Cuckoo Corner protesters disrupt council meeting (From Echo)

Quite right too.

Waite made a promise to the residents of Camp Bling who kept their side of the deal and cleared the camp away without it costing the taxpayer a penny.

Lamb (Dep. Leader) appeared on the television stating that the current plan did not involve widening of Priory Crescent.

So what does that map on the Council's website show, Councillor Lamb?

What a totally untrustworthy and mendacious lot Southend Council are!

When are Quareshi and his co-horts are going to realise that the battle has been lost. A few trees for the sake of necessary progress in providing a good road network. The nutters can be found at Cuckoo (appropriatley named) Corner. Do us all a favour and go home, Just luke SUFC you are on a loser

It's not just about the trees. It's about the Council lying to the people of the town, not consulting us and pursuing schemes that will make the traffic *worse*, not better. We cannot trust them to run this town, so it's time for them to go.

Traffic lights will keep people waiting longer than the roundabout does now, so it's not progress, it's a waste of £5m of our money.

Get a life.

Where is the proof of the deal.

You could say anything and the idiots will beleve you, quite clearly you got nothing in writing about how long the Cuckoo Corner scheme would be, so you could tell the press and public what ever you want.

I do not beleve a word ANY protest group spouts as 100% of the time they twist what is actually said to fit thier own propaganda campaigns.

You do not have 100% backing from the people of Southend far from it.

You moan about pollution from cars but I drove past a number of times over the last few day each and every time your lot were burning wood and tons of paper to keep warm (bless your cotton little socks) if you going to protest at leat dont pollute the air whilst your doing it!

bytheway wrote:
When are Quareshi and his co-horts are going to realise that the battle has been lost. A few trees for the sake of necessary progress in providing a good road network. The nutters can be found at Cuckoo (appropriatley named) Corner. Do us all a favour and go home, Just luke SUFC you are on a loser

People are entilted to protest and at the same time the council are allowed to make improvements if it is right to do so. However, that is not the issue. The issue is the COUNCIL have LIED and gone back on thier word. This council have completely shown themselves to be untrustworthy to the extreme and Waite, Lamb and all the other councillors who are involved in this underhand situation have just lost what little credibility they had left. I say good luck to the protesters. Not because I disagree with the improvements, but because I feel that the council should be given a kick up the backside for the way they made mugs of the participants of camp bling. Also, a bit of advice to the protesters, get everything agreed by solicitor next time.

How does anyone get the idea that the Cuckoo Corner changes will improve anything? All Southend residents know is that they will either wait longer at the Bell or in the other direction at Sutton Road. That is only if no pedestrians want to cross at Cuckoo Corner! There will be no gain but we will have lost one of the few attractive parts left of Southend. We have no right to destroy the little heritage left. There is no gain from this destruction. Who can look at the facts and not understand that this is all about the carve up of Southend for business where the ordinary person does not count. If you think it is for you as an ordinary person I feel sorry that you have so much to learn!! This is ultimately about Eddie Stobbard and what suits him. Dualling Priory Crescent up to the industrial park so that the airport can park all the cars. Wake up and do something! Get down to Cuckoo Corner early hours of Sunday morning. The chainsaws will be there to destroy what our forefathers planted for us to enjoy.

pw1954 or peter walker as you are better known this idea you have that the camp bling campers did us all a favour of clearing away the camp with no cost to tax payer is a poor argument. so they bloody should have done otherwise they would have been flytipping. YOU are the chairman of PPPS and you employed a lawyer to advise you of action and legal challanges. Why did you feel fit that when the camp was pack up on these promises did you not get something legally binding? does it have something to do with the fact you and Denis ran round making noises you had won. The letter to Parklife said that the land of the grave of the saxon king would be left but also mentioned that changes would possibly be needed to the layout of the road for prittlebrook industrial site. Denis goes on about the waste of public money but really he doesnt care at all about others this is as always with him glory hunting and him trying to raise his personal profile as an enviromentalist. Look at the pictures on PPPS website of priory cresent which denis put for a caption "priory cresent on a typical afternoon" the picture show a deserted road from several angles. Is this a possibly misleading statement? if i stood outside the old TOOMEY garage and photographed the road at say 2pm anyday of the week i would find it hard to get a picture with no cars using the road unless i waited for a rare gap. Denis and peter walker have been misleasing and unpleasent in the whole of this sorry afair dating back to the early days when the PPPS was formed. their personal attack on Anna Waite has been nasty with her attacked for every move the council makes. I hope Stobarts get their extension as they deserve it for putting up with the misleading facts and attacks they have recieved from these people and i hope priory cresent is widened as far as is needed. I wish southend and all who live in the surrounding boroughs much greater employment and investment as this is the best future for our children a town with no investment has no job and becomes a dead town.

southendmechanic wrote:
pw1954 or peter walker as you are better known this idea you have that the camp bling campers did us all a favour of clearing away the camp with no cost to tax payer is a poor argument. so they bloody should have done otherwise they would have been flytipping. YOU are the chairman of PPPS and you employed a lawyer to advise you of action and legal challanges. Why did you feel fit that when the camp was pack up on these promises did you not get something legally binding? does it have something to do with the fact you and Denis ran round making noises you had won. The letter to Parklife said that the land of the grave of the saxon king would be left but also mentioned that changes would possibly be needed to the layout of the road for prittlebrook industrial site. Denis goes on about the waste of public money but really he doesnt care at all about others this is as always with him glory hunting and him trying to raise his personal profile as an enviromentalist. Look at the pictures on PPPS website of priory cresent which denis put for a caption "priory cresent on a typical afternoon" the picture show a deserted road from several angles. Is this a possibly misleading statement? if i stood outside the old TOOMEY garage and photographed the road at say 2pm anyday of the week i would find it hard to get a picture with no cars using the road unless i waited for a rare gap. Denis and peter walker have been misleasing and unpleasent in the whole of this sorry afair dating back to the early days when the PPPS was formed. their personal attack on Anna Waite has been nasty with her attacked for every move the council makes. I hope Stobarts get their extension as they deserve it for putting up with the misleading facts and attacks they have recieved from these people and i hope priory cresent is widened as far as is needed. I wish southend and all who live in the surrounding boroughs much greater employment and investment as this is the best future for our children a town with no investment has no job and becomes a dead town.

Trouble is that these 'improvements' will not really solve the traffic issue. That aside, this council just treats its taxpayers with utter contempt; countless lies and complete disregard to the electorates wishes. Roll on the local elections!

Anna Waite & trees again?. As has been said before "Roll on the elections".

everyone is an arm chair highways expert and there is nothing wrong in that we all have our thoughts on the project but I can't understand the protesters. lets be honest if it wasn't for them we would not be having some of the trees lifted and replanted or replaced in the number that are. All across Southend trees are cut down and replaced for all sorts of reasons. In the fairway 20 trees cut down replaced with 30. No camp no protesters. The protesters won there case in prittlewell cresent but I feel they are now pushing it to far and have lost credability. Like it or not the Waite is actually doing the rigth thing. Now victoria circus mmm

Chainsaw Waite and Nigel Holdcroft should be made to resign for this. They and the rest of Southend's Tories, have lied through their teeth to the people of this town.

