Help
Business Reviews
Loading...
Consultants Propose Official Travellers Site in Neston
| Published: 2nd September 2011 14:02 |
Cheshire West and Chester Council leaders will vote this week on a proposal for a number of residential sites for travellers in the area, including one at Buildwas Road, Neston.
Clayhill, Neston. Proposed site marked in red. Click to download
pdf of full size image.
The site, adjacent to Clayhill Industrial Estate, is one of five residential sites and one transit site in the Cheshire West patch that have been short-listed by consultants Ekosgen. Other recommended sites on the list are in Chester, Ellesmere Port and Winsford, including one immediately behind the Cheshire Police HQ.
According to a press release today, over 1300 potential sites in the borough were examined, with many being ruled out due to major planning constraints.
Councillor Herbert Manley, Executive Member, Regeneration is quoted as stating: "Successive governments have placed a statutory obligation on this and former authorities to provide sites in the Borough.
"Until we meet that obligation, we are always going to be liable to lose planning appeals against our refusal to grant applications on unauthorised sites - even in the green belt.
"If the Executive approves the recommendation it is hoped that it will bring Cheshire West and Chester within the allocated quota range of (32/45) pitches and should be sufficient to convince the Planning Inspectors that this authority is intent upon fulfilling its obligations."
The authority further claims that the licence/tenancy that traveller families would sign before moving onto the pitch would be similar to those used with regard to regular housing and would cover all standards required as part of the tenancy agreement, and that they will be run with the aid of multi-agency management groups, including representatives from the travelling community, police, businesses and council.
If the Executive votes in favour at the meeting on September 7th, this will prompt the authority to apply for planning permission on the prospective sites and full public consultation will follow as part of that process.
In recent months, Neston Town Council has been in discussion with Cheshire West and businesses on the Clayhill estate with a view to making improvements both for the benefits of existing residents and businesses and to attract new companies to the area. It seems likely that there will now be further discussion on what effects the new proposal may have on those plans.
Neston Town Council
The Mayor of Neston, Cllr Martin Barker, said today: "In response to the announcement by Cheshire West and Chester Council in relation to the development of one transit and five residential Gypsy and Traveller sites in the Borough, Neston Town Council will be discussing this issue at the next Full Council meeting on October 4th.
"The discussion will be in response to whatever decision is made by Cheshire West and Chester Council's Executive meeting on September 7th.
"Neston Town Council has previously informed CW&C that the view of the Planning & Environment Committee is that there are no suitable locations in the Neston area for Gypsy and Traveller sites."
Cllr Andy Williams, Neston Ward Councillor, Cheshire West and Chester Council
Cllr Williams has provided AboutMyArea Neston with the following statement, which he intends to read out at the meeting on 7th September:
"I think that the inclusion of the Neston Clayhill area as a possible Gypsy and Traveller site is wrong for a number of reasons the first and most important is its proximity to a household waste tip. What sort of message does this send to the Gypsy and traveller community that the Cheshire West and Chester council considers living next to a tip is an appropriate place for them to live and bring up their families?
"The second point is that in these times of rising unemployment we should be promoting our business areas and encouraging them to expand rather than using the limited amount of space at Clayhill for housing. Neston has a history of poor public transport links out of the area so the Town Council and I have been pushing for better advertising of the Clayhill area to boost business which hopefully in turn will encourage new businesses to the area and help create more local jobs.
"Next, the Neston area has no real history of being an area frequented by the Gypsy and Traveller community and a site adjacent to the A5117/M56 corridor would be more appropriate.
"One of the factors looked at by the consultants was access to local schools but I feel this wasn't looked at properly. The council's own literature recognises that the Irish traveller community comprises mainly of members of the Catholic faith who prefer to send their children to a faith school and with the nearest Catholic high school being in Chester and the council's recent withdrawal of subsidised transport, I feel Neston is too far away to allow the community easy access to their preferred choice of school.
"I understand the council's need to find a permanent site within its borders but I hope they don't make their decision based purely on ease of using a site and, instead, take on board my concerns regarding the choice of choosing Neston as a site."
More information
Additional information about the proposal (and the background to it) can be found on the Cheshire West and Chester website here.
There has been an email address set up for the public to ask questions or comment on what is happening, it will be responded to within 24 hours: GypsyandTravellersenquiries@cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk
Related Content:
Gypsy Site in Neston Threatens New Local Jobs (added 7.9.11)
Council Accepts Gypsy Plan for Cheshire West Needs More Work (added 8.9.11)
Have Your Say
When you register to take part in the survey below, make sure you leave the box ticked to receive our weekly newsletter. You will get a one-page digest of all the previous week's news stories and forthcoming events delivered to your inbox every Wednesday.
Survey
Report this article as inappropriate
Comments
TonyAt 19:34 on 31st August 2011, Tony commented:
No way. We've got enough bother without adding this in. The area covered by this council is huge and they expect us to believe Clayhill is the answer when theres thousands of acres of land throughout the wider area??? Theres enough pressure on our schools and services already. Not to mention the police issue.
andiparryAt 19:49 on 31st August 2011, andiparry commented:
No no no!! I live adjacent to the Clayhill and I don't want this site anywhere near my house! Like Tony says, there must be plenty of unused land well away from here they could build on! This will outrage the residents of Neston. Throw the idea away now!!!
OwdenAt 20:03 on 31st August 2011, Owden commented:
I was aghast when reading this article, Cheshire West councillors can expect a stauch and vehement opposal from Neston, Little Neston and Parkgate residents alike... Care2/Facebook petition against a travellers site in Neston is being drafted now, pending next weeks outcome - We simply DO NOT want this in our lovely village
replenAt 20:38 on 31st August 2011, replen commented:
NO
Why is it when clayhill gets quite with no trouble and its quite a nice place to live, you feel like you HAVE to drop this bomb shell on us,after all we have had trouble before when leaving there rubbish and waste all over the place for dogs to rumaged in and other vermin .We have had enough trouble in the past is it not time to leave us alone. just as we were getting use to piece and quiet.
Why is it when clayhill gets quite with no trouble and its quite a nice place to live, you feel like you HAVE to drop this bomb shell on us,after all we have had trouble before when leaving there rubbish and waste all over the place for dogs to rumaged in and other vermin .We have had enough trouble in the past is it not time to leave us alone. just as we were getting use to piece and quiet.
lorraine bAt 22:16 on 31st August 2011, lorraine b commented:
NO !! NO !! NO !!! the council leaders want to make a site for these people then put them next to where they live !! lets see how they like it !! last time they set up camp illegally, remember how much damage was caused, mess was made and thefts in the area !! this is just wrong in so many ways and if it goes ahead i know of plenty of people that will move away from the clayhill !!! for god sake give neston a bloody break !! ellesmere port get a new college, a revamped leisure centre and what does neston get ......... BLOODY TRAVELLERS !!!!!! NO NO NO !!
,At 22:42 on 31st August 2011, , commented:
Totally gobsmacked at this ... The area has so much potential but also its fair share of problems already. Can you imagine the effect this will have on the businesses on the clayhill estate, the local residents and so on. Hopefully we have strong Councillors representing Neston in CWAC and this will not happen.
I read one comment above from Lorraine about moving away from the Clayhill ... to be honest I think we would move away from Neston altogether as this would be the final straw.
I read one comment above from Lorraine about moving away from the Clayhill ... to be honest I think we would move away from Neston altogether as this would be the final straw.
Alan SAt 23:28 on 31st August 2011, Alan S commented:
I'm somewhat confused at the notion of providing a permanent base anywhere, for a section of society who are self-described as 'travelers'.
There is a preconceived stigma many associate with such people. That perception may well be wrong - but it may equally be right.
Neston has recently suffered enough of a rise in undesirable behaviour, at a time when policing is being reduced beyond what could politely be called 'skeleton' levels, without adding this to the mix. It could be a recipe for disaster in our town and seriously damage the community beyond repair.
That concern could be wrong, and potential 'travelers' may be shining paragons of virtue, contributing selflessly to the wellbeing of the town. But would the CWAC executives be willing to take the risk in their own back yards? I think not...
There is a preconceived stigma many associate with such people. That perception may well be wrong - but it may equally be right.
Neston has recently suffered enough of a rise in undesirable behaviour, at a time when policing is being reduced beyond what could politely be called 'skeleton' levels, without adding this to the mix. It could be a recipe for disaster in our town and seriously damage the community beyond repair.
That concern could be wrong, and potential 'travelers' may be shining paragons of virtue, contributing selflessly to the wellbeing of the town. But would the CWAC executives be willing to take the risk in their own back yards? I think not...
ClangerAt 23:40 on 31st August 2011, Clanger commented:
"the licence/tenancy that traveller families would sign before moving onto the pitch would be similar to those used with regard to regular housing and would cover all standards required as part of the tenancy agreement, and that they will be run with the aid of multi-agency management groups, including representatives from the travelling community, police, businesses and council."
Police, businesses and council are aware of this and are signed-up for it are they they? What bollards. And this is an official Cheshire West release? If so then OMG we are in trouble. Perhaps Cllrs Williams and Dowding might comment?
ARGH.
Police, businesses and council are aware of this and are signed-up for it are they they? What bollards. And this is an official Cheshire West release? If so then OMG we are in trouble. Perhaps Cllrs Williams and Dowding might comment?
ARGH.
,At 23:47 on 31st August 2011, , commented:
I have a concern here that now we are part of the wider Cheshire West and Cheshire we (Neston) become a dumping ground for what other areas of Cheshire don't want on their doorstep. It was always a running joke that we got the dirty end of the stick when we were part or Ellesmere Port & Neston Council (many will remember the joke of the christmas lights that only half worked before proper investment).
I would love to know who in CWAC proposed this site ? I can't imagine anyone living in Neston & working for CWAC (councillor or otherwise) would have had any part in the proposal.
Although maybe a comment of self-interest - but what would happen to property prices, saleability and our already stretched resources if this were allowed to go ahead.
