What's happening with the Dale Farm eviction?

[Teachermumof3]

Does anyone who live locally know what's going on? Have many of the travellers left? Will there be a horrible fight at 9am tomorrow?

Emma, Travellers are indeed recognised by Law as ethnic group, and rightly so. But can I just point out to you that all ethnic groups in the UK are required to have the correct planning permissions in place before building on land, regardless of ownership. It's not just applying that is important, it is approval The council offered to buy the land back, but were hardly going to pay £6million were they?

In the UK there are regularly (equally heartbreaking) stories about people building houses/extensions or whatever without planning permission and having them bulldozed - it happens to settled people as well, you know.

Whilst you jump up and down about 'ignorant comments', you, yourself then go on to make a very ignorant comment yourself about 'scroungers on benefits'. A lot of MNetters take a very dim view of benefits bashing.

whats the problem with that??? Im sure many of you own houses abroad that you visit at certain times of the year etc why not go and live in them?

Erm, no. Nobody I know has a second home. However, if they did and refused to get proper planning permission on their land, I would be pissed off!

Can I just point out to you my earlier comment of how i understand how planning permission works!!!!!!! I know they need permission BEFORE they can build, my point was that if they thought they were above the law then thay simply wouldnt bother applying atall, you may want to read the part where I agreed that breaking the rules isnt justified, and yes they were only permitted to build on half of the site!!!!

As far as "jumping up and down" im simply having my say like the rest of the people commenting on this, yes my say may be different from yours but thats the point of a duscussion isnt it???

Benefits Bashing??? Again, you may want to familiarise yourself with the rest of this thread. The discussion was in relation to the travellers "playing the system" and my reply was making reference to the fact that there are plenty of people in this country "claiming bebefits unecessarily" i.e "scroungers" playing the system....not to those who claim it necessarily!!! So im sure MNetters wont be too offended at this :-)

So because nobody YOU know has a second home that means its rare? Please read the thread properly ffs.....I DONT agree with the fact that they built before the permission was granted!!!!!

Emma, you might want want to lay off the !!!!!!!??????? if you don't want accusations of jumping up and down.

If you want to use the words 'benefits' and 'scrounger' in the same sentence then you are as bad as the people you are complaining about.

It was me who said they were playing the system but that wasn't in relation to being benefit scroungers. Please dont misquote me.

What I meant by that comment is that they took advantage of the planning laws. They dropped off their application at a time when they knew they had the best chance that noone would look. Quickly moved in before anyone could do anything. Knowing fine well it would take years for the council to get rid of them. Gambling on the fact that statistically they have a better chance of getting approvals from court than from the council.

How is that not playing the system?

For me this is nothing to do with benefits or how many homes they have. As long as they earned their money for their homes legally, I don't care if they have one or twenty.

My only truck is that they knowingly bent the laws, they haven't been allowed to get away with it and now are screaming racism to deflect the real problem which is that they didn't get planning approval for half their site.

Well no, I don't think applying for planning permission and then not bothering to wait for a decision before going ahead and doing what you wanted to do anyway does necessarily prove you didn't think you were above the law. If you wanted to respect the law you should follow it fully, and if you don't you have to be prepared to face the consequences - such as losing what you built.

And no, I'm not on benefits myself. Just saying, that's all.

Btw, there is another thread where the Travellers issues are being discussed in more depth - your posts might be more relevant there.

My comment was to Emma, not to Niceguy2 btw

I really dont mind being accused of jumping up and down, thats fine :-)!!!!!!!!

I didnt misaquote you.....AGAIN, if this was read properly I was making reference to MY REPLY not anything YOU said. Read below.....

The discussion was in relation to the travellers "playing the system" and MY reply was making reference to the fact that there are plenty of people in this country "claiming bebefits unecessarily" i.e "scroungers" playing the system....not to those who claim it necessarily!!!

As far as screaming racism to deflect from the real problem I really dont agree that thats the case. I think by reading the comments such as "im sure they use the NHS services and their children attend schools funded by tax payers" surely shows the ignorance and does deflect from the problem, wtf does that have to do with anything, isnt everybody entitled to this?

Emma Do you think that people are allowed to break planning laws because, and I quote you 'there are plenty of people in this country claiming benefits unnecessarily' ?