They regularly waste our council tax on pie-in-the-sky 'consultations' that never come to anything, they enter 'competitions' so they can go off tripping or 'researching' at our expense, they award themselves freebies like car parking and enormous travel expense claims. It is time for this venal bunch to get the boot.

The proponents of road widening need to understand that opposition to widening and opposition to tree cutting is not the same as opposition to progress in the town. It is possible to improve employment conditions without bulldozing everything that makes this place slightly more pleasant than others.

Cuckoo Corner is the entrance to Southend. You arrive there you see huge 100ft mature trees lining Priory Crescent and one side of Victoria Avenue. It makes Southend distinctive from Basildon or Lakeside. Turn it into an industrial wasteland and it will never be the same again. Once those trees are gone, they are gone. A few saplings elsewhere in the town will not make up for the loss of mature trees that are well over 125 years old.

Also the traffic hold ups are NOT caused by the width of the road, they are caused by the roundabouts at each end of it. Time and again all over Britain road widening has proved just ONE thing: make the road wider and the traffic increases to fill it and within a year there are hold ups again, but this time with more pollution and worse health for those who live nearby.

Personally I would prefer we don't do anything that encourages more traffic and more pollution. If people want wider roads and more industrial estates, go live in Grays where they have much wider roads and LOTS of industrial estates, and it is such a LOVELY place to live...


Ps. Off-topic: Max Impact, wood and paper are not fossil fuels, they do not pollute as much as car exhaust fumes. If waste wood is burned in an efficient burner it releases very few harmful gases, it also releases no more CO2 than it would if the wood was left to naturally compost.

It's not just about the trees. It's about the Council lying to the people of the town, not consulting us and pursuing schemes that will make the traffic *worse*, not better. We cannot trust them to run this town, so it's time for them to go.

Hear hear! THis council seems hell bent on destroying this town and running it into the ground. I cannot wait until the are booted out.

Good for nothing council.

It's not just about the trees. It's about the Council lying to the people of the town, not consulting us and pursuing schemes that will make the traffic *worse*, not better. We cannot trust them to run this town, so it's time for them to go.

Hear hear! THis council seems hell bent on destroying this town and running it into the ground. I cannot wait until the are booted out.

Good for nothing council.

I travel along Priory Crescent often during peak times and rush hour, and let me tell you that it only ever takes a few minutes to pass through.
All this destruction and loss forever just to shve a few seconds of a journey time.
(Anyone could be forgiven for thinking this is Anna route home to Barling!)
.
Far more disgusting is the mess Anna Waite and her posse are going to make of Vic Circus.
Who has ever heard of a free flowing roundabout (the main intersection of routes in and out of town) being replaced by traffic lights!
.
The only conjestion you get their is the backup of traffic from the crossing just along by Focus.
.
When this develpment is all done and dusted i'm sure it'll look wonderfull (at 4am in the morning when there is no traffic backed up at the lights).
.
Will Anna eat humble pie when it is declared a major c0ck up???
(Of course not, she'll be long gone!)

What have Stobarts got to do with this? I am confused. If and its a big if imo Stobarts wanted some land they surely they would try to accquire the old access car park next to the airport where the waste transer station was going to go, why would they want anything to do with Prittlebrook estate?

RB5 haven't you heard, it is a big Stobart and Anna Waite conspiracy to take over the whole of Southend so they have somewhere out of the way to park their lorries, whilst the drivers go diving and watch Southend United play at Fossetts Farm, even though the widening scheme came about more than ten years before Stobarts had heard of Southend.

Lol. I hadnt heard that theory; that would change things!

In reality this country is governed by a minority in local elections and general elections normally only between 20 and 35% of the population bother voting so we all get what we deserve.

However with the same argument we certainly did not vote for a bunch of hippies to dictate what we should and should not do to improve the towns infrastructure.

Unless transport facilities of every kind are improved for this town in every description be it roads, rail or air the town will never ever be prepared for the future, despite what the tree huggers say never in history have we reversed we have always developed for the future, we owe it to our children, who unlike most tree huggers will eventually all work to pay the millions of benefit seekers of every description we now have.

And regardless of the decision re the widening of the road, the east of the town is badly served and traffic congestion is appalling at Priory park AND at progress Road, we must have either a new road of serious widening of many roads.

As for the disruption of council business by any group of protesters that is your right but is also the right of non protesters to shout loud 'You do not speak for me'

If road widening takes place but this then turns back into a single-lane road further up, there will of course be bottlenecks!! If however all of the roads in the area are widened, the traffic flow will definitely be smoother! It has to start somewhere and Priory Crescent seems like a good starting point! Some day all the roads in the area will be widened and Southends whole traffic system will flow faster and smoother. It has to start somewhere. Widen Priory Crescent ….. As it is both ends of this are already dual carriageways anyway. Then move onto Sutton Road and so on and so on.

R85 wrote:
These people disgust me! It's like a big joke on a family guy cartoon! But they're serious!!????!! Get a fkin life, stop halting development, being unfathomably & ridiculously over-sensitive about a few poxy trees, allow progress to happen and SHUT THE F**K UP. These hippy scumbags do nothing good for this town whatsoever. If they do decide to chain themselves to trees I hope they endure months of abuse, as I heard they did before – no big surprise! There should be a protest against the protest!! WTF if going on with this world and the people in it???

i agree i feel like popping along and protesting about these backward thinking people anna has not broken any promises!! the grave site remains untouched!

southendmechanic wrote:
pw1954 or peter walker as you are better known this idea you have that the camp bling campers did us all a favour of clearing away the camp with no cost to tax payer is a poor argument. so they bloody should have done otherwise they would have been flytipping. YOU are the chairman of PPPS and you employed a lawyer to advise you of action and legal challanges. Why did you feel fit that when the camp was pack up on these promises did you not get something legally binding? does it have something to do with the fact you and Denis ran round making noises you had won. The letter to Parklife said that the land of the grave of the saxon king would be left but also mentioned that changes would possibly be needed to the layout of the road for prittlebrook industrial site. Denis goes on about the waste of public money but really he doesnt care at all about others this is as always with him glory hunting and him trying to raise his personal profile as an enviromentalist. Look at the pictures on PPPS website of priory cresent which denis put for a caption "priory cresent on a typical afternoon" the picture show a deserted road from several angles. Is this a possibly misleading statement? if i stood outside the old TOOMEY garage and photographed the road at say 2pm anyday of the week i would find it hard to get a picture with no cars using the road unless i waited for a rare gap. Denis and peter walker have been misleasing and unpleasent in the whole of this sorry afair dating back to the early days when the PPPS was formed. their personal attack on Anna Waite has been nasty with her attacked for every move the council makes. I hope Stobarts get their extension as they deserve it for putting up with the misleading facts and attacks they have recieved from these people and i hope priory cresent is widened as far as is needed. I wish southend and all who live in the surrounding boroughs much greater employment and investment as this is the best future for our children a town with no investment has no job and becomes a dead town.

@Southendmechanic:

Since you ask me directly, I will respond.