Someone please tell me Carrie got her dates mixed up and this is the 2012 April Fools joke come early !
I would love to know who in CWAC proposed this site ? I can't imagine anyone living in Neston & working for CWAC (councillor or otherwise) would have had any part in the proposal.
Although maybe a comment of self-interest - but what would happen to property prices, saleability and our already stretched resources if this were allowed to go ahead.
Someone please tell me Carrie got her dates mixed up and this is the 2012 April Fools joke come early !
,At 23:55 on 31st August 2011, , commented:
Sorry additional.... many will also remember the hell we had many years ago when the fields ajacent to the clayhill were illegally used by travellers. This lead to the trenches being dug around these fields to prevent further access by travellers and I would expect cost the local authority / taxpayer / Police a substantial amount of money to move people on and make the area difficult to access.
As this is a historic problem then why has anything changed ? What would be different if this was an "official" site other than maybe more travellers taking up residence.
There is also a perception (please correct me if I am wrong) that travellers run their own businesses and don't integrate / work for the wider community businesses. If this is the case here could we see our existing tradesmen in Neston being put out of business by travellers operating with much lower overheads. Okay its not the main issue but certainly another reason to say a resounding NO to the proposal
As this is a historic problem then why has anything changed ? What would be different if this was an "official" site other than maybe more travellers taking up residence.
There is also a perception (please correct me if I am wrong) that travellers run their own businesses and don't integrate / work for the wider community businesses. If this is the case here could we see our existing tradesmen in Neston being put out of business by travellers operating with much lower overheads. Okay its not the main issue but certainly another reason to say a resounding NO to the proposal
merrymacAt 23:56 on 31st August 2011, merrymac commented:
"CWaC has a statutory obligation .......to provide sites in the Borough. Until we meet that obligation, we are always going to be liable to lose planning appeals against our refusal to grant applications on unauthorised sites - even in the green belt."
To paraphrase the above, if CWaC does not provide a site(s), which by law they have to, then travellers are able to live more easily where they like, even in Green Belt areas. Rather they live on a semi-industrial area , out of sight with water & drainage, than in a rural area elsewhere
To paraphrase the above, if CWaC does not provide a site(s), which by law they have to, then travellers are able to live more easily where they like, even in Green Belt areas. Rather they live on a semi-industrial area , out of sight with water & drainage, than in a rural area elsewhere
OwdenAt 07:20 on 1st September 2011, Owden commented:
I understand the governmental obligation MerryMac, but where are the travellers now that were on Clayhill previously? Gone... and if CWaC provide them with a permanent home they'll never leave Neston.... EVER
Mike ShipmanAt 10:53 on 1st September 2011, Mike Shipman commented:
The Council and its predecessors have consistently failed to provide these sites which, as has been indicated above, it must do if it is to control Traveller Sites. It seems reasonable that the Council looks at possible locations throughout the borough. All areas appear to have been included in the alternatives (even Chester!). There can be no reason for the Neston area to be excluded. I can think of no other suitable site FOR CONSIDERATION in Neston. Can anyone else?
A site must be found. To say this can be somewhere else is just NIMBYism.
A site must be found. To say this can be somewhere else is just NIMBYism.
OwdenAt 11:24 on 1st September 2011, Owden commented:
Indeed due consideration must be made, and a site must be found to satisfy government targets... BUT NOT IN NESTON (Or Parkgate or Little Neston if CWaC ever decide to propose there)
NIMBY'ism it may be, but Neston people and their Parkgate and Little Neston neighbours are proud of the area and will strongly oppose this from the outset, for as long as it takes...
NIMBY'ism it may be, but Neston people and their Parkgate and Little Neston neighbours are proud of the area and will strongly oppose this from the outset, for as long as it takes...
Alan SAt 12:26 on 1st September 2011, Alan S commented:
Mick - NIMBYism it may be - but it IS my back yard so I'll say what I like, thankyou
1300 sites considered in the whole of Cheshire West. 6 sites proposed to be established. Why then, are two thirds of these (four of six) proposed within a 10 mile radius of Neston? (Clayhill, Costco at M56 roundabout, Sealand Rd Chester, and Ellesmere port)?
It sounds as if CWAC want to shunt the majority of the problem into the far North West of the authority (i.e. MY BACK YARD). How is THAT fair?
1300 sites considered in the whole of Cheshire West. 6 sites proposed to be established. Why then, are two thirds of these (four of six) proposed within a 10 mile radius of Neston? (Clayhill, Costco at M56 roundabout, Sealand Rd Chester, and Ellesmere port)?
It sounds as if CWAC want to shunt the majority of the problem into the far North West of the authority (i.e. MY BACK YARD). How is THAT fair?
DaveyJAt 16:31 on 1st September 2011, DaveyJ commented:
what a ridiculous idea right next to our neston estates !!!!!
i remember too well the mess made last time both here and next to my wife's family in liverpool and the hell they had to put up with
i wonder if counsillors in heswall know about this because its going to be right on there doorstep too
at least the idea of a site by costco is out of the way of a main town like neston
it will be a bad bad day for this town if it is allowed to happen !!!!! anyone spoken to the mp about this
i remember too well the mess made last time both here and next to my wife's family in liverpool and the hell they had to put up with
i wonder if counsillors in heswall know about this because its going to be right on there doorstep too
at least the idea of a site by costco is out of the way of a main town like neston
it will be a bad bad day for this town if it is allowed to happen !!!!! anyone spoken to the mp about this
mark bAt 18:04 on 1st September 2011, mark b commented:
so this will "outrage" the residents of neston will it? i think this comment is profoundly wrong and certainly very provocative.i myself live in neston and i have mixed opinions on this issue.gypsies can live amongst a local community and its only because of an unjust opinion the ignorant have of them through documentaries that are shown on tv that ignorant people think "oh no we cant have gypsies in our community because i seen the way they behaved on a channel 4 documentary"-and if this is the case are we going to object to eastern europeans that come to the uk that get uk jobs? i think we owe it to ourselves to educate our brains and if a decision is made to create a gypsie site in neston then we should at least welcome them to our community and not treat them with any unjust indifference.i am aware that a chap in neston a mr david bladen was involved in the filming of a documentary about gypsies it would be interesting to gauge his opinion on this issue he himself having spent time amongst a gypsie community.
mighty mAt 21:01 on 1st September 2011, mighty m commented:
I'm sorry mark b but you are wrong Neston residents will be up in arms and so they should be, this is just one in a long line of "put up or shut up" changes that have been imposed on Neston since we have been with Ellesmereport and now Chester. I am born and bred Nestonian and over the years I have seen the decline Neston has suffered at the hands of these councils. Our council tax just goes into improving E/port while our own estates begin to suffer, we once had a Police Station with officers that was considered one of the best in Cheshire now what have they left us with nothing but a police office with no police officers only police community support officers although i must say are an excellent contribution to Neston. This site is with in throwing distant of residents who are quite rightly worried about the impact that this site will have on them and Mark b people are not ignorant in Neston tell that to the MANY elderly people of Neston who have been swindled out of money by "Travellers " whom bully them into having work done and charging them extortionate rates for a shoddy job. I hope the rest of our silent councillors Andy Willams being the exception do what we pay them to do represent us.
mark bAt 23:10 on 1st September 2011, mark b commented:
mighty m?....as you have stated who are the MANY elderly people of Neston who have been swindled out of money by "Travellers " whom bully them into having work done and charging them extortionate rates for a shoddy job?? where these crimes reported to cheshire police? can you name the elderly people in neston who where swindled out of money by(as you claim)"travellers"?
OwdenAt 08:54 on 2nd September 2011, Owden commented:
Mark B, be sure to allow Carrie to take a picture of your face, particularly your jaw hitting the floor when you see the furore that will be created if CWaC vote in favour of Neston being the preferred site for this Traveller development.
You are both naive and a fool if you believe that Neston people and their neighbours would not be outraged by this. I've already said above there would be a staunch and vehement objection to this proposal, of that, CWaC can be absolutely guaranteed
A protest forum is already being investigated… even at this early stage.
You are both naive and a fool if you believe that Neston people and their neighbours would not be outraged by this. I've already said above there would be a staunch and vehement objection to this proposal, of that, CWaC can be absolutely guaranteed
A protest forum is already being investigated… even at this early stage.
Katie RobsonAt 10:06 on 2nd September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
I've decided to let the comments so far stand, but could everyone please be mindful that this should not get personal, and that sweeping statements are not helpful.
mark bAt 10:23 on 2nd September 2011, mark b commented:
stuey? i am naive and a fool am i? i live in neston too and i am a bonafide nestonian and unlike some people in the town who oppose the travellers development-all because of a stigma attached to the travelling community i myself will welcome any travellers community in neston.i am not prepared to join the consensus of opinion in neston that we should object to a proposed travellers community-all because of bigots in the town who are using the usual stereotypical opinion that because they are travellers we dont want them in our town.it makes neston look bad if we at the very least dont welcome a new community to our town.and carrie? maybe somebody should contact cheshire police to enquire who the elderly people were from our village that mighty m claimed were "swindled out of money by travellers".and if mighty m"s claims are untrue then that carrie is wholly wrong and its a smear against the travelling community.
,At 11:52 on 2nd September 2011, , commented:
We have not had any comments on here yet from Andy Williams. As our Neston Cllr I would welcome his own opinion and thoughts on what he will do at CWAC to resolve this.
Clearly most people are against the proposal so hopefully our Cllr's will stand up for the majority here and stand against these ridiculous plans.
As for comments about travellers coming into the area and doing "dodgy work"... I know several people who had work done on the pretext it was a reputable company some years back and the work was sub-standard and guarantees worthless. I recall 2 people who reported this to trading standards .... but its usually a civil matter so the police don't get involved hence no crimes were reported.
