/list.aspx?c=00619ef1-21e2-40aa-8d5e-f7c38586d32f&n=ee2710c5-5881-494d-9f54-126ab10d3f0f



the Council had to order a stay of execution on an outstanding eviction order because it was pointed out that their five year development plan did not include an assessment of the number of local Gypsies and Travellers who would need somewhere to live in the future



So if just one family turn up in Hartlepool they can more or less pick any site they chose and the council will have no power to remove them swiftly if at all. 

[SRMoore]

Except HBC isn't obliged to provide a a site for transient gypsy/travellers. Just those who have been identified as currently living in the Borough.

Transient gypsy/travellers will more than likely continue to use the site at B&Q (illegally) and if they pitch up elsewhere they will be moved on as they are now under stricter rules and enforcement  brought in during this parliament

[mk1]

Pettyfogging. The fact is due to the duplicity of the LabCon coalition a cynical decision was made to  dump the site in Hart in order for Labour to boast it kept the sites away from its strongest Wards. As soon as the election was over ar*se saving moves were made  so the same LabCon liars who dumped the site in Hart could (try to) avoid the  responsibility.
The Tory councillors are in bed with Labour on every issue and if elected Shane you would just be another vote for the SCABs. Your leader has already sold your vote.

[DRiddle]

Whilst most people were speculating what would or wouldn't happen now the plan has been scrapped for the sake of scoring political points I thought it'd be far more productive to write to government ministers and senior planning officials in Whitehall to find out exactly where people stand.

Shane, all your letter has 'established' is it'll go to planning, which we knew already.

If the traveller(s) went to planning ask for it to be at Hart, they'd have a damn good case keeping in mind the disgraceful decision to propose to put it at Hart in the first place, made BY the council.

With no plan in place, HBC appear to be waving through EVERYTHING knowing that an appeal is likely to win and we can't afford to fight them. (amongst other reasons).

I gave the council leader a guilt edged opportunity to state categorically once and for all that it will NOT be going in Hart, should a need ever arise.  He chose NOT to say "No" to a straight forward question.

Many would interpret that to mean his initial thoughts on the matter haven't changed.

Many would also interpret 'that letter', if you read through the guff, to again certainly NOT state categorically that it won't be in Hart.

Don't go claiming your letter is some sort of political masterstroke.

All you've established is it'll go to planning? Right?

Three Tories sit on the planning committee. Right?

Which way did they all vote when it came to choosing the gypsy site again?

I'll tell you what Shane, i'll give you the 62p you paid for the stamp back (they've gone up a lot since privatisation haven't they), and you can use the money to catch a bus to Seaton where you stood last year.

[mk1]

Transient gypsy/travellers will more than likely continue to use the site at B&Q (illegally) and if they pitch up elsewhere they will be moved on as they are now under stricter rules and enforcement  brought in during this parliament

See here how this 'stricter' enforcement has failed to move these Travellers.


Village thinks it wins after 4 years
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10648196/Village-wins-four-year-battle-against-illegal-travellers-site.html


and yet.........

http://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/news/local/red-tape-stalls-evictions-on-caravan-site-1-6532592

[Pwilson]

I'm still awaiting the leaders letter to land.

Maybe it was a select few homes that were chosen to be lied to.

Its depressing the level of contempt the leader of HBC has shown for the intelligence of voters, whenever  his seat is up someone should get an actual monkey to stand against him, at least it will tell fewer lies.

[SRMoore]

David, how quickly you resort to name calling and petty snipes. Quite pathetic really since you claim to be 'different'.

The information I received back from Whitehall contained much more than confirming it would go to planning. You'd know this information yourself if you had bothered to do anything other than turn up to one meeting in the ward, grandstand and then hope that that'd be enough to see you through an election campaign in a ward neither you or PHF had taken any interest in before the gypsy site bandwagon came rolling by.

I prefer to ensure residents are given confirmed facts rather than speculating and scaremongering.