Indeed, I am Peter Walker, Chairman of PPPS. But who are you? You sprinkle this website with nasty "spEak You're bRanes" type comments, telling people where I live, what I do for a living etc. but hiding behind a cloak of anonymity. What kind of spineless coward are you?

In answer to your direct question, I don't suppose we could have called on any law to ensure that the Council would keep their word. Of course, if you had come to our many PPPS meetings you could have given us the benefit of your legal expertise but sadly you didn't.

It's ironic that you of all people should have the brass neck to talk about personal attack when it seems to me that you spend most of your time on here ranting about my family. At least we've got the courage of our convictions and are prepared to get involved in the local community. What do *you* do apart from increase your blood pressure ranting about me?

You would do well to think about some of the issues surrounding the money the Council is wasting, not just on this scheme but on others as well. Can you honestly say that the £5m they want to spend on widening Priory Crescent will make the slightest difference in the time it takes to drive from Sutton Road to Hobleythick Lane and back? Especially if there is an extra set of traffic lights installed at Cuckoo Corner?

Yes, there is a consistent theme in our campaigning: it's that the Council consistently wants to spend our money (yes, yours and mine, assuming that you are a tax payer) on projects that will do nothing whatever to alleviate the traffic problems of the town. But I suppose it's a bit much to expect you to keep yourself properly informed - after all, that would take a bit of effort, wouldn't it?

We should be grateful to Camp Bling, they are the ones who really care for our future. Do any of you really want to live somewhere thats going to resemble Basildon and Inner London. if you do why don't you go and live there and leave the rest of us to enjoy the last few remaining trees and pretty parks etc. What about your children and grandchildren do they deserve a concrete jungle as their inheritance.

Denis Walker wrote:
It's not just about the trees. It's about the Council lying to the people of the town, not consulting us and pursuing schemes that will make the traffic *worse*, not better. We cannot trust them to run this town, so it's time for them to go. Traffic lights will keep people waiting longer than the roundabout does now, so it's not progress, it's a waste of £5m of our money.

Are you a qualified transport consultant? Probably not, so what gives you the idea you can comment with any authority? You tried to ruin the airport and you're trying to ruin other things in the town seemingly without evidence of your own.

(Hopefully) the reason for these traffic works isn't just Waite's crazy brainchild, they'll be informed by studies and hard evidence, which I'm sure you could dig up under freedom of information if you wanted.

Please, will you people face up to the facts ….

Over 1000 new trees have been planted in Southend over the past year, with almost two hundred new trees scheduled to be planted throughout the town in the coming months.

The Council introduced a strict policy that for every single tree that had to be removed they will plant TWO to replace it. The Victoria Square project will ultimately reduce congestion and make Southend a more welcoming environment – and those twenty two trees will be replaced by forty four .

What is being forgotten is that the council is about to plant sixteen new trees in the town centre, over fifty in various car parks, one hundred palm trees on the seafront and others along cycle paths.

Cuckoo Corner - yes, sixteen trees will be removed – but not all are large, mature trees and many of them are not healthy. Nine new trees have already been planted close to the road, within the park and are growing well. A minimum of thirty-two more will go into the Cuckoo Corner/Priory Crescent landscaping. That’s forty-one new trees for the existing sixteen they need to remove.

I know you don’t want to hear this as it does not fit in with your arguments….

kittylitter:

The council's "two for one" tree replacement is a sick joke. They replace large healthy mature trees with weedy little saplings and most of the time put them nowhere near the tree that was felled. According to an arboricultural expert we have consulted, you can expect about 10% of such trees to survive to maturity as they are susceptible to disease, accidental damage and the local yobs snapping their trunks.

However, it has never just been about the trees. Not one of the schemes the council has proposed would have solved the congestion problem and so it would have been a waste of our money.

DannyK86 wrote:

Denis Walker wrote:
It's not just about the trees. It's about the Council lying to the people of the town, not consulting us and pursuing schemes that will make the traffic *worse*, not better. We cannot trust them to run this town, so it's time for them to go. Traffic lights will keep people waiting longer than the roundabout does now, so it's not progress, it's a waste of £5m of our money.

Are you a qualified transport consultant? Probably not, so what gives you the idea you can comment with any authority? You tried to ruin the airport and you're trying to ruin other things in the town seemingly without evidence of your own.

(Hopefully) the reason for these traffic works isn't just Waite's crazy brainchild, they'll be informed by studies and hard evidence, which I'm sure you could dig up under freedom of information if you wanted.

If you had been at the 2004 Public Inquiry into the original F5 plans you would have seen the appalling quality of the Council's work: even where their documentation was complete, the WS Atkins' so-called "experts" had no idea what it meant and ordinary members of the public who had had just one evening to read the documentation were able to run rings round the "experts" the following day.

I'd suggest looking through the documents - they are public information - to see the sort of stuff the Council were trying to fob off as quality work. Phone the Civic Centre on 01702 215000 and ask for Debee Skinner.

Remember that f5, a full dualling of Priory Crescent, was slung out because it would have cost £27m but would, according to the Council's best estimate, have saved 2 minutes on each journey made. Even that claim didn't stand up to scrutiny. How will a part-scheme improve things at all?

This campaign is about sensible use of public money and this, if it goes ahead, will be £5m wasted.

pw1954 wrote:

southendmechanic wrote:
pw1954 or peter walker as you are better known this idea you have that the camp bling campers did us all a favour of clearing away the camp with no cost to tax payer is a poor argument. so they bloody should have done otherwise they would have been flytipping. YOU are the chairman of PPPS and you employed a lawyer to advise you of action and legal challanges. Why did you feel fit that when the camp was pack up on these promises did you not get something legally binding? does it have something to do with the fact you and Denis ran round making noises you had won. The letter to Parklife said that the land of the grave of the saxon king would be left but also mentioned that changes would possibly be needed to the layout of the road for prittlebrook industrial site. Denis goes on about the waste of public money but really he doesnt care at all about others this is as always with him glory hunting and him trying to raise his personal profile as an enviromentalist. Look at the pictures on PPPS website of priory cresent which denis put for a caption "priory cresent on a typical afternoon" the picture show a deserted road from several angles. Is this a possibly misleading statement? if i stood outside the old TOOMEY garage and photographed the road at say 2pm anyday of the week i would find it hard to get a picture with no cars using the road unless i waited for a rare gap. Denis and peter walker have been misleasing and unpleasent in the whole of this sorry afair dating back to the early days when the PPPS was formed. their personal attack on Anna Waite has been nasty with her attacked for every move the council makes. I hope Stobarts get their extension as they deserve it for putting up with the misleading facts and attacks they have recieved from these people and i hope priory cresent is widened as far as is needed. I wish southend and all who live in the surrounding boroughs much greater employment and investment as this is the best future for our children a town with no investment has no job and becomes a dead town.

@Southendmechanic:

Since you ask me directly, I will respond.

Indeed, I am Peter Walker, Chairman of PPPS. But who are you? You sprinkle this website with nasty "spEak You're bRanes" type comments, telling people where I live, what I do for a living etc. but hiding behind a cloak of anonymity. What kind of spineless coward are you?