Yes there is a stigma attached to travellers and yes some of it may be unfair, but a lot of it is certainly justified hence many many people in Neston are against this proposal and greatly outnumber the few who are not concerned. The comments above show this very clearly.
Clearly most people are against the proposal so hopefully our Cllr's will stand up for the majority here and stand against these ridiculous plans.
As for comments about travellers coming into the area and doing "dodgy work"... I know several people who had work done on the pretext it was a reputable company some years back and the work was sub-standard and guarantees worthless. I recall 2 people who reported this to trading standards .... but its usually a civil matter so the police don't get involved hence no crimes were reported.
Yes there is a stigma attached to travellers and yes some of it may be unfair, but a lot of it is certainly justified hence many many people in Neston are against this proposal and greatly outnumber the few who are not concerned. The comments above show this very clearly.
OwdenAt 12:46 on 2nd September 2011, Owden commented:
Mark B, yes, you would be naive and a fool as I said if you believe Neston people (and their neighbours) would not be outraged by this - Do even just a few of the comments on here not make people's feelings obvious ?
To counter Mark's 'alleged' inappropriate comments above, can you supply the audience as to what you perceive to be the positive impacts of having a Travellers site on our doorstep are ?
What this traveller site will offer Neston, it's residents and neighbours ?
Do you believe that this will place no additional impact on the already stretched policing in the area ?
Do you believe the traveller community will offer local people jobs in their businesses ?
To counter Mark's 'alleged' inappropriate comments above, can you supply the audience as to what you perceive to be the positive impacts of having a Travellers site on our doorstep are ?
What this traveller site will offer Neston, it's residents and neighbours ?
Do you believe that this will place no additional impact on the already stretched policing in the area ?
Do you believe the traveller community will offer local people jobs in their businesses ?
Katie RobsonAt 14:03 on 2nd September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
Cllr Andy Williams' statement has now been added to the article above.
jax1965At 14:50 on 2nd September 2011, jax1965 commented:
So Carrie what way is the voting going??
Katie RobsonAt 15:14 on 2nd September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
We're getting hundreds of hits on this page, but not everyone is voting. So far 32 people have voted. 29 say 'no', 2 say 'yes' and 1 says 'don't know.'
Those of you who haven't voted yet - it's simple to register and press the button of your choice. Your details are entirely confidential, we can't see who has voted, or for which answer.
Remember to sign up to the newsletter too, so you can be kept informed about this and all the other stories and events we cover every week.
Those of you who haven't voted yet - it's simple to register and press the button of your choice. Your details are entirely confidential, we can't see who has voted, or for which answer.
Remember to sign up to the newsletter too, so you can be kept informed about this and all the other stories and events we cover every week.
mighty mAt 15:46 on 2nd September 2011, mighty m commented:
I owe Mark b & Carrie an apology for my comments that caused offence, I did not nor do wish to sound that i was being bias and mark b you are right i should get my facts right first, I do know a few peoplewho have been done but i listened to hearsay were they said they had irish accents but me and i'm probably not alone jumped to the conclusion that it as got to be a traveller. if I knew how to delete the comment i would
Katie RobsonAt 16:05 on 2nd September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
Thank you Mighty M. Unfortunately the only way to delete a comment is to 'Report this comment as inappropriate.' I wish the functionality allowed for editing of comments, because if you delete yours now, it means some of ensuing comments cease to make sense. However, if you wish to do that, I'll get an alert in my admin section and will put a note on here accordingly.
For general note - I try to allow people as much free rein as possible in the comments section, to allow for lively debates. Usually these things balance out in the end. As long as people do not openly insult one another or 'name and shame' (i.e. in such a way as could leave us open to litigation), I am fairly easy going.
For general note - I try to allow people as much free rein as possible in the comments section, to allow for lively debates. Usually these things balance out in the end. As long as people do not openly insult one another or 'name and shame' (i.e. in such a way as could leave us open to litigation), I am fairly easy going.
OwdenAt 16:56 on 2nd September 2011, Owden commented:
MightyM, whilst I'm sure your apology will be welcomed by MarkB, there is no evidence to say they ‘were not’ travellers as much as they ‘were’ - Mark B and everyone else should understand and respect that also.
Going back to your concerns and Mark B's comments, the problem I believe is where people ‘have’ been victims of crime at the hands of travellers, how many actually report it for fear of reprisals from the travellers ? I'd like to believe that they are as culpable as any of us if the law is broken, but I fear that the Police will be relatively powerless to their closed community, leading residents to fear them and not to report crimes committed
It may be that the majority of ‘actual’ traveller crimes are committed by those on temporary sites rather than those on permanent sites (that is, where an actual charge has been brought)
Of course we have crime in our own communities and we cannot say that Travellers are a crime wave in themselves, but I do believe my opinion to be accurate about fear of reprisals hence not reporting crime
Going back to your concerns and Mark B's comments, the problem I believe is where people ‘have’ been victims of crime at the hands of travellers, how many actually report it for fear of reprisals from the travellers ? I'd like to believe that they are as culpable as any of us if the law is broken, but I fear that the Police will be relatively powerless to their closed community, leading residents to fear them and not to report crimes committed
It may be that the majority of ‘actual’ traveller crimes are committed by those on temporary sites rather than those on permanent sites (that is, where an actual charge has been brought)
Of course we have crime in our own communities and we cannot say that Travellers are a crime wave in themselves, but I do believe my opinion to be accurate about fear of reprisals hence not reporting crime
stan eAt 19:24 on 2nd September 2011, stan e commented:
I am a pensioner that lives in neston myself and i have read with interest both sides of the arguement on this issue and havin fought in the second world war and seen the horrors of what adolph hitler did to millions of gypsies in europe i believe that our village should welcome with open arms this development.i would be willing to meet this community and get to know them because am pretty sure a picture is being painted of them that is very untrue.stan(with my bus pass and my walking frame to hand)
marshAt 20:17 on 2nd September 2011, marsh commented:
Just like to say to all the councillors who are going to vote on this were is the money coming from to set up this site and the running of it.the local people of neston the same people who vote you in.please spend our money on things we need not things we do not.as we do pay your wages and keep you in a job so if we say no it means no
Katie RobsonAt 20:19 on 2nd September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
38 votes now. 'Yes' - 3. 'No' - 34. 'Don't know' - 1.
OwdenAt 21:06 on 2nd September 2011, Owden commented:
Mark B.
You may be confusing me with someone else, but indeed I don't live in Neston. I will however soon be again, and soon enough to want to air my views about this as you have. Whether a person lives here or not does not lessen their right to protest or support if it has an impact on them. People in Parkgate will air their views, as will people in Little Neston and perhaps even Heswall, should they be excluded because they do not live in Neston ? The impact of this is not exclusive to Neston
Saying I'm making ‘smearful’ comments and mud-slinging shows a lack of respect for debate and is tantamount to a direct accusation of a smear campaign. Your thoughts Carrie ?
I will gladly change my opinion and welcome a traveller’s site if someone can convince me of the positive benefits this will bring to Neston and it's neighbours, so far, this is not forthcoming
Stan, I absolutely concur with the abhorrent treatment of gypsies during WWII at the hands of Hitler, Himmler, Goebel’s & Goering, I believe the majority were Romany Gypsies rather than the more prevalent 'Travellers' that we see in present day. This treatment however was not exclusive to gypsies as you yourself know from experience. I don’t think parallels can be drawn with the Nazi treatment of Gypsies during WWII and the proposal for a traveller site in Neston however.
You may be confusing me with someone else, but indeed I don't live in Neston. I will however soon be again, and soon enough to want to air my views about this as you have. Whether a person lives here or not does not lessen their right to protest or support if it has an impact on them. People in Parkgate will air their views, as will people in Little Neston and perhaps even Heswall, should they be excluded because they do not live in Neston ? The impact of this is not exclusive to Neston
Saying I'm making ‘smearful’ comments and mud-slinging shows a lack of respect for debate and is tantamount to a direct accusation of a smear campaign. Your thoughts Carrie ?
I will gladly change my opinion and welcome a traveller’s site if someone can convince me of the positive benefits this will bring to Neston and it's neighbours, so far, this is not forthcoming
Stan, I absolutely concur with the abhorrent treatment of gypsies during WWII at the hands of Hitler, Himmler, Goebel’s & Goering, I believe the majority were Romany Gypsies rather than the more prevalent 'Travellers' that we see in present day. This treatment however was not exclusive to gypsies as you yourself know from experience. I don’t think parallels can be drawn with the Nazi treatment of Gypsies during WWII and the proposal for a traveller site in Neston however.
mighty mAt 21:58 on 2nd September 2011, mighty m commented:
can i just say why? do we have to supply permanent sites for people who do not want to mix in our society, do not respect us or our laws and hands out their own punishment with in their own community (which some of the punishment handed out we should adopt) when Ireland won't allow them to do it in their country.
lorraine bAt 22:05 on 2nd September 2011, lorraine b commented:
as far as i can tell everyone has their own oppinion, but as for the residents that will be living right next door to the travellers proposed site, i think that they are all saying the same WE DONT WANT IT !! i am all for welcoming new comers to neston and making them feel welcome but we had the travellers quite a few times very close to our homes and it was a nightmare, and your saying now that the council want to make them legal there !! i am sorry,but no !!! there is now a petition that has been set up, that i am sure many residents of the estates close to the proposed site will sign and also the local businessess on the clay hill !! please remember that these are the people that will have to live with them on a day to day basis, and we have already done that many times with the mess and hassle to go with it, so unless you have lived close the travellers sites, either legal or illegal then i think that you should listen to those that have been there and done that !!!
Katie RobsonAt 22:18 on 2nd September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
As previously stated, could everyone please keep the debate about the issue and not attack one another? I don't want to have to remove posts, as I am trying to provide an open forum, so please think before you 'zing'. Thanks.
mark bAt 00:01 on 3rd September 2011, mark b commented:
stuey? can you give evidence of the impact this proposed site will have on the residents of neston?
mark bAt 00:09 on 3rd September 2011, mark b commented:
lorraine b? you state you are "all for welcoming new comers to neston and making them feel welcome but we had the travellers quite a few times very close to our homes and it was a nightmare"?? can you state what this "nightmare" was-and if so can you substantiate what this "nightmare" was?