Really...how old are you...like i said, read the thread properly, where, atall, did it say i thought people were allowed to break planning laws because people are claiming benefits unecessarily? Also, thanks for the earlier info on the other thread. As it goes I really dont find some points relevant either but as mentioned earlier...its a discussion and if you dont like it then dont discuss it, or better still, find a more RELEVANT thread :-)!!!!!!!!!!!

Emma: you said it here:

Quote: 'The discussion was in relation to the travellers "playing the system" and MY reply was making reference to the fact that there are plenty of people in this country "claiming benefits unecessarily" ie. "scroungers" playing the system'

So, I'll ask again, do you think it's ok for people (anyone, not just travellers) to 'play the system' with regard to planning laws, just because other people are 'playing the system' with regards to benefits?

Other wise I can't imagine what you meant by your statement above?

I don't think either scenario is right for the record.

People who break the law are criminals. It doesn't matter what minority they belong to.

And ill ask you again.... where in that does it say that i think its right. if you read my earlier comments I have said that breaking the rules isnt justified. so maybe now you can imagine what I meant.

I dont believe anybody should be able to break planning laws, travellers or otherwise, my opinion is that from the start the whole thing has been pretty much against them and not just for breaking planning laws which is what the discussion is surely about.

And people who work but don't pay taxes are breaking the law too .....

Again, something which is not very fair to law abiding citizens of course.

EmmaCummins, ok so you agree then that since they don't have planning permission to build/live there they must move.

We misunderstood you before yes?

No I dont agree, surprise surprise. Did you misunderstand me before? I really dont know as I have only seen one previous comment from yourself.

My opinion is that they should be able to stay, if not for the fact that there are families that have been there for ten years then simply the small matter of the £18 million its going to cost to evict them. No planning laws should be broken but ten years down the line and £18 million later, is it really that big a deal?

But they were told to go 8 plus years ago .....

People can't break the law, it does not matter who they are or what their circumstances. They may be cases where there is a defence (ie the burglar who was stabbed when he invaded someone's house) but there isn't any defence in this case.

EmmaCummins No surprise at all. I just wanted you to make it clear that they should stay despite it being illegal. Now try and claim that you are not advocating allowing them to break the law.

There is no way to stay without breaking the law therefore they must go. Either you support them going or you support them breaking the law.

is it really that big a deal?

Yes.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion and yes my opinion is that they should be able to stay despite being illegal. At the very least for the fact that its going to cost £18million to remove them and destroy their homes aswell as being in favour of travellers also as my family are travellers. where is there for them to go really, not just in this case but others aswell, theyre constantly moved on and on then they buy their own land and are refused planning....what chance have they got when everything is so against them.

This is obviously going round in circles whereby im for them staying and your not and we have very different opinions for whatever reasons but no doubt theyll be moved on regardless and we'll probably see the same situation in another 10 years time after the council encourage more travellers to buy more land.

" if they thought they were completely above the law why did they apply for planning permission atall?"

It's a delaying tactic, it means they can claim that they are waiting for a decision or there is an appeal in the pipeline and avoid hassle while dragging the situation out for years when they know they are breaking the law.

The problem is Emma is that becomes the thin end of the wedge and sets a very dangerous precendent.

If you let one group of people get away with breaking the law because of whatever reason (eg. it costs too much to evict them) then it's a license for everyone else to do the same yes? Do you not see that?

Next thing you know, someone will build a bloody big extension on their land overlooking their neighbours and not to regulations. They'd understandably point to Dale Farm and argue well if you let them....why not me? And that by denying his application you have discriminated against them. They will also then drag things out as long as possible because hey...it worked for Dale Farm....

Do we then stop deporting illegal immigrants because its cheaper not to? Do we stop collecting parking fines because its cheaper not to? Just where do you stop.

It's only going to cost £18 million because the squatters decided to defy the law. Personally I'd much rather see the council spend it on schools & the NHS etc but the council have had their hand forced. Like I said earlier, it was reported the land is worth £100k and yes the travellers own it. I'm sure had they have asked for something sensible like £200k then the council may have decided to bite the bullet to save £18 million. But to ask for £6 million is frankly taking the piss and akin to blackmail.

No, the ones who are clearly in the wrong are the travellers. They've brought this upon themselves and are royally taking the piss. My only criticism of the powers that be here is that they've been too patient and should have gone in much earlier.

I totally agree with Niceguy2. You have to enforce the law or, in the long-term, the country will be in chaos.

We can't not enforce it just because it's a bit difficult, unpleasant or expensive.