In answer to your direct question, I don't suppose we could have called on any law to ensure that the Council would keep their word. Of course, if you had come to our many PPPS meetings you could have given us the benefit of your legal expertise but sadly you didn't.

It's ironic that you of all people should have the brass neck to talk about personal attack when it seems to me that you spend most of your time on here ranting about my family. At least we've got the courage of our convictions and are prepared to get involved in the local community. What do *you* do apart from increase your blood pressure ranting about me?

You would do well to think about some of the issues surrounding the money the Council is wasting, not just on this scheme but on others as well. Can you honestly say that the £5m they want to spend on widening Priory Crescent will make the slightest difference in the time it takes to drive from Sutton Road to Hobleythick Lane and back? Especially if there is an extra set of traffic lights installed at Cuckoo Corner?

Yes, there is a consistent theme in our campaigning: it's that the Council consistently wants to spend our money (yes, yours and mine, assuming that you are a tax payer) on projects that will do nothing whatever to alleviate the traffic problems of the town. But I suppose it's a bit much to expect you to keep yourself properly informed - after all, that would take a bit of effort, wouldn't it?

Very well said. 'Southendmachanic' does spend a lot of time attacking and insulting others. You, Mr Walker, have the courage to argue under your own name. Something which cannot be said for ALL those attacking and insulting your family.
I realise the irony of my saying this under my own synonym. I would lose my job if I used my real name.

but peter i did like so many locals come to some of the PPPS meeting until yourself and your son hijacked the whole show pushing people who had done fundraising into the background because you could not work with them.
That is why at the end of the day PPPS meetings where much poorer attended and had lost the local intrested and support.
You seemed to comment on my personality but you didnt seem to cover that of your sons.
What about the misleading photos he took and captioned on the PPPS website? and the other so called Facts he comes out with never with any proof.
i invite everyone to look at the PPPS website and look at these photos.
Can the please then comment on their own views on if they feel that they are misleading? and if they feel that they are meant to be misleading?

www.ppps.org.uk/phot
os/roads.html

Incidentally, I call myself "pw1954" because on this site the name "Peter Walker" has been allocated to someone else. There's a lot of us about.

Those photos, IIRC, were taken on a Tuesday morning about 8 years ago around 11 o'clock - and we had to wait hardly any time at all for a gap in the traffic to appear. They were meant as a tongue-in-cheek antidote to the perennial photos of clogged-up Priory Crescent that the Echo publish - which creates just as false an impression. There was no photoshopping involved. I wouldn't mind betting we could repeat the exercise today. The point we were trying to get across was that firstly PC is only clogged for an hour or two every day and that secondly you can "prove" anything you want with a photograph.

Neither our family nor FoE "took over" PPPS. PPPS was started by FoE as a result of a packed Public Meeting in St. Mary's Hall. I was elected chairman and was re-elected every year, usually unopposed.

I don't know what fund-raising opportunities we missed - probably a few. We were all learning. But the biggest fund raiser we ever organised was a gig involving local bands, notably 4ft Pimp, who gave their time free. IIRC we raised over £1500 on the night.

As ever with something like this, the membership expect the committee to lead, but we all have busy lives and there's nothing to stop anyone getting involved.

But if you sit back and expect the Council to act on your behalf, then you are making a huge mistake. They just represent themselves and they are very hard to call to account.

Forgive me, but I don't understand where the all personal attacks come from. The members of Camp Cuckoo DO NOT involve the public purse, however the same cannot be said of the council. It is obvious to any bystander who the WASTERS really are, isn't it?

Even if you don't agree with thier viewpoint what harm are they doing? none other than expressing a view that you personally might not necessarily agree with.

I dont think you have to have attended every PPPS meeting to have a semi-informed opinion/decision on whether this is right or not! ! I've also just been on the above link and OMG!!! Talk about FALSE-REPRESENTATION
. I am completely with southendmechanic! These pictures are a complete and utter lie. I dont remember any time (that wasn't 4am) that this road looked like this!! They have clearly taken pictures to influence the public and put an unfair slant on this! Surely the pictures would loose public support!?

so why have photos on there with a typical afternoon as the caption when they where taken at 11am and hour before noon. the website is misleading and i feel it was produced like that with the intention in mind.
so what was wrong with john ford input with PPPS he was a front runner fundraiser till he and his wife taken off the committe. So would you say in the last 8 years priory cresent has got worse for traffic?

This is an item from the RHS magazine called Garden, dated Feb. 2010:

'Large trees vital in built up areas

A proposed study into the use of larger tree species, such as oak and London plane, in neighbourhood streets hopes to encourage landscapers to use them more widely when planning new developments.

'The year-long-project, by the Construction Industry Research & Information Association, will look at how to include large, mature trees in early design processes, and will evaluate the cost benefits they can bring in improving city environments.

'Tree benefits
Previous studies by the Trees and Design Action Group have shown that large, long-lived trees are better than commonly used small trees such as cherries or rowans, because they provide greater shade and have a wider impact on air quality. They also increase property prices and have even been shown to affect the amount of money customers are willing to spend in shopping streets'

Cllr. Waite please note!

And I wish to add that as a young adult up to 1966 I lived at 5 Prince Avenue and as a family we used Priory Park most days.

It must be kept safe!

I seem to remember, a few years ago, that a senior druid gave his blessing to the campers. Can we assume that this guarantee has now expired, as they do,or should we expect a fire-breathing Welsh dragon to appear in the council chamber?

DannyK86 wrote:

Denis Walker wrote: It's not just about the trees. It's about the Council lying to the people of the town, not consulting us and pursuing schemes that will make the traffic *worse*, not better. We cannot trust them to run this town, so it's time for them to go. Traffic lights will keep people waiting longer than the roundabout does now, so it's not progress, it's a waste of £5m of our money.

Are you a qualified transport consultant? Probably not, so what gives you the idea you can comment with any authority? You tried to ruin the airport and you're trying to ruin other things in the town seemingly without evidence of your own. (Hopefully) the reason for these traffic works isn't just Waite's crazy brainchild, they'll be informed by studies and hard evidence, which I'm sure you could dig up under freedom of information if you wanted.

Having spoken many qualified consultants and their ideas for the town, it is amazing how many have little local knowledge.
But do seem puzzled to work out how this junction will work. So pleasedanny. mr mechanic and r85
if you could tell me how it will improve the time takento get to the town border please tell me. Thanks everso

Re the road phoitos your website states "a typical afternoon" whilst above you state and I quote "taken on a Tuesday morning about 8 years ago around 11 o'clock " from when was 11:00 o 'clock in the afternoon?

was it morning or afternoon we need FACTS not fiction.

Lets face FACTS here neither party will give way only those in the meeting will know what was said the letter that was on blings website stated the GRAVE site would not be touched the current plan sticks to that so I'm backing the council.

If you do not have the brains to get it all down on paper and signed then its your own stupidity, you quite clearly were too quick to shout "we won" before checking all what you thought you had agreed to.

You are misleading the sheep who follow blindly and like lemmings and jump at your beckn call this is a matter of your own making you FACT you messed up by not getting a contract drawn up and signed and now you relise this you need somebody to shift the fault to and that just happens to be the council it would never be ylour fault would it.