DaveyJAt 04:35 on 3rd September 2011, DaveyJ commented:
anyone who has lived in neston their whole lives will remember the problem we had with travellers making their camps on the clayhill estate feilds many years back with the mess noise and general disturbance the caused
the counsil even went to the trouble of digging trenches around the fields so they couldnt come back so that is the proof we have already suffered with travellers before and that is the reason so so many of us are saying no
for those on here supporting this nonsense just think that a simple poll by editor shows 33 against and 2 in favour so sorry but we are a democracy and the counsil should respect the majority and so should the minority who support this riduculous idea
the counsil even went to the trouble of digging trenches around the fields so they couldnt come back so that is the proof we have already suffered with travellers before and that is the reason so so many of us are saying no
for those on here supporting this nonsense just think that a simple poll by editor shows 33 against and 2 in favour so sorry but we are a democracy and the counsil should respect the majority and so should the minority who support this riduculous idea
OwdenAt 08:32 on 3rd September 2011, Owden commented:
Mark B, ? There are enough comments already on here from the people who have lived near it, and with it, to provide an impact - The council had to dig trenches on the Clayhill to stop them returning, does that not speak volumes ?
It may also be that where a permanent site is, it will attract temporary travellers as well as it's seen to be an accepted encampment area?
What I'm saying to you and other supporters is provide some postitive impacts and the benefits this will bring to Neston. I believe that the lack of positive comments to date shows that there are few, if any, positive benefits to this proposal
It may also be that where a permanent site is, it will attract temporary travellers as well as it's seen to be an accepted encampment area?
What I'm saying to you and other supporters is provide some postitive impacts and the benefits this will bring to Neston. I believe that the lack of positive comments to date shows that there are few, if any, positive benefits to this proposal
null nAt 12:51 on 3rd September 2011, null n commented:
What if we get the gypsies who are being evicted from Dale Farm Essex? They have already shown that they will not be bound by our planning laws and it could cost millions. The estimate in Essex is £18 million in legal fees and for returning the illegal part of the site to greenbelt. Those of us who pay council tax and our way in society need to have our "human rights" protected by those we elect to represent us. I agree with every point Cllr Williams has made.
Richard MAt 13:53 on 3rd September 2011, Richard M commented:
I don't want this proposal to happen, none of my neighbours want it to happen. It is about 150 yards from our homes and my main concern is that a culture which bases itself on not conforming to our society and it's values will not contribute positively to Neston. I note that the council have already admitted this through spin 'little negative impact' is what was quoted in the Daily Post. No mention there then of a positive impact!
grumpyoldmenAt 17:18 on 3rd September 2011, grumpyoldmen commented:
Well well! as written above - we ARE the dumping ground for CWAC once again. (Remember the arguments for Sainsburys? More footfall - regenerated shopping area new shops attracted - yada yada yada. Reality - net loss of shops - net massive loss of unrestricted parking. Soulless market. Displaced fair. No streetlights in Brook st ) Ah yes - we have the balance of Sainsburys money. Let's allow a lawless disgusting bunch of ne'er do wells in to a prime trade site and we won't have the problem of them buying into agricultural land then obtaining planning on the pretext there's no other space for them. Has anyone tested under the Proceeds of Crime ACt how they legally obtained the wherewithall to buy thes plots?
Now all we have to do is put a few great crested newts there, (£5000 fine if you are not licenced to move one). Establish a couple of bat houses and a badger sett, Then you suggest a roman road went through the site before it became contaminated with methane from the original tip (not to mention a bit of asbestos). We should be able to keep them off for many years if (and it is a big IF) we follow the usual planning rules! Ho Hum
Now all we have to do is put a few great crested newts there, (£5000 fine if you are not licenced to move one). Establish a couple of bat houses and a badger sett, Then you suggest a roman road went through the site before it became contaminated with methane from the original tip (not to mention a bit of asbestos). We should be able to keep them off for many years if (and it is a big IF) we follow the usual planning rules! Ho Hum
Katie RobsonAt 17:41 on 3rd September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
45 votes. 41 'no', 3 'yes' and 1 'don't know.'
JaxAt 18:35 on 3rd September 2011, Jax commented:
As a LOCAL resident and council tax-payer, I would very much appreciate my Planning Inspectors fulfilling their obligations to me and fellow residents. The mention of a full public consultation reminds us all of the FULL public consultation prior to the building of Sainsbury’s. It was a done deal and nothing we said made any difference AT ALL.
You also mention that well managed sites will have little negative impact on their surroundings! Well you better tell that to local residents who have had gypsies in the very same area before – so you don’t need to dispel the myths - they will assure you that they made quite an impact and it was certainly not a POSITIVE one. Hence they DO NOT wish a repeat performance. Thank you for listening to your residents many who will not have heard about this until it is too late.
You also mention that well managed sites will have little negative impact on their surroundings! Well you better tell that to local residents who have had gypsies in the very same area before – so you don’t need to dispel the myths - they will assure you that they made quite an impact and it was certainly not a POSITIVE one. Hence they DO NOT wish a repeat performance. Thank you for listening to your residents many who will not have heard about this until it is too late.
,At 19:32 on 3rd September 2011, , commented:
If this was allowed to go ahead and we did have problems as a result then it would be irreversible- you couldn't build the site then take it away at a later date.
Cllr Williams has also made some good points in his somewhat diplomatic appraisal of the situation - this site does not suit the needs of a travelling community either so no-one would win if it were located in Neston
Dumping ground is the only way to describe what is happening to Neston in so many ways - this being the biggest however if it happens.
Cllr Williams has also made some good points in his somewhat diplomatic appraisal of the situation - this site does not suit the needs of a travelling community either so no-one would win if it were located in Neston
Dumping ground is the only way to describe what is happening to Neston in so many ways - this being the biggest however if it happens.
Jeni YAt 20:43 on 3rd September 2011, Jeni Y commented:
Gypsies are nomadic - why do they need to stop in Neston - where are they going? We know for sure that they will be of Irish descent - not visiting relatives then? Of course, because of there diisgusting life style - leaving filth and destruction in their pathway not to mention thieving from decent folk - they have not been allowed to stay in their homeland - Ireland. No - send the scum over here and better still - what about upsetting innocent householders in a pleasant little town. They are certainly not here to make our lives better - they are parasites and should be treated as such!. Once again the Council seems to think it knows best and like Sainsburys (I was an objector along with so many) it will be a foregone conclusion - consultation - what a joke! Well managed site - does that mean a twenty-four hour patrol at council tax payers expense - I don't think so - but yes we will pay for their water, electricity etc supplies - clearing of rubbish - increased house insurance - tell me what will they be giving us for the privilege of staying in our community - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
We need to attract business to Neston NOT detract it - so our clever Council (which seems to have the same brain as the previous Ellesmere Port one) - first of all destroys the town centre with a near empty Sainsburys then thinks that our small industrial estate will entice new business with a gypsy encampment - am I going mad or is this the real world!
We need to attract business to Neston NOT detract it - so our clever Council (which seems to have the same brain as the previous Ellesmere Port one) - first of all destroys the town centre with a near empty Sainsburys then thinks that our small industrial estate will entice new business with a gypsy encampment - am I going mad or is this the real world!
DaveyJAt 00:52 on 4th September 2011, DaveyJ commented:
we need to stop calling them travellers as travellers move around the country
people who live on permanent camps are gypsies and expect everything to be provided for them without paying a penny towards it
for those few who support this just go on google and see the money that other counsils have spent on toilets and collecting rubbish hundreds of thousands yet the gypsies have lots of money because they dont pay theyre way ever !!!!!!!
people who live on permanent camps are gypsies and expect everything to be provided for them without paying a penny towards it
for those few who support this just go on google and see the money that other counsils have spent on toilets and collecting rubbish hundreds of thousands yet the gypsies have lots of money because they dont pay theyre way ever !!!!!!!
andy wAt 11:17 on 4th September 2011, andy w commented:
To partially answer the above question the councils estimate is £80'000 to £100'000 per pitch to prepare the site so for Clayhill it will cost a possible £1.2million to prepare the site.This will have to be paid out of the councils budget if it fails to gain any funding from central government
,At 13:20 on 4th September 2011, , commented:
The travelling community are almost certainly working in some capacity whether it be travelling entertainment or the more common businesses they run within their community
So why are the rest of us paying for their homes - the £80,000+ bill per pitch ! Why don't they pay for their homes themselves wherever they may be ?
The internet is full of genuine reports from other areas of the UK where council's have paid out hundreds of thousands to pay for water, toilets, refuse collection etc at the expense of their own budgets and therefore that of the council tax payers in the area.
Maybe we should all find a nice plot of land and expect the local authority to provide the ground & services for us totally free of charge.
Incidentally I read up on the consultancy firm that produced this report. Their website boasts about urban regeneration and how that is their driving force... surely here this is not regeneration of the area but in fact something that could damage the local area.
Putting many of the concerns aside for a second & thinking of investment in the area - if you were buying a house or considering setting up a business in a commercial unit would you consider a town with a large, permanent travellers camp right on the doorstep ? Most people would not thats for sure
I hope Cllr Williams and his colleagues will take a firm stand on this when representing us within CWAC.
One last point - I see the dreaded word "Bigot" quoted in some posts above and I take exception to that. A bigot is a "prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own" The concerns people are raising are genuine and backed with so much evidence freely available out there as to the damage these camps have caused elsewhere and in this case from those who remember the very negative impact travellers had in Neston when we last entertained them. Its genuine concern based on fact and not bigoted at all !
