To think that rights/wrongs aside, a council needing to make £300m cuts should focus it's funds somewhere other than evicting gypsies?

[Blubell]

I know there are massive fors and againsts in the Dale Farm evictions, and I don't want to start a big travellers debate, but in this time of austerity measures, and the fact that Essex council needs to cut £300m in 3 years, is evicting the site now, when it's a case that has been going on for 10 years really the best way to spend the little cash they have? Its been reported it's going to cost the council £18m to return the site - which used to be a scrapyard so hardly a place of outstanding beauty - back to greenbelt, how many carers, libraries etc will be lost to fund that? Just a thought.......

Mathanxiety would you please answer my question about travellers evacuating their bowels and the health question theroeon ?

I remember years ago in my work dealing with 1 family of travellers for a while. They explained that they thought it was dirty to use the toilet in the caravan. But they went somewhere suitable, dug a hole and buried their poo.

Of course it is unacceptable to just poo anywhere in public spaces. And yes I think it is unacceptable for people to urinate in city centres as well.

And the council are not trying to get ris of the Travellers. The perfectly legal site will remain there, as it should. It is simply the illegal one that the council want to get rid of.

Surely people historically used to poo in holes though? Wasnt it all the chucking poo out of windows that caused the plague? Though I may have dreamt that

But people poo on the street in certain countries

And in terms of trying to reach a compromise, I can't see what compromise there could be. Those arguing this, what compromise could there possibly be?

Yes Roger people do poo in the street in some countries. And in some countries children play or live next to open running sewers.

AW, I just did. What's the difference between Traveller crap and yours?

Math - The difference as you know is that my poo goes into a toilet and then enters our sewage system which provides a safe way to get rid of human waste. Leaving poo in public places is unsightly and creates a health hazard.

I think the main question is why did they let them expand the site for so long. I understand that the travellers employed lawyers to create legal cases against the council but if those laws were passed and they were allowed to stay and still carry on expanding I do find it all a bit eyebrow raising that ten years worth of their community will just be destroyed. Than again, has anyone watched that clip on the bbc site about that town in Ireland that most of them own?

I will try and find it

Rathkeale

I think the difference is that Traveller poo doesn't find its way to the internet.

but seriously why aren't the travellers being invoiced for some of the costs. I cannot believe they do not have any assets. If it was you or me wouldn't the baliffs be in.

e.g. non payment of a speeding fine, no car tax, insurance, working cash in hand and not paying tax

They should also be billed for cleaning up the site. Why should the tax payer always lose out.

That makes the assumption that none of them pay tax and that in itself is a prejudiced reaction. You do understand that dont you?

math - Fine just ignore the serious points people are making by cracking a "joke". FFS!

Roger - Alemci is arguing that the Travellers should be invoiced for the cost of the eviction and any clean up costs. This is totally different from saying Travellers don't pay tax.

Yes Roger but i am sure some may pay tax but in all honesty if they are illegally occupying a site do you think they do?

I just think it is time that they should incur some costs for the inconvenience and suffering that they have caused to the residents in the area and stop being treated differently to everyone else.

Particularly when it has been made known that some of them have properties in Ireland and are not particularly hard up.

It doesn't matter what I think about whether they pay tax or not, it is the assumption that they don't without proof that is offensive. You have to be careful about making blanket assumptions about sectors of society.

Have you seen my link on the town of Rathkeale? It is quite shocking really.

RogerMelly, just to clarify, the town of Rathkeale is about 80% Traveller owned but not necessarily owned by the Dale Farm Travellers. Some Dale Farm Travellers own property or are in some other way connected to Rathkeale. (the most anyone on this thread came up with was 12 families iirc) The headline on the page 'Dale Farm Travellers' Irish Home' is misleading.

wrt burial in Rathkeale -- the idea of a family burial plot is important to Travellers. Being buried in a certain cemetry doesn't mean you lived in the town or owned land there or property. Keeping the family together even after death is a big thing. There is an element of conspicuous display of wealth involved in the graves and in the garish Spanish style houses because the idea of being seen as poor is something Travellers hate. Hundreds of years of being poor in Ireland taught them that being poor and appearing poor in Ireland was not a good thing.

The planning infractions visible in Rathkeale are echoed in many other developments in Ireland, where as Aoife Kiely said in the clip, 'money talks' when it comes to development -- or it did in the days of the Celtic Tiger. Many a brown bag full of unmarked notes was found slipped under many a planning committee member's door in the not too distant past.

Historically people used to poo wherever they saw fit.
Then educated people realised that uncontroled human shit = disease.
And did something about it.
And all "normal" people conformed. Because it was sensible and it reduced the risks of their children dying from dysentery/cholera.
Still a travellers Christian camp (1500-2000) people shat in my woods, in 2009. The stench they left generated and the filth they left was intolerable to any person.
We're all for Human Rights. From any descent. Whether they be European, Caribbean, African, Asian or Chinese ...
We accept other cultures; but at the same time we accept the need for toilets.

Lesley -- Traveller urine and faeces amounts to a very small fraction of the total number of litres or kilos of urine and excrement deposited daily (nightly?) in the highways and byways of Britain. When it comes to disease, rats, etc., it doesn't matter who the source of it all may be. Microbes and rodents are not fussy.

Math. The difference between traveller crap and mine is about £300 that I pay to the water/sewerage company to take mine away via a TOILET.

TBH I am not going to be able to ask them but I still think they should put their hands in their pockets. they are breaking the law and should be fined and treated like any other citizen.

AW -- 'And all "normal" people conformed. Because it was sensible and it reduced the risks of their children dying from dysentery/cholera.'

Read what I posted about the millions of pints of British urine befouling the streets of London alone, and take note of the continued need for regulations about public urination and defecation before you get too smug about how civilised the British population in general is.

Travellers accept the need for toilets too, AW, just not inside their abodes. But apparently the LAs who think it's ok to not provide serviced sites for them are happy to countenance the messing up of your woods.

Mathanxiety - why exactly should the LA provide serviced sites to them? Where do you suggest the money for this comes from because it's not being contributed to by the travellers?

Math are you ever going to have the grace to answer the many questions that have been put directly to you? By quite a few posters? Or is that beneath you, because it certainly feels that way.

I don't understand this obsession with poo! But i live by a dairy farm and there is poo everywhere in the cuntry!

Mathanxiety, thanks for explaining about the burial traditions, that's really interesting.