So move off the land you are trespassing and let Southend grow

Carole, the Park is not being touched!

I see the new Traffic information signs that have gone up are displaying
"Cuckoo Corner work to start April 2010"
Looks like the campaigners have a month to dig in.

Looks like the campaigners have a month to dig in.

And I sincerely wish them all the best of luck for it.

southendreb wrote:

DannyK86 wrote:

Denis Walker wrote: It's not just about the trees. It's about the Council lying to the people of the town, not consulting us and pursuing schemes that will make the traffic *worse*, not better. We cannot trust them to run this town, so it's time for them to go. Traffic lights will keep people waiting longer than the roundabout does now, so it's not progress, it's a waste of £5m of our money.

Are you a qualified transport consultant? Probably not, so what gives you the idea you can comment with any authority? You tried to ruin the airport and you're trying to ruin other things in the town seemingly without evidence of your own. (Hopefully) the reason for these traffic works isn't just Waite's crazy brainchild, they'll be informed by studies and hard evidence, which I'm sure you could dig up under freedom of information if you wanted.

Having spoken many qualified consultants and their ideas for the town, it is amazing how many have little local knowledge. But do seem puzzled to work out how this junction will work. So pleasedanny. mr mechanic and r85 if you could tell me how it will improve the time takento get to the town border please tell me. Thanks everso

i have an easy answer
the best thing to be done is remove the people camping in tents next to a main roundabout which cause people to slow down and look this must be causing a major holdup!!!
i have voted as have the good people of southend for our council who consult experts and carry out changes as deemed needed. most of these people have been re-elected so must be doing a good job and most people in southend are happy with the results they have. With such a diverse community its hard to keep everyone happy and there are some out there who just dont want ANY change.

most people in southend are happy with the results they have

southendmechanic is a big council brown noser.

But there is no congestion at Victoria Circus. Where there are traffic lights there are queues. Look at the Progress Road traffic lights where the A127 is jammed with cars sitting and waiting while maybe a handful of cars move across the road. A roundabout there might improve things, but a flyover is the obvious solution.

I am against destroying these beautiful trees.

Are we looking at these short term solutions because a motorway north of the town is being planned to link in with the airport?

i dont see southend with big protests about the council on every issue.
no town has everyone happy people in basildon hate their council or so they say in the press people dislike chelmsford council and we could go on and on. the only people with a big problem are always the same group and really most arnt directly involved with the original problem they are helping out as they like to think

Gail Martin, I couldn't have said it better myself. These trees are too beautiful to destroy, are we going to destory trees every time we want to extend a road? It simply is not a solution that anyone should consider.

Soozie wrote:
Looks like the campaigners have a month to dig in. And I sincerely wish them all the best of luck for it.

Yeah they are digging about it the crap they spout.

Let then dig the holes and then have them arrested for Willful Public Endangerment, and vandalism as they do not own the land.

If they like digging so much they can come and dig my land over it needs re turffing so if your free guys give me a call.

See SAEN are now stating that the old Ekco site is for Stobarts Lorry park..... Shall I call the men in white coats for them.......

Soozie wrote:
Looks like the campaigners have a month to dig in. And I sincerely wish them all the best of luck for it.

Yeah they are digging about it the crap they spout.

Let then dig the holes and then have them arrested for Willful Public Endangerment, and vandalism as they do not own the land.

If they like digging so much they can come and dig my land over it needs re turffing so if your free guys give me a call.

See SAEN are now stating that the old Ekco site is for Stobarts Lorry park..... Shall I call the men in white coats for them.......

Max Impact wrote:

Soozie wrote: Looks like the campaigners have a month to dig in. And I sincerely wish them all the best of luck for it.

Yeah they are digging about it the crap they spout. Let then dig the holes and then have them arrested for Willful Public Endangerment, and vandalism as they do not own the land. If they like digging so much they can come and dig my land over it needs re turffing so if your free guys give me a call. See SAEN are now stating that the old Ekco site is for Stobarts Lorry park..... Shall I call the men in white coats for them.......

Are SAEN actually saying that? In which case they have to be bare faced lying.

Stobarts have been in the logistics and distribution business for years and aren't stupid. What IDIOT would think that an industrial estate situated next to a congested road by a town centre in a not particularly accessible part of the country would be a good idea? If they were going to put some sort of distribution centre anywhere it'd be next to the airport, anyway.

Stobart only build major freight hubs in practical places, i.e. next to motorways. The time taken to get goods to and from Priory Crescent would be unviable.

"These beautiful tree's, these beautiful tree's", for goodness sake people get over yourself. Its easy to complain when you don't agree with something but lets have a practical suggestion about what to do instead. I live close to Priory Park and no doubt will suffer a bit when the road works start but I can suffer a period of mild annoyance for the benefit of the town. I would rather have the diggers there than the eyesore of Camp Bling and its tree dwelling inhabitants on a daily basis. Campaigners, get a hobby, get a life, anything to take your mind off your precious trees. Before anyone has a go at me, I do understand the importance of trees and there role in our eco system but I would rather my children could benefit from the improvements that are being made around the town, than cry over half a dozen trees. Especially when we have 2 other parks within 5 minutes of Priory

can they plant as many replacement trees as possible at the old camp bling site?

When are they going in to clear the new blingers?

Only people that pay council tax or are retired pensioners that have paid council tax should have the right to vote in local elections.

All these lazy tree hugging benefit scroungers should have no rights to vote.

evilc wrote:
Only people that pay council tax or are retired pensioners that have paid council tax should have the right to vote in local elections.

All these lazy tree hugging benefit scroungers should have no rights to vote.

If you hate democracy so much Clive, go live in your beloved China.

Everyone except convicted criminals should have the right to vote.

The tragedy which so many of your correspondents do not appreciate is that the Council has a duty to attract inward business investment to Southend and would be failing in this duty were it not to look for investment in town's transport infrastructure both in the air and on the land. We already have the highest unemployment in the Eastern Region while protesters who have no democratic mandate try to make the situation worse.They have tried to high jack the Council's agenda with their mind blowing stupidity and the sad thing for all of us is that they are applauded by some for doing so. If we want this town to become a deprived area, just leave it to these so called protesters to prevent the town from becoming a place in which jobs and employment are treated as a priority. Surely, anyone who has seen the misery that unemployment and poverty cause would not want that to happen here. There again - perhaps not?

Denis Walker wrote:
kittylitter: The council's "two for one" tree replacement is a sick joke. They replace large healthy mature trees with weedy little saplings and most of the time put them nowhere near the tree that was felled. According to an arboricultural expert we have consulted, you can expect about 10% of such trees to survive to maturity as they are susceptible to disease, accidental damage and the local yobs snapping their trunks. However, it has never just been about the trees. Not one of the schemes the council has proposed would have solved the congestion problem and so it would have been a waste of our money.

You hypocrite and to all the protestors in general.

" It's not about the trees"... " ..it would have been a waste of money."

And what would be the point of planting a sapling near the tree to be felled. It's being cut down because it's in the wrong place. All this talk of "mature" trees is rubbish. I grew up in the New Forest Hampshire. Trees grow old and die and need replacement. I suppose the protestors want to hold the roots of these venerable plants in their twilight years as they gentle pass away into compost. GROW UP.