So why are the rest of us paying for their homes - the £80,000+ bill per pitch ! Why don't they pay for their homes themselves wherever they may be ?
The internet is full of genuine reports from other areas of the UK where council's have paid out hundreds of thousands to pay for water, toilets, refuse collection etc at the expense of their own budgets and therefore that of the council tax payers in the area.
Maybe we should all find a nice plot of land and expect the local authority to provide the ground & services for us totally free of charge.
Incidentally I read up on the consultancy firm that produced this report. Their website boasts about urban regeneration and how that is their driving force... surely here this is not regeneration of the area but in fact something that could damage the local area.
Putting many of the concerns aside for a second & thinking of investment in the area - if you were buying a house or considering setting up a business in a commercial unit would you consider a town with a large, permanent travellers camp right on the doorstep ? Most people would not thats for sure
I hope Cllr Williams and his colleagues will take a firm stand on this when representing us within CWAC.
One last point - I see the dreaded word "Bigot" quoted in some posts above and I take exception to that. A bigot is a "prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own" The concerns people are raising are genuine and backed with so much evidence freely available out there as to the damage these camps have caused elsewhere and in this case from those who remember the very negative impact travellers had in Neston when we last entertained them. Its genuine concern based on fact and not bigoted at all !
Size 9'sAt 17:23 on 4th September 2011, Size 9's commented:
I would not want to wade into this battle too much and face the accusations of bigotry & racism etc. So hopefully a few facts and not opinions that will not be taken too badly.
On CWAC website, it explains that a total of 65 sites are required, not 45.
“It concluded that between 31-45 additional residential pitches and 10 additional transit pitches for Gypsies and Travellers were needed by 2016 in Cheshire West and Chester. It also identified a need for an additional 10 plots for Travelling Showpeople in the borough by 2016.”
45+10+10 = 65.
Councillor Williams explains the cost for each pitch is £80 - £100k, so if we use the higher figure, given the track record of most government departments for spending more than first thought, then the total £6.5m. I have to therefore question how this cost is arrived at, because as the land in this exercise is already owned by CWAC, you could build 65 houses for the same budget, not just connect services to a yard.
It is ironic the whilst Neston Town Council is attempting to obtain some form of co-operation from CWAC to improve Clay Hill as a commercial centre, before they even start, there are plans to reduce the capacity of Clay Hill to be a commercial centre.
I think it fair to say, the majority of entrepreneurs, given a choice, would rather not have such a site on their commercial doorstep, for either their own reasons or fear of putting off customers as well, because even if the actual residents are entirely delightful and law abiding, a reputation precedes them.
Also on CWAC:
“All residents within the UK pay tax on their purchases, petrol and road tax as do Gypsies and Travellers.”
“All Gypsies and Travellers living on a local authority or privately owned sites pay council tax, rent, gas, electricity, and all other charges measured in the same way as other houses.”
I think these remarks are a little disingenuous and omit income tax, and as any self employed person who chooses not to keep accounts nor complete tax returns, the truth of the persons financial standing is hard to establish, but such lack of ‘income’ does make it easier to obtain benefits such as council tax benefit and so on.
Maybe the qualification for access to such a site should be a full and uninterrupted record with HMRC!
Crime.
My wife & I have suffered attempts at ‘doorstep’ crime on three occasions, once in the midlands, around 12 years ago, twice since moving to Neston. Each time the perpetrator was a traveller / gypsy or whatever the correct term is. Each time my wife or I had the good fortune to be able foil the attempts. The latest of these incidents was closely followed by doorstep theft from an elderly single woman pensioner in Neston, using the ‘water board’ trick or similar they attempted here.
On balance therefore, I would have to say I am against because:
The poor reputation of travellers, warranted or not, could damage business and prosperity for Clay Hill.
No matter the rights and wrongs, it is a cause of distress to local residents, particularly that closest.
It is unseemly to make someone’s home a pitch on an industrial estate next to a tip.
It is naïve to contend that people who have no wish to contribute to the UK society are paying the taxes that afford such items.
On CWAC website, it explains that a total of 65 sites are required, not 45.
“It concluded that between 31-45 additional residential pitches and 10 additional transit pitches for Gypsies and Travellers were needed by 2016 in Cheshire West and Chester. It also identified a need for an additional 10 plots for Travelling Showpeople in the borough by 2016.”
45+10+10 = 65.
Councillor Williams explains the cost for each pitch is £80 - £100k, so if we use the higher figure, given the track record of most government departments for spending more than first thought, then the total £6.5m. I have to therefore question how this cost is arrived at, because as the land in this exercise is already owned by CWAC, you could build 65 houses for the same budget, not just connect services to a yard.
It is ironic the whilst Neston Town Council is attempting to obtain some form of co-operation from CWAC to improve Clay Hill as a commercial centre, before they even start, there are plans to reduce the capacity of Clay Hill to be a commercial centre.
I think it fair to say, the majority of entrepreneurs, given a choice, would rather not have such a site on their commercial doorstep, for either their own reasons or fear of putting off customers as well, because even if the actual residents are entirely delightful and law abiding, a reputation precedes them.
Also on CWAC:
“All residents within the UK pay tax on their purchases, petrol and road tax as do Gypsies and Travellers.”
“All Gypsies and Travellers living on a local authority or privately owned sites pay council tax, rent, gas, electricity, and all other charges measured in the same way as other houses.”
I think these remarks are a little disingenuous and omit income tax, and as any self employed person who chooses not to keep accounts nor complete tax returns, the truth of the persons financial standing is hard to establish, but such lack of ‘income’ does make it easier to obtain benefits such as council tax benefit and so on.
Maybe the qualification for access to such a site should be a full and uninterrupted record with HMRC!
Crime.
My wife & I have suffered attempts at ‘doorstep’ crime on three occasions, once in the midlands, around 12 years ago, twice since moving to Neston. Each time the perpetrator was a traveller / gypsy or whatever the correct term is. Each time my wife or I had the good fortune to be able foil the attempts. The latest of these incidents was closely followed by doorstep theft from an elderly single woman pensioner in Neston, using the ‘water board’ trick or similar they attempted here.
On balance therefore, I would have to say I am against because:
The poor reputation of travellers, warranted or not, could damage business and prosperity for Clay Hill.
No matter the rights and wrongs, it is a cause of distress to local residents, particularly that closest.
It is unseemly to make someone’s home a pitch on an industrial estate next to a tip.
It is naïve to contend that people who have no wish to contribute to the UK society are paying the taxes that afford such items.
Size 9'sAt 17:25 on 4th September 2011, Size 9's commented:
My comment was accidentally listed twice. I hit the inappropriate button to get rid of it.
Jeni YAt 20:28 on 4th September 2011, Jeni Y commented:
Hi again
What annoys me is the sneaky way the Council has gone about selecting this site - it was just by chance from a neighbour that I found out - if it gets to the planning stage - which it will following the meeting on the 7th Septemer in Chester - its Council land and hey presto they do not refuse their own application! Consultation with local residents - thousands could object but they are not listening.
This country seems to be run by bureaucrats who are completely out of touch with the needs of the community - to adhere to a bunch of travellers who should change their life style to fit in not the other way round - spending thousands of pounds which could be spent on housing and new jobs - no wonder the country's in a mess.
You can be assured that the sites will be nowhere near Councillor Manley and Co.who assure us these sites will be closely monitored - please get a grip - you will be inviting not just a dozen travelling families - but many many more - and of course eviction by the Council is a pathetic operation costing thousands of pounds - do we really need this when money is desperately needed elsewhere for more just causes.
What annoys me is the sneaky way the Council has gone about selecting this site - it was just by chance from a neighbour that I found out - if it gets to the planning stage - which it will following the meeting on the 7th Septemer in Chester - its Council land and hey presto they do not refuse their own application! Consultation with local residents - thousands could object but they are not listening.
This country seems to be run by bureaucrats who are completely out of touch with the needs of the community - to adhere to a bunch of travellers who should change their life style to fit in not the other way round - spending thousands of pounds which could be spent on housing and new jobs - no wonder the country's in a mess.
You can be assured that the sites will be nowhere near Councillor Manley and Co.who assure us these sites will be closely monitored - please get a grip - you will be inviting not just a dozen travelling families - but many many more - and of course eviction by the Council is a pathetic operation costing thousands of pounds - do we really need this when money is desperately needed elsewhere for more just causes.
DaveyJAt 23:01 on 4th September 2011, DaveyJ commented:
worse tho Jeni is that the consil didnt choose this site but payed consutants a lot of money probably to pick the sites for them
i think the consultants just picked sites they thought were easy options and i would bet any money the consultants were even more out of touch with reality than our awful counsil is
i think the consultants just picked sites they thought were easy options and i would bet any money the consultants were even more out of touch with reality than our awful counsil is
PatrickAt 10:14 on 5th September 2011, Patrick commented:
I think it's a lovely idea just think of the beautiful poeple and the lucky heather, dolly pegs,palm reading and all them New drive ways done on the cheap iv seen that gypsy wedding show an I think they look like such nice people with a grate community spirit plus the other reason I don't live there anymore :-)
OwdenAt 10:50 on 5th September 2011, Owden commented:
Folks, the general feeling is that CWaC have got this in the bag already, the worst thing we can do is accept this - I know Sainsbury's was forced upon us regardless of the campaign, but one could argue that there were positive benefits to it as well as the negatives, i.e. Jobs for local people etc. I won't go into it as I know it's still a touchy subject for some.