So much for your claim to "not want to cut each others throats" though eh? I guess basically what you were asking me to do was stand aside in Hart and not cut your throat and when I refused your offer you decided to lash out. Fair enough, I should have listened to you when you advised me that politics was " a dirty business". Shame you didn't take my advice that "it doesn't have to be".

MK1 - If you can attack me for what others have done all day long but it won't make them my actions nor will your assumptions that I will fall in line and vote with Labour. No doubt I would vote with them on occasion though. You see, the conservatives prefer to turn up to committee meetings and debate issues as they come in. That way we have the opportunity to mould them into something that would be more beneficial to those who elected us to represent them. It isn't always possible but for a group with just 3 councillors we are able to make a difference by engaging.
By contrast PHF cllrs seldom bother turning up to committee meetings to ensure the residents of their wards are represented and take no part in moulding policies in the earlier stages. They prefer instead to turn up to full council meetings when there is likely to be more of the public present and a reporter from the Mail then play bloody hell that they don't agree with what is being proposed and vote against it for maximum political points.

We could all do that, MK1 but nothing would be done and with Labours sheer voting numbers they'd pass anything they wanted anyway so it is better to be sat around the table like adults and try and water down their proposals. So when you and PHF shout about how the local Conservatives vote with Labour you are missing out the important fact that they are voting on something they have had a say in. Others should try it sometime.

[mk1]

We could all do that, MK1 but nothing would be done and with Labours sheer voting numbers they'd pass anything they wanted anyway so it is better to be sat around the table like adults and try and water down their proposals. So when you and PHF shout about how the local Conservatives vote with Labour you are missing out the important fact that they are voting on something they have had a say in. Others should try it sometime.

Bollocks. The Tory group do what Ray Wells tells them to do and Ray Wells only decides to do things that increase his  influence on planning matters.

I call you out. Give me an example of a Labour Policy you watered down.

[SRMoore]

Brenda Loynes has voted in the opposite way to Ray on numerous occasions.

The Conservative group successfully fought to have Labour accept the grant they called "a government bribe" to freeze council tax. They have done that now for the past four years despite heavy opposition from certain Labour councillors who argued against.

[SRMoore]

I'll leave you all to it now. I did tell myself not to get drawn into these pointless tit for tat threads but I don't like seeing people deliberately spread half truths or scaremongering for their own political gain.   

Hopefully people will see through the rhetoric & bluster and won't be voting for PHF those PHF candidates who choose to partake in it. Good luck to the honest and decent ones.

[mk1]

Brenda Loynes has voted in the opposite way to Ray on numerous occasions.

Did she not read the memo?

The Conservative group successfully fought to have Labour accept the grant they called "a government bribe" to freeze council tax. They have done that now for the past four years despite heavy opposition from certain Labour councillors who argued against.

Let me get this straight. Ray Wells is helping the moderate Labour  councillors fight off the attempts by the more radical elements to pursue the path of true socialism?
Who exactly are the hard-liners  because as far as I am aware the dynamic duo are the marxists.

The complete silence of Wells group over the MRA scandal tells us all we need to know about the Conservatives. Lap dogs who do the SCABs bidding at every turn. 3 votes sold to sate one mans  desire to me the Mr Big in all building development in the town.

[DRiddle]

David, how quickly you resort to name calling

I'm just reading back through the thread for a fifth or sixth time looking for the name calling.... nope, still can't see it.

I saw the Tories happily say "Aye", to the Gypsy site being put at Hart though.

I also saw you hiding up the back of the meeting in Hart village hall despite me offering you a seat in the front row?

What was the matter? Had you been told to keep your head down by Ray?

The people of our town don't need anymore meek, submissive sheep. They need representation by people with a certain quality.

Said quality is spherical and plural.

Some have them, some don't.

[Sanddancer]

REPEAT.....resident of Hart, main part of village,not outlying farms etc, still no letter from dear leader. Feel sadly neglected.