So what about all the money wasted on protestors who have NOT been elected by a democratic majority vote.

IF you do not like what is being done STAND for election. You will not get my vote.

Meanwhile go away, let the people elected do the job we pay them for and they will be held to account at election time.

But you don't like that, because you know you are in a minority.

as a pensioner myself everyone has a right to vote. but lets not get silly. the whole point of this current problem is that waite lied and its not the first time. she is an elected person who MUST listen to everyone's point of view and she isn't. last night at the council meeting we had all the usual talk about the beneifits of the town, who's town the rat paying - voting people of the towne don't get a look in if THE COUNCIL say so. I wonder how many shares certain councillors have in stobbards now? That's what everything boils down to MONEY. The council don't care about YOU only at election time. When people say NO we don't want this to happen, we want to save those beautiful trees, we don't want saplings which yobs will destroy given half the chance. The Saxon King site what will become of that, do you know its of more value than Sutton Hoo, but i don't think you understand that, your car is of more value isn't it. When are You going to understand what is at stake here. the people at the camp arn't all young hippie types as you call them, they are caring people of ALL AGES willing to put their lives on the come bloody sunday. what would you put your life on the line for?

Over the years I have emailed Anna 'Chainsaw' Waite numerous times about various issues and concerns. My emails have always been polite, relevant and coherent.

NOT ONCE HAVE I HAD A REPLY FROM THIS ARROGANT WOMAN.

She is a liar who ignores the concerns of the people of Southend. She should resign now.

lilysnana wrote "I wonder how many shares certain councillors have in stobbards now?"

You're obsessed with STOBART. They have nothing to do with this. I take it those against companies like Stobart only use and purchase local goods?
I wonder if people would keep mentioning them if Cadburys had purchased a business in the town? mmm. With Cadburys you would probably see far more Lorries.

....

Anyway moving away from cloud cuckoo land and freight depots etc.

The trees in Priory Crescent are already encased in tarmac. So widening only sees the trees removed (2 for 1 planted). Not destruction of green space.
All these people that think they know how traffic flows better, I don't. I can guess, but I will go with the consultants employed and trained to provide computer modelling. They will have a company reputation to protect.
As for problems further down at The Bell. Do you not think they will be syncronised all the way along?

I am not for tree culling for the hell of it. But I can see the benefits of widening that road.
Get the chainsaws out lads!!!

Stobarts making money and employing people,traffic moving faster in priory crescent allowing emergency vehicles to get through,we dont want that.We want to sit in a traffic jam looking at the beautiful trees.

southendreb wrote:

DannyK86 wrote:

Denis Walker wrote: It's not just about the trees. It's about the Council lying to the people of the town, not consulting us and pursuing schemes that will make the traffic *worse*, not better. We cannot trust them to run this town, so it's time for them to go. Traffic lights will keep people waiting longer than the roundabout does now, so it's not progress, it's a waste of £5m of our money.

Are you a qualified transport consultant? Probably not, so what gives you the idea you can comment with any authority? You tried to ruin the airport and you're trying to ruin other things in the town seemingly without evidence of your own. (Hopefully) the reason for these traffic works isn't just Waite's crazy brainchild, they'll be informed by studies and hard evidence, which I'm sure you could dig up under freedom of information if you wanted.

Having spoken many qualified consultants and their ideas for the town, it is amazing how many have little local knowledge. But do seem puzzled to work out how this junction will work. So pleasedanny. mr mechanic and r85 if you could tell me how it will improve the time takento get to the town border please tell me. Thanks everso

Nobody can tell me the how it will improve then. Surley if it wil not improve the junction but make it worse WHY are we arguing.

in a year's time if people like you basilbrush are driving away from southend on the A127, over the pot-holes i expect you will be quite happy stuck behind a fleet of lorries. and what is wrong with local shopping? i am leaving the roads empty for people like you. All i'm trying to express is having to live in London for a short time believe me its no joke, with really heavy traffic. we have had consultants coming out of our ears on this subject. use your eyes and look at just what will happen come sunday!!! once again waite did lie to park-life, believe me i know. even spoken to the campers? no you hide and write things you know nothing about

'V' wrote:

evilc wrote: Only people that pay council tax or are retired pensioners that have paid council tax should have the right to vote in local elections. All these lazy tree hugging benefit scroungers should have no rights to vote.

If you hate democracy so much Clive, go live in your beloved China. Everyone except convicted criminals should have the right to vote.

He'd love it over there....they have the Death Penalty for numerous crimes, just as he advocates. One small problem; they don't like people crticising officialdom! It upsets them quite a bit, with, often fatal consequences.

As to SBC, well, it does seem to be a council that is out of control and that is something that needs to be addressed by the electorate. I often use that particular route into Southend and frankly, I don't see that this scheme (or should that be, scam?) would make a great difference. Look at the latest piece of insanity on the seafront, which is surely a taster - that is going on until April 2011!!! Good luck to the seafront traders - they'll need it. Best wishes to the campaigners too; somebody has to hold SBC to account for its contemptuous arrogance and lies.

'V' wrote:

evilc wrote:
Only people that pay council tax or are retired pensioners that have paid council tax should have the right to vote in local elections.

All these lazy tree hugging benefit scroungers should have no rights to vote.

If you hate democracy so much Clive, go live in your beloved China.

Everyone except convicted criminals should have the right to vote.

!!Evilc ton ma I dna dias llew.

DannyK86 wrote:

Max Impact wrote:

Soozie wrote: Looks like the campaigners have a month to dig in. And I sincerely wish them all the best of luck for it.

Yeah they are digging about it the crap they spout. Let then dig the holes and then have them arrested for Willful Public Endangerment, and vandalism as they do not own the land. If they like digging so much they can come and dig my land over it needs re turffing so if your free guys give me a call. See SAEN are now stating that the old Ekco site is for Stobarts Lorry park..... Shall I call the men in white coats for them.......

Are SAEN actually saying that? In which case they have to be bare faced lying. Stobarts have been in the logistics and distribution business for years and aren't stupid. What IDIOT would think that an industrial estate situated next to a congested road by a town centre in a not particularly accessible part of the country would be a good idea? If they were going to put some sort of distribution centre anywhere it'd be next to the airport, anyway. Stobart only build major freight hubs in practical places, i.e. next to motorways. The time taken to get goods to and from Priory Crescent would be unviable.

A friend signed up to the SAEN email group to see what they are saying, even though he fully supports the airport scheme!


An e-mail sent by:

Denis Walker
Press Officer, Stop Airport Extension Now

As you'll be aware by now, a number of local people are camped out on Cuckoo Corner at the moment in opposition to "Better Southend" Project 3 (Cuckoo Corner) and the way the council treats the residents of Southend.

It is no co-incidence that these road projects are happening now and indeed, we have confirmation from a source close to the council that they are being done specifically with improved access to the airport in mind.

It seems that the Council is planning on evicting the camp this weekend and it's important that SAEN shows strong support for the protesters. If you have the time, please go down to the camp to lend your support over the course of the weekend. We need to make it clear that the people of Southend have lost confidence in their Council.