But with a traveller’s site…. there are no positive benefits - and we should force this point on CWaC and challenge them to defend it, all the way. This protest will have far more sting in the tail than Sainsbury's ever did and CWaC's life can be made very hard with the right balance of research and evidence presented to show this is wrong for Neston from the outset and this site should be built elsewhere
Aside from Andy Williams’ comments, there has been nothing in reply from Kay Loch, Brenda Dowding or Louise Gittens to my mail sent a week ago … The silent councillors indeed as somebody else put. Whilst Andy’s comments have been welcome, there are a some holes in it, which I for one would not present to CWac
1. The nearest Catholic primary school is St. Winefred’s on Mellock Lane - In fact the list of Catholic schools available on the Wirral is as below – The ‘Chester’ defence falls flat on it’s face from the start
Christ The King Catholic Primary School, Bromborough
Holy Cross Catholic Primary School, Bidston
Ladymount Catholic Primary School, Pensby
Our Lady and St Edward's Catholic Primary School, Birkenhead
Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Primary School, Leasowe
Our Lady of Pity Catholic Primary School, Greasby
Sacred Heart Catholic Primary School, Moreton
St Alban's Catholic Primary School, Wallasey
St Anne's Catholic Primary School, Rock Ferry
St John's Catholic Infant School, Bebington
St John's Catholic Junior School, Bebington
St Joseph's Catholic Primary School, Upton
St Joseph's Catholic Primary School, Wallasey
St Joseph's Catholic Primary School Birkenhead, Oxton
St Michael and All Angels Catholic Primary School, Woodchurch
St Paul's Catholic Primary School, Beechwood
St Peter and St Paul's Catholic Primary School, Wallasey
St Peter's Catholic Primary School, Noctorum
St Werburgh's Catholic Primary School, Birkenhead
St John Plessington Catholic College, Bebington
St Mary's Catholic College, Wallasey
2. ‘Proximity to a household waste tip’ – A good point but we know travellers are not fussy, CWaC know that and this will not hold any weight with them – You ask a Dale Farm evictee and they’d be here in Neston in a breath, living on the tip or next to it
Andy, we really appreciate your comments but we need to strenghten the case against this proposal
I did try and send the following to the mail address as supplied within the story above but there is a spelling mistake (on CWaC’s behalf) – It should be GypsyandTravellerenquiries@cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk – Carrie, can you amend this above ? I’ve asked CWaC to rectify this on their website ahead of Wednesday meeting should people want to ask questions (and be provided answers) before then
Has anyone started up an official protest group yet ? I believe a petition is underway
_______________________________
I’ve read the article on Aboutmyarea.co.uk and I am shocked and annoyed (specifically about Neston) that even before CWaC have met to discuss this (as planned for 7th September), a recommendation has been made to apply for planning permission as outlined below in Section 7.2 of the of PDF available on your website
“In line with the recommendations of the Study, that planning permission is sought by the Council for the development of the sites listed in paragraph 6.1 of this report”
I also draw your attention to the quote on your website that states;
“Any sites identified which are taken forward will require planning permission and will be subject to further public consultation”
So in light of the meeting (to discuss potential sites) that has not taken place yet, a recommendation has already been given to apply for planning permission ? Please can you provide me with this justification for this, and whether planning permission has been applied for and the details of this if it has.
1. How are the different sites compared to each other ? Is it purely ticks in the boxes i.e. Site close to schools/Sport Centres? If not, what other criteria is examined and considered ?
2. What is the likelihood of an approval in Neston compared to the other sites ? What criteria is being favoured for the Neston site in comparison to the other sites
3. What consultation has been held with Cheshire Constabulary on these proposals ?
4. What is the perceived impact to policing in the area ? Bearing in mind Neston does not now have a 24 hour police station, and that PCSO’s outnumber normal Police ?
5. What are the positive impacts to Neston and it’s community of building a travellers site there ? Please be thorough in detail
6. What are the negative impacts to Neston and it’s community of building a travellers site there ? Please be thorough in detail
7. What have been the costs to EP&NBC and CWaC for the previous times that travellers have resided on the Clayhill Estate over the last ten years ? I.e. digging trenches to prevent the return of travellers and cleaning up the Clayhill Estate and removing all the rubbish left behind - Please be thorough in detail
8. How a permanent traveller’s site will not encourage temporary travellers to reside alongside a permanent traveller’s site
But with a traveller’s site…. there are no positive benefits - and we should force this point on CWaC and challenge them to defend it, all the way. This protest will have far more sting in the tail than Sainsbury's ever did and CWaC's life can be made very hard with the right balance of research and evidence presented to show this is wrong for Neston from the outset and this site should be built elsewhere
Aside from Andy Williams’ comments, there has been nothing in reply from Kay Loch, Brenda Dowding or Louise Gittens to my mail sent a week ago … The silent councillors indeed as somebody else put. Whilst Andy’s comments have been welcome, there are a some holes in it, which I for one would not present to CWac
1. The nearest Catholic primary school is St. Winefred’s on Mellock Lane - In fact the list of Catholic schools available on the Wirral is as below – The ‘Chester’ defence falls flat on it’s face from the start
Christ The King Catholic Primary School, Bromborough
Holy Cross Catholic Primary School, Bidston
Ladymount Catholic Primary School, Pensby
Our Lady and St Edward's Catholic Primary School, Birkenhead
Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Primary School, Leasowe
Our Lady of Pity Catholic Primary School, Greasby
Sacred Heart Catholic Primary School, Moreton
St Alban's Catholic Primary School, Wallasey
St Anne's Catholic Primary School, Rock Ferry
St John's Catholic Infant School, Bebington
St John's Catholic Junior School, Bebington
St Joseph's Catholic Primary School, Upton
St Joseph's Catholic Primary School, Wallasey
St Joseph's Catholic Primary School Birkenhead, Oxton
St Michael and All Angels Catholic Primary School, Woodchurch
St Paul's Catholic Primary School, Beechwood
St Peter and St Paul's Catholic Primary School, Wallasey
St Peter's Catholic Primary School, Noctorum
St Werburgh's Catholic Primary School, Birkenhead
St John Plessington Catholic College, Bebington
St Mary's Catholic College, Wallasey
2. ‘Proximity to a household waste tip’ – A good point but we know travellers are not fussy, CWaC know that and this will not hold any weight with them – You ask a Dale Farm evictee and they’d be here in Neston in a breath, living on the tip or next to it
Andy, we really appreciate your comments but we need to strenghten the case against this proposal
I did try and send the following to the mail address as supplied within the story above but there is a spelling mistake (on CWaC’s behalf) – It should be GypsyandTravellerenquiries@cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk – Carrie, can you amend this above ? I’ve asked CWaC to rectify this on their website ahead of Wednesday meeting should people want to ask questions (and be provided answers) before then
Has anyone started up an official protest group yet ? I believe a petition is underway
_______________________________
I’ve read the article on Aboutmyarea.co.uk and I am shocked and annoyed (specifically about Neston) that even before CWaC have met to discuss this (as planned for 7th September), a recommendation has been made to apply for planning permission as outlined below in Section 7.2 of the of PDF available on your website
“In line with the recommendations of the Study, that planning permission is sought by the Council for the development of the sites listed in paragraph 6.1 of this report”
I also draw your attention to the quote on your website that states;
“Any sites identified which are taken forward will require planning permission and will be subject to further public consultation”
So in light of the meeting (to discuss potential sites) that has not taken place yet, a recommendation has already been given to apply for planning permission ? Please can you provide me with this justification for this, and whether planning permission has been applied for and the details of this if it has.
1. How are the different sites compared to each other ? Is it purely ticks in the boxes i.e. Site close to schools/Sport Centres? If not, what other criteria is examined and considered ?
2. What is the likelihood of an approval in Neston compared to the other sites ? What criteria is being favoured for the Neston site in comparison to the other sites
3. What consultation has been held with Cheshire Constabulary on these proposals ?
4. What is the perceived impact to policing in the area ? Bearing in mind Neston does not now have a 24 hour police station, and that PCSO’s outnumber normal Police ?
5. What are the positive impacts to Neston and it’s community of building a travellers site there ? Please be thorough in detail
6. What are the negative impacts to Neston and it’s community of building a travellers site there ? Please be thorough in detail
7. What have been the costs to EP&NBC and CWaC for the previous times that travellers have resided on the Clayhill Estate over the last ten years ? I.e. digging trenches to prevent the return of travellers and cleaning up the Clayhill Estate and removing all the rubbish left behind - Please be thorough in detail
8. How a permanent traveller’s site will not encourage temporary travellers to reside alongside a permanent traveller’s site
Katie RobsonAt 11:01 on 5th September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
Regarding the email address you mention, Stuey, I originally had it as you have stated, but was then informed that it was incorrect, and should have an 's' after 'traveller' - hence it currently reads as it does in the article above. I think this is now the correct one, as verified by Dawn Taylor from the relevant department at Cheshire West and Chester Council.
mark bAt 13:02 on 5th September 2011, mark b commented:
Over the last few days i have read with interest the comments made on this subject and while i was originally against a travellers site on the clayhill i feel my opinion has now changed so much so and after talking to several people in the town and talking to several people in the pubs in neston i honestly could not find one person who was for the travellers site.yes i stick by my opinion that travellers need somewhere to live but i feel after my efforts over the last few days to gauge the grass root opinion of my fellow nestonians i can say without a heavy heart that i am against a travellers site in neston.i would also like to thank stuey for his industrious and steely determination in saying what every nestonian thinks that we dont want this site in neston-am sorry stuey that i didnt listen to what you and others were telling me and i now will do what i can to stop this site moving to neston.and i would like to ask councillor andy williams a question-"did you and cwac know about this proposed site before we had the election in neston that elected you as our councillor in neston?
,At 13:20 on 5th September 2011, , commented:
I am extremely disappointed to hear some of our councillors are silent on this matter and to be honest Andy Williams' comments in the article above are extremely muted for a guy who is normally so strong in his opinions.
This is the biggest change (disaster maybe) to hit Neston in a very long time where the local community will not benefit in the slightest yet our councillors remain quiet. Why did we elect them again ? To represent us with strength and determination ?
Incidentally has anyone spoken to or emailed our MP ?
This is the biggest change (disaster maybe) to hit Neston in a very long time where the local community will not benefit in the slightest yet our councillors remain quiet. Why did we elect them again ? To represent us with strength and determination ?