That one comment makes SAEN a total joke to link the two schemes is farcical the road scheme is NOTHING to do with the airport.

Its just more bile spat out by a group hell bent on destroying employment opportunities in Southend.

Retarded... Ooops sorry retired or jobless bums wanting things thier own way and not giving two hoots about future generations work posibilitys.

Sob how will turning right into victoria avenue improve employment figures please tell me.

southendreb wrote:
Sob how will turning right into victoria avenue improve employment figures please tell me.

It's called Infrastructure. You know drains, lighting, telecomms, and roads. The little things that encourage business to set up services, manufacturing and light engineering.

Previous governments have killed off most of the heavy engineering, shipbuilding and steel as it did not fit their economic and social models.

I wonder what the reaction would be if say TARTA, never going to happen but just suppose, wanted to build a steelworks say on MOD land at Shoebury.

Jobs versus environment ?

Mary Lou wrote:

southendreb wrote:
Sob how will turning right into victoria avenue improve employment figures please tell me.

It's called Infrastructure. You know drains, lighting, telecomms, and roads. The little things that encourage business to set up services, manufacturing and light engineering.

Previous governments have killed off most of the heavy engineering, shipbuilding and steel as it did not fit their economic and social models.

I wonder what the reaction would be if say TARTA, never going to happen but just suppose, wanted to build a steelworks say on MOD land at Shoebury.

Jobs versus environment ?

They already dispose of uranium tipped munitions there, a steelworks wouldn't make much difference.

Personally I would prefer a decent environment to live in and hand down to our children, rather than SBC's plan of turning Southend into Grays Mk2, all concrete and ghettoes.

you are about 50 years too late.

You are about 50 years too late.

You're better off believing in Santa Claus than Anna Waite's word.

She should be for the chop, not the trees!

'V' wrote:

Mary Lou wrote:

southendreb wrote: Sob how will turning right into victoria avenue improve employment figures please tell me.

It's called Infrastructure. You know drains, lighting, telecomms, and roads. The little things that encourage business to set up services, manufacturing and light engineering. Previous governments have killed off most of the heavy engineering, shipbuilding and steel as it did not fit their economic and social models. I wonder what the reaction would be if say TARTA, never going to happen but just suppose, wanted to build a steelworks say on MOD land at Shoebury. Jobs versus environment ?

They already dispose of uranium tipped munitions there, a steelworks wouldn't make much difference. Personally I would prefer a decent environment to live in and hand down to our children, rather than SBC's plan of turning Southend into Grays Mk2, all concrete and ghettoes.

now you show how much you listen to seefoe and know nothing.
New ranges and foulness have been around testing and used in disposal of munitions longer than anyone alive, if you dont like it move from shoebury.
Without this facility then many lives of british soldiers would have been lost. from my knowlage no official figures or communications on the disposal of uranium tipped tank shells where released and the only information given was that testing for these had taken place at New ranges and that levels of radiation where checked and continued to be checked regularly due to this.

southendmechanic wrote:

'V' wrote:

Mary Lou wrote:

southendreb wrote: Sob how will turning right into victoria avenue improve employment figures please tell me.

It's called Infrastructure. You know drains, lighting, telecomms, and roads. The little things that encourage business to set up services, manufacturing and light engineering. Previous governments have killed off most of the heavy engineering, shipbuilding and steel as it did not fit their economic and social models. I wonder what the reaction would be if say TARTA, never going to happen but just suppose, wanted to build a steelworks say on MOD land at Shoebury. Jobs versus environment ?

They already dispose of uranium tipped munitions there, a steelworks wouldn't make much difference. Personally I would prefer a decent environment to live in and hand down to our children, rather than SBC's plan of turning Southend into Grays Mk2, all concrete and ghettoes.

now you show how much you listen to seefoe and know nothing.
New ranges and foulness have been around testing and used in disposal of munitions longer than anyone alive, if you dont like it move from shoebury.
Without this facility then many lives of british soldiers would have been lost. from my knowlage no official figures or communications on the disposal of uranium tipped tank shells where released and the only information given was that testing for these had taken place at New ranges and that levels of radiation where checked and continued to be checked regularly due to this.

You moron, where did I complain? I simply pointed out what already happens there. I am well aware of the munitions testing that goes on, and the military exercises. I have Chinooks flying 50ft over my roof regularly. I am proud of Shoebury's history and heritage and would not have it any other way.

You on the other hand spend all your days on this site ****, whining and moaning that Southend is not built up enough for you. That you can't get your lardy @r$e along Priory Crescent in your car fast enough every day. If you're too thick to plan your journey to take account of the traffic, that's your problem. If YOU don't like the way our town is, pi$$ off and live in inner London.

lilysnana wrote:
in a year's time if people like you basilbrush are driving away from southend on the A127, over the pot-holes i expect you will be quite happy stuck behind a fleet of lorries. and what is wrong with local shopping? i am leaving the roads empty for people like you. All i'm trying to express is having to live in London for a short time believe me its no joke, with really heavy traffic. we have had consultants coming out of our ears on this subject. use your eyes and look at just what will happen come sunday!!! once again waite did lie to park-life, believe me i know. even spoken to the campers? no you hide and write things you know nothing about

Oh dear. Clearly you don't read my post properly. You still haven't said where the lorries are coming from.

When I was referring to local shopping I was inferring that people that moan about lorries, should remember where there clothes and food is from (not that Lorries are relevant to this discussion).
Local shopping is a good thing. Good for the local economy.
Something you Greenies want to destroy.
You say you care for your grandchildrens future.... It won't be in Southend if you all keep blocking projects.
I lived in London for several years. At least there is a descent public transportation system.

Why do you say I hide?

'V' wrote:

southendmechanic wrote:

'V' wrote:

Mary Lou wrote:

southendreb wrote: Sob how will turning right into victoria avenue improve employment figures please tell me.

It's called Infrastructure. You know drains, lighting, telecomms, and roads. The little things that encourage business to set up services, manufacturing and light engineering. Previous governments have killed off most of the heavy engineering, shipbuilding and steel as it did not fit their economic and social models. I wonder what the reaction would be if say TARTA, never going to happen but just suppose, wanted to build a steelworks say on MOD land at Shoebury. Jobs versus environment ?

They already dispose of uranium tipped munitions there, a steelworks wouldn't make much difference. Personally I would prefer a decent environment to live in and hand down to our children, rather than SBC's plan of turning Southend into Grays Mk2, all concrete and ghettoes.

now you show how much you listen to seefoe and know nothing. New ranges and foulness have been around testing and used in disposal of munitions longer than anyone alive, if you dont like it move from shoebury. Without this facility then many lives of british soldiers would have been lost. from my knowlage no official figures or communications on the disposal of uranium tipped tank shells where released and the only information given was that testing for these had taken place at New ranges and that levels of radiation where checked and continued to be checked regularly due to this.

You moron, where did I complain? I simply pointed out what already happens there. I am well aware of the munitions testing that goes on, and the military exercises. I have Chinooks flying 50ft over my roof regularly. I am proud of Shoebury's history and heritage and would not have it any other way. You on the other hand spend all your days on this site ****, whining and moaning that Southend is not built up enough for you. That you can't get your lardy @r$e along Priory Crescent in your car fast enough every day. If you're too thick to plan your journey to take account of the traffic, that's your problem. If YOU don't like the way our town is, pi$$ off and live in inner London.

one thing you might like to do for me can you plan a route for me to get to walthamstow from my house which doesnt involve driving along priory crescent? when i LIVE in priory crescent!! I love the way our town IS run
also for the record i was correcting you incorrect statement that uranium tipped shells are disposed of at Qinetiq. they have never been disposed of there only tested and like the rest of PPPS and SKIPP you always extend the truth as the chinnocks dont fly 50ft over anyones house as they have like the rest of the ranges operate within strict guildlines. Also most activitys at the site are not military and are carried out by contractors.

Crikey, my spelling above was shocking.... Anyway.

Having just driven past the illegal camp at Cuckoo corner on my way home, I notice (as usual) only around 5 maybe 8 people at a push. So my question is>
.....
If the whole town is so pro this action. Why are there always so few people there? Even with Mr Walker Jnr's war cry with SAEN?

southendmechanic wrote:

'V' wrote:

southendmechanic wrote:

'V' wrote:

Mary Lou wrote:

southendreb wrote: Sob how will turning right into victoria avenue improve employment figures please tell me.

It's called Infrastructure. You know drains, lighting, telecomms, and roads. The little things that encourage business to set up services, manufacturing and light engineering. Previous governments have killed off most of the heavy engineering, shipbuilding and steel as it did not fit their economic and social models. I wonder what the reaction would be if say TARTA, never going to happen but just suppose, wanted to build a steelworks say on MOD land at Shoebury. Jobs versus environment ?

They already dispose of uranium tipped munitions there, a steelworks wouldn't make much difference. Personally I would prefer a decent environment to live in and hand down to our children, rather than SBC's plan of turning Southend into Grays Mk2, all concrete and ghettoes.

now you show how much you listen to seefoe and know nothing. New ranges and foulness have been around testing and used in disposal of munitions longer than anyone alive, if you dont like it move from shoebury. Without this facility then many lives of british soldiers would have been lost. from my knowlage no official figures or communications on the disposal of uranium tipped tank shells where released and the only information given was that testing for these had taken place at New ranges and that levels of radiation where checked and continued to be checked regularly due to this.

You moron, where did I complain? I simply pointed out what already happens there. I am well aware of the munitions testing that goes on, and the military exercises. I have Chinooks flying 50ft over my roof regularly. I am proud of Shoebury's history and heritage and would not have it any other way. You on the other hand spend all your days on this site ****, whining and moaning that Southend is not built up enough for you. That you can't get your lardy @r$e along Priory Crescent in your car fast enough every day. If you're too thick to plan your journey to take account of the traffic, that's your problem. If YOU don't like the way our town is, pi$$ off and live in inner London.

one thing you might like to do for me can you plan a route for me to get to walthamstow from my house which doesnt involve driving along priory crescent? when i LIVE in priory crescent!! I love the way our town IS run
also for the record i was correcting you incorrect statement that uranium tipped shells are disposed of at Qinetiq. they have never been disposed of there only tested and like the rest of PPPS and SKIPP you always extend the truth as the chinnocks dont fly 50ft over anyones house as they have like the rest of the ranges operate within strict guildlines. Also most activitys at the site are not military and are carried out by contractors.

Those Chinooks do fly in about 50ft up. Next time they come over I'll take a photo. Come and see for yourself.

If, as you claim, you live in Priory Crescent, and you are so in favour of destroying Priory Crescent, why don't you have the courage of your convictions. Stop being a faceless coward hiding behind a keyboard and come along to the camp and explain your argument for destroying the Crescent.

'V' wrote:

southendmechanic wrote:

'V' wrote:

southendmechanic wrote:

'V' wrote:

Mary Lou wrote:

southendreb wrote: Sob how will turning right into victoria avenue improve employment figures please tell me.

It's called Infrastructure. You know drains, lighting, telecomms, and roads. The little things that encourage business to set up services, manufacturing and light engineering. Previous governments have killed off most of the heavy engineering, shipbuilding and steel as it did not fit their economic and social models. I wonder what the reaction would be if say TARTA, never going to happen but just suppose, wanted to build a steelworks say on MOD land at Shoebury. Jobs versus environment ?

They already dispose of uranium tipped munitions there, a steelworks wouldn't make much difference. Personally I would prefer a decent environment to live in and hand down to our children, rather than SBC's plan of turning Southend into Grays Mk2, all concrete and ghettoes.

now you show how much you listen to seefoe and know nothing. New ranges and foulness have been around testing and used in disposal of munitions longer than anyone alive, if you dont like it move from shoebury. Without this facility then many lives of british soldiers would have been lost. from my knowlage no official figures or communications on the disposal of uranium tipped tank shells where released and the only information given was that testing for these had taken place at New ranges and that levels of radiation where checked and continued to be checked regularly due to this.

You moron, where did I complain? I simply pointed out what already happens there. I am well aware of the munitions testing that goes on, and the military exercises. I have Chinooks flying 50ft over my roof regularly. I am proud of Shoebury's history and heritage and would not have it any other way. You on the other hand spend all your days on this site ****, whining and moaning that Southend is not built up enough for you. That you can't get your lardy @r$e along Priory Crescent in your car fast enough every day. If you're too thick to plan your journey to take account of the traffic, that's your problem. If YOU don't like the way our town is, pi$$ off and live in inner London.

one thing you might like to do for me can you plan a route for me to get to walthamstow from my house which doesnt involve driving along priory crescent? when i LIVE in priory crescent!! I love the way our town IS run also for the record i was correcting you incorrect statement that uranium tipped shells are disposed of at Qinetiq. they have never been disposed of there only tested and like the rest of PPPS and SKIPP you always extend the truth as the chinnocks dont fly 50ft over anyones house as they have like the rest of the ranges operate within strict guildlines. Also most activitys at the site are not military and are carried out by contractors.

Those Chinooks do fly in about 50ft up. Next time they come over I'll take a photo. Come and see for yourself. If, as you claim, you live in Priory Crescent, and you are so in favour of destroying Priory Crescent, why don't you have the courage of your convictions. Stop being a faceless coward hiding behind a keyboard and come along to the camp and explain your argument for destroying the Crescent.

due to the above comments i think you would understand that my job and contracts are of a specific nature and i choose not to need or desire to say my name. those who are involved with an indepth knowlage already will know who i am. as one of my neighbours has already mentioned. I would appriciate it if you would complain to the ministry of defense reguarding chinnock movements of anything near 50ft as the down draft would be able to blow a shed or greenhouse over with ease. Having worked around these aircraft for a number of years and having been collected and exisited these i am fully aware of the dangers. Plus unless you are living on the island i have in my years seen a chinnock arrive or leave across shoebury at low decent and usally find when they do come in low its from the thames. They also dont attend Foulness that often as they have only been required for testing radar and never have moved heavy or large loads which would be their only other use to Qinetiq.