Incidentally has anyone spoken to or emailed our MP ?
andy wAt 14:32 on 5th September 2011, andy w commented:
Hi Mark in answer to your question did i know about this proposed site before the election the answer is no.The decision whether to accept the report and go for planning permission on wednesday will be made by the executive committee which consists of all conservative councillors ,if i had got wind of this before the election i think i might have mentioned it somewhere in my election leaflet as the labour candidate,as for CWaC i don't know when the consultants started their report and i wouldn't be privy to any information as i wasn't on the council before the election
As for the next comment about my response being muted i am doing a lot of work behind the scenes and haven't stopped since the announcement.As a councillor i have to weigh up all the facts before me and put forward these facts for the executive to consider.I understand this is a very emotional subject but if i were to put forward some of the reasons for refusal from this website i would probably end up being brought before a scrutiny committee accused of racism which wouldn't get us anywere,instead i want to put forward a reasoned argument that i hope the committee will relate to and remove the Neston site from being considered and choose a far more suitable alternative
As for the next comment about my response being muted i am doing a lot of work behind the scenes and haven't stopped since the announcement.As a councillor i have to weigh up all the facts before me and put forward these facts for the executive to consider.I understand this is a very emotional subject but if i were to put forward some of the reasons for refusal from this website i would probably end up being brought before a scrutiny committee accused of racism which wouldn't get us anywere,instead i want to put forward a reasoned argument that i hope the committee will relate to and remove the Neston site from being considered and choose a far more suitable alternative
OwdenAt 14:35 on 5th September 2011, Owden commented:
From CWaC
Cheshire West and Chester Council - Thank you for your comment. We must point out that we will be taking no action in relation to planning permission applications until the Executive has resolved on the report that it is to consider this Wednesday (September 7).
Thank you for letting us know about the broken email link, it has now been fixed and it will be live on the website within one hour.
Cheshire West and Chester Council - Thank you for your comment. We must point out that we will be taking no action in relation to planning permission applications until the Executive has resolved on the report that it is to consider this Wednesday (September 7).
Thank you for letting us know about the broken email link, it has now been fixed and it will be live on the website within one hour.
,At 16:47 on 5th September 2011, , commented:
Thanks for your response Andy & all your efforts are appreciated. I wonder if we can get the other CWAC councillors for the surrounding areas (Louise & Kay) to respond with their views and hopefully support. Would be good to hear off the many town councillors too with their views
Support from councillors is essential to any objection or action we take should this go ahead
Support from councillors is essential to any objection or action we take should this go ahead
marshAt 20:11 on 5th September 2011, marsh commented:
with ref to potition yes there is 1 underway you need 1500 signatures for a full council debate if you get 750 it will be scheduled for consideratin at an appropriate committee if you handed it in with less then it does not count and you can not add to it again so if any one else has one then we can add togather to make the numbers up
Cheshire CatAt 21:03 on 5th September 2011, Cheshire Cat commented:
Where can we find this petition ??
Katie RobsonAt 21:53 on 5th September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
65 votes. 61 say 'No', 3 say 'Yes' and 1 'Don't Know.'
OwdenAt 22:33 on 5th September 2011, Owden commented:
Is there a group of people gathering petition signatures formally ? Market day would be a good pitch as well as the pubs over the weekend, Traceys food hall has offered their support, there's lots of choices for a keen protest group to gather petition signatures
FarleyAt 23:28 on 5th September 2011, Farley commented:
This is an absolute joke - there are so many local people looking for housing, why should money be spent making homes for "travellers"? If they are travellers why do they need a permanent site? This can't be allowed to happen!
sardie123At 09:19 on 6th September 2011, sardie123 commented:
Is anybody organising any official protests at the council meetings? I have signed the petition. It would be good to have somebody officially organise a website/facebook page to coordinate any residents opposition. I note from previous comments that a facebook page will be set up has this been done yet? Thank you (ps my vote is NO!!!!)
mark bAt 09:39 on 6th September 2011, mark b commented:
i was in the lodestar pub yesterday and i heardfrom one of the regulars that a facebook page has been set up.can carrie confirm this??
Katie RobsonAt 09:55 on 6th September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
A number of facts have come to light which would appear to demonstrate that the proposed site at Buildwas Road is unsuitable, even by the consultants' own criteria. These will be presented at the meeting at 5.30pm on 7th September at CW&C HQ in Chester. It is entirely possible, therefore, that the Executive will do do the sensible thing and take Neston of the proposed sites list.
If not, then it moves to the planning permission and public consultation stage, at which point, no doubt, everyone will make their views crystal clear.
Meanwhile, there is a Facebook page here: http://on.fb.me/nIlwFj.
Petitions are available to sign in the Greenland Fishery, Brewers Arms and Marsh Nurseries (Parkgate). In addition, volunteers are going door-to-door, particularly in the immediate area around Clayhill.
If not, then it moves to the planning permission and public consultation stage, at which point, no doubt, everyone will make their views crystal clear.
Meanwhile, there is a Facebook page here: http://on.fb.me/nIlwFj.
Petitions are available to sign in the Greenland Fishery, Brewers Arms and Marsh Nurseries (Parkgate). In addition, volunteers are going door-to-door, particularly in the immediate area around Clayhill.
lorraine bAt 10:05 on 6th September 2011, lorraine b commented:
the facebook site is http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/259304924092619/
OwdenAt 10:06 on 6th September 2011, Owden commented:
My view around the Facebook site is that it needs comments to be vetted before publishing, otherwise CWaC will not take this serious - Anything that could be viewed as bigotted or racist needs to be removed, I know we have free speech and I applaud and support it, but CWaC with dismiss anything with 'hate' connotations and use this against us.
We need to deal with facts and facts alone with CWaC
We need to deal with facts and facts alone with CWaC
Katie RobsonAt 14:12 on 6th September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
78 Votes. 74 say 'No,' 3 say 'Yes' and 1 says 'Don't Know.'
ParkgateJackAt 18:09 on 6th September 2011, ParkgateJack commented:
I used to live in Thornton Hough but now I live in Parkgate. A few years ago the village was hit by a group of travellers who stole 6 caravans from the area. Do we really want the possibility of increased crime rates in the area to the many innocent inhabitants of Neston? I know I don't...
Louise gAt 19:03 on 6th September 2011, Louise g commented:
Hi if Stuey would like to send me the email I will reply as I do to all my emails, and I didn't receive this one. check the spelling of my surname as it is Gittins not Gittens so that may be why. To fill some of the gaps above: the travellers will be expected to pay both council tax and a rent and the site is likely to be managed by a housing association. I agree with andy that this is not a suitable site, for the reasons he has given: however we do have a legal and moral obligation to provide permanent and transit sites within the council.
Louise Cllr Little Neston and Burton
Louise Cllr Little Neston and Burton
FarleyAt 22:34 on 6th September 2011, Farley commented:
To Louise Gittins - what moral obligation should we have to provide a permanent site for "travellers"? Is it not a more moral obligation to house local people first?
DaveyJAt 02:00 on 7th September 2011, DaveyJ commented:
nearly everyone in neston is against this and our counsillors were elected to represent us
i can predict that if any counsillor supports this and goes against nearly everyone in Neston then they dont have a hope in hells chance of getting elected again next time thats for sure or anyone from the same party
our counsillors have a moral obligation to represent the people who took the trouble to go out and vote for them as their first priority and they should remember that
i can predict that if any counsillor supports this and goes against nearly everyone in Neston then they dont have a hope in hells chance of getting elected again next time thats for sure or anyone from the same party
our counsillors have a moral obligation to represent the people who took the trouble to go out and vote for them as their first priority and they should remember that
megamanAt 12:14 on 7th September 2011, megaman commented:
Does anyone remember the mess left on lees lane a year or so ago after a few travellers were there illegally??? What a mess.
ENOUGH SAID!
i personally will leave neston if this goes ahead, property prices have fallen enough already and if these lot get in it wont get any better thats for sure.
Travellers are a cunning clever lot, give them an inch and the Clayhill will be like Dale Farm in Essex in a matter of no time. These sites will attract other travellers and it will be impossible for the council to stop this happening. The pubs will be overrun
Business's will be off put from moving here and local jobs/trades will suffer. additional policing will need to be enforced for the trouble that will erupt.
Why do these so called travellers need a site anyhow? i thought they like to travel hence the name...........
There's a reason why they are not wanted in Ireland, do your research. I'm sick of England being such a soft touch these days and looks like Neston is still being treated like the old dog. If you wanna live somewhere buy a house get a job contribute.
LOOK IS THIS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR.
ENOUGH SAID!
i personally will leave neston if this goes ahead, property prices have fallen enough already and if these lot get in it wont get any better thats for sure.
Travellers are a cunning clever lot, give them an inch and the Clayhill will be like Dale Farm in Essex in a matter of no time. These sites will attract other travellers and it will be impossible for the council to stop this happening. The pubs will be overrun
Business's will be off put from moving here and local jobs/trades will suffer. additional policing will need to be enforced for the trouble that will erupt.
Why do these so called travellers need a site anyhow? i thought they like to travel hence the name...........
There's a reason why they are not wanted in Ireland, do your research. I'm sick of England being such a soft touch these days and looks like Neston is still being treated like the old dog. If you wanna live somewhere buy a house get a job contribute.
LOOK IS THIS WHAT YOU VOTED FOR.
Sharon LAt 12:23 on 7th September 2011, Sharon L commented:
Are the Council going to pay for the extra security that will be needed for businesses on the Clayhill Industrial Estate. The Surestart Nursery has to close and then we have to pay towards a site for these thieving, dirty low lifes. If these move in then the businesses and the surrounding houses are going to be a target for break ins. BLOODY OUTRAGEOUS !!!!!!!
Lynn BAt 13:13 on 7th September 2011, Lynn B commented:
The decision makers appear to do what they want despite what local residents think or feel.
Will CWaC make up the shortfall on my house when I sell it and its valued at less than market rate because of these travellers - no
Will CWaC put up my council tax because of increased police requirements - yes
Will businesses move out of Clayhill and will the travellers start spreading out - yes
Did the council clear up after the last lot who landed in Neston finally moved on - No.
Travellers are a law unto themselves, why would they respect our area?
They are 'travellers' the clue is in the name - why do they need permanent sites ?
Why does Neston always seem to get these people landing on their door step?
As for the people who voted yes - they must be travellers voting on their iphones !
Will CWaC make up the shortfall on my house when I sell it and its valued at less than market rate because of these travellers - no
Will CWaC put up my council tax because of increased police requirements - yes
Will businesses move out of Clayhill and will the travellers start spreading out - yes
Did the council clear up after the last lot who landed in Neston finally moved on - No.
Travellers are a law unto themselves, why would they respect our area?
They are 'travellers' the clue is in the name - why do they need permanent sites ?
Why does Neston always seem to get these people landing on their door step?
As for the people who voted yes - they must be travellers voting on their iphones !
roger fAt 14:22 on 7th September 2011, roger f commented:
I remember the days when the Travellers used to set up home of about 20 caravans on the fields on the clayhill near to the tip, what a mess, the tip got ransacked every night with the looting, and not to be crude but travellers children would do thier business in the long grass and just walk away leaving it on the ground, I used to work at the tip, so I know first hand of how they live.
I know the tip has security cameras now but that won`t stop them getting in and trashing the place.
As for the travellers supposed to of ripped off old people and done dodgy work, well one of my neighbours and myself had our driveways tarmaced by them and an awful job it was, I refused to pay them all the money they asked for and that night, they came back and poured black liquid all over the drive and it melted the tarmac.
So for those local residents who think we should say yes, I would suggest you think again and say no to the proposed travellers site. E&OA
I know the tip has security cameras now but that won`t stop them getting in and trashing the place.
As for the travellers supposed to of ripped off old people and done dodgy work, well one of my neighbours and myself had our driveways tarmaced by them and an awful job it was, I refused to pay them all the money they asked for and that night, they came back and poured black liquid all over the drive and it melted the tarmac.
So for those local residents who think we should say yes, I would suggest you think again and say no to the proposed travellers site. E&OA
Anne SAt 18:03 on 7th September 2011, Anne S commented:
I have only just heard about this and I support all those who think "travellers" should do just that. I work near Bumpers Lane in Chester and have seen first hand the mess left behind when illegal camps are set up. I don't see how a permanent site would change things. I have voted on this site and will be signing the petition over the weekend.
SHAREAt 10:40 on 8th September 2011, SHARE commented:
How many people here have actually realised that, (like myself and my family) there are already lots of Romany, Gypsies and Travellers that you already meet with, talk to, work with, buy things from in the community - people make stupid remarks and accusations regarding race and culture without even looking past the end of their noses.
I myself am Romany, I support many people regardless of their culture, ethnicity or where or how they choose to live - as we are all human; true there are some people that ruin it for everyone but if you want to stereotype like the majority on here you can say that there has been no Romany, Gypsy or Traveller leader in the world who has brought on the death of so many people from so many cultures and from what I could say on here from what I read I could say all Non Romany, Gypsies and Travellers - so everyone who is not a Romany, Gypsy or Traveller are racist, trouble causing bullies that are self centred and lack any amount of knowledge or decency - however as I am educated I understand that peoples negative behaviours are down to the INDIVIDUALS and NOT their culture, I live amongst other HUMANS and appreciate life, I have met a few bad eggs in life - some claiming to be Romany, some claiming to be non Romany, Gypsy, Traveller .. whatever and I have the decency to think, you know what it is because of how they are as an individual and I wont allow it to cloud my judgement or make me STEREOTYPE all those I meet or work with in life... you just avoid them and move on.
As something to make your brains think a little - I work for the NHS, and I can say that the last thing on a persons mind when they need support in lets say surgery as an example and the last thing you will be thinking about the Dr or professional whom is supporting you and about to give you treatment "hmm I wonder if he or she is Romany, Gypsy or Traveller and causes the value of my property to go down, throws rubbish all over the area, brings more crime to the area, is unable to bring about social harmony in the area" no you simply think will this treatment help me.
I am Romany, I work in the NHS and I provide support to all so remember there are lots of people out there including Drs and Nurses that we dont know much about but are selflessly providing supporting us all and maybe one of the kids going on to the proposed site in the area will one day be a Dr helping you - regardless of you being a non traveller or questioning if you had depreciated the value of their caravan locally or asking about the last time your rubbish had been collected.
I myself am Romany, I support many people regardless of their culture, ethnicity or where or how they choose to live - as we are all human; true there are some people that ruin it for everyone but if you want to stereotype like the majority on here you can say that there has been no Romany, Gypsy or Traveller leader in the world who has brought on the death of so many people from so many cultures and from what I could say on here from what I read I could say all Non Romany, Gypsies and Travellers - so everyone who is not a Romany, Gypsy or Traveller are racist, trouble causing bullies that are self centred and lack any amount of knowledge or decency - however as I am educated I understand that peoples negative behaviours are down to the INDIVIDUALS and NOT their culture, I live amongst other HUMANS and appreciate life, I have met a few bad eggs in life - some claiming to be Romany, some claiming to be non Romany, Gypsy, Traveller .. whatever and I have the decency to think, you know what it is because of how they are as an individual and I wont allow it to cloud my judgement or make me STEREOTYPE all those I meet or work with in life... you just avoid them and move on.
As something to make your brains think a little - I work for the NHS, and I can say that the last thing on a persons mind when they need support in lets say surgery as an example and the last thing you will be thinking about the Dr or professional whom is supporting you and about to give you treatment "hmm I wonder if he or she is Romany, Gypsy or Traveller and causes the value of my property to go down, throws rubbish all over the area, brings more crime to the area, is unable to bring about social harmony in the area" no you simply think will this treatment help me.
I am Romany, I work in the NHS and I provide support to all so remember there are lots of people out there including Drs and Nurses that we dont know much about but are selflessly providing supporting us all and maybe one of the kids going on to the proposed site in the area will one day be a Dr helping you - regardless of you being a non traveller or questioning if you had depreciated the value of their caravan locally or asking about the last time your rubbish had been collected.
SHAREAt 10:50 on 8th September 2011, SHARE commented:
and to quote a relative of mine - there are lots of people that tar everyone with the same brush - the people you are talking about whom are acting negatively - are they Roma? Rrom? English Romany? Welsh Romany? Scottish Romany? English Gypsy? Welsh Gypsy? Scottish Gypsy? Irish Gypsy? English Traveller? Irish Traveller? A Showman? New age Traveller?, someone pretending to be any of the others living in a caravan but behaves badly like what people call a Tinker?
Food for thought.
Food for thought.
Lynn BAt 12:35 on 9th September 2011, Lynn B commented:
I for one am speaking from experience from the last time these 'travellers' were here not from a pre-judged, pre-conceived racist idea. You try selling a house next to a gypsy site no mater whether they are good travellers or bad.
DaveyJAt 17:00 on 11th September 2011, DaveyJ commented:
well said lynn and what about all the news reports on the hell travellers have caused around england
in the bbc news today travellers have been arrested for keeping people locked up as slaves
im sorry but their values are so different to mine and i will fight any plans to have a traveller camp in neston along side everyone else in this town who is against this
in the bbc news today travellers have been arrested for keeping people locked up as slaves
im sorry but their values are so different to mine and i will fight any plans to have a traveller camp in neston along side everyone else in this town who is against this
Helena EAt 18:45 on 11th September 2011, Helena E commented:
Well worn phrase, but there's no smoke without fire.
If the gypsies and travellers giving them a bad name are a 'miniority' then the majority need to address the problems their fellow G&T's are causing.
You see yourselves as a 'community' who should be given equal rights with every other resident in the UK. So, start acting like a community - clean up your act/s, do some PR and marketing to address the perceived issues. It's no different to what the community of Neston has to do to bring new business in and attract people to live here, not to mention protecting the rights and interests of those that already do.
Another well worn phrase, but you can't have your cake and eat it. Either you intend to fully engage with the community you choose to come and live with, or butt out.
If the gypsies and travellers giving them a bad name are a 'miniority' then the majority need to address the problems their fellow G&T's are causing.
You see yourselves as a 'community' who should be given equal rights with every other resident in the UK. So, start acting like a community - clean up your act/s, do some PR and marketing to address the perceived issues. It's no different to what the community of Neston has to do to bring new business in and attract people to live here, not to mention protecting the rights and interests of those that already do.
Another well worn phrase, but you can't have your cake and eat it. Either you intend to fully engage with the community you choose to come and live with, or butt out.
Helena EAt 18:48 on 11th September 2011, Helena E commented:
p.s. Frankly, I'm sick of hearing that the Government have decided that local councils now have statutory obligation to house travellers and gypsies, because they are minority that needs protection. What about the protection of the majority??? I appreciate that not all G&T's seek to dodge their financial obligations to the state and local council, and not all choose to rip off old ladies, but clearly a number of them must have done so to build up the reputation they have. Sort it out, and you will be more welcome, and most of us will then stop feeling aggrieved at having to finance your lifestyle choices.
Katie RobsonAt 16:44 on 23rd September 2011, Katie Robson responded:
The last few comments have been removed as it was becoming a personal argument.
Also, one of the correspondents removed a comment that rendered the rest somewhat irrelevant.
Also, one of the correspondents removed a comment that rendered the rest somewhat irrelevant.
OwdenAt 11:05 on 9th May 2012, Owden commented:
Carrie, are you aware of any further update on this ? Has Cheshire Spa's and Pool's purchased the land now ? Can't seem to find out any updates on the web
You need to log in before you can do that! It's only a quick registration process to join the AMA network and completely free.
Help