Camp Cuckoo served with eviction notice (From Echo)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting ECHONEWS to 80360, or email us »
Camp Cuckoo served with eviction notice
3:21pm Monday 15th March 2010 in
PROTESTERS at the Camp Cuckoo site say they have been served with an eviction notice by Southend Council.
Members at the camp say they have to appear in the High Court in London on Thursday.
FULL STORY IN TUESDAY'S ECHO
Comments(141)
j-w
says...
3:41pm Mon 15 Mar 10
BASILBRUSH
says...
3:49pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Well done SBC for getting on with it.
thelonewhinger
says...
3:53pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Heavy action against a few harmless tree huggers but scant attention to the other lawless bunch a few miles West along the A127....
southendmechanic
says...
3:59pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Well done southend council lets hope this really gets things going and the waste of money this must be causing is soon stopped and we get the road we want funded by central goverment cash.
As for the promise camp bling made i walked the dog yesterday down on the old campsite and found 4 pallets on the land and at least 6 over the fence on the railway embankment so they did a good job didnt they
essexboi1989
says...
4:00pm Mon 15 Mar 10
southendmechanic
says...
4:03pm Mon 15 Mar 10
j-w wrote:well ppps did have funds of a few hundred pound that really should be used to cover a small fraction of the costs that EVERY household in southend will have to pay.
Have these Cuckoo groups got any money to pay back to the local taxpayers for the court actions they cause?
And to those who are saying about dale farm alas its a diffrent council who have seemed to this time listened to the public outcry of illegal land occupation. who bets the chainsaws go in while the court hearing is going on.
Carrie.C
says...
4:05pm Mon 15 Mar 10
southendmechanic
says...
4:10pm Mon 15 Mar 10
R85
says...
4:16pm Mon 15 Mar 10
j-w
says...
4:17pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Carrie, Anna Waite is one councillor out of 51 she is not the council.
Also some road schemes and changes this council have bought in have worked very well.
southendmechanic
says...
4:28pm Mon 15 Mar 10
I am sorry carrie you feel upset but for most in southend it will be a releif not to have this protest group trying to call the shots.
Peter Pantsless
says...
4:41pm Mon 15 Mar 10
.
Anyone with a ounce of intellegence can see this is a complete waste of time and money.
.
Even more disturbing though is her other development at Vic Circus which without question will cause conjestion where there currently isnt an issue.
.
Honestly, who in their right mind would replace a free flowing roundabout of the busiest routes in and out of the town centre with traffic lights and a reduced number of exits????
.
How can she justify this?
gingerfox
says...
4:42pm Mon 15 Mar 10
They could do a lot of mending instead of building this white elephant
SARFENDMAN
says...
5:12pm Mon 15 Mar 10
southendreb
says...
5:15pm Mon 15 Mar 10
j-w wrote:Great can you name them PLEASE
Southendmechanic, At least the Travellers have illegally developed their own land, they are not occupying public land and putting structures up. Carrie, Anna Waite is one councillor out of 51 she is not the council. Also some road schemes and changes this council have bought in have worked very well.
southendreb
says...
5:23pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Peter Pantsless wrote:Exactly peter Anna has wasted millions of pounds earmarked for this town
The problem the protestors have is that having beaten Chainsaw Waite before, Anna has now made this a personal crusade to make sure she gets her own way and wins the battle, irrelevant of whether or not the scheme is actually of any benefit. . Anyone with a ounce of intellegence can see this is a complete waste of time and money. . Even more disturbing though is her other development at Vic Circus which without question will cause conjestion where there currently isnt an issue. . Honestly, who in their right mind would replace a free flowing roundabout of the busiest routes in and out of the town centre with traffic lights and a reduced number of exits???? . How can she justify this?
dont beleive me open your eyes and check for yourself and dont forget it election soon and she has certainly pulled the wooll over certain peoples eyes on this site turning her from southends most hated woman to superwoman in their eyes.
'V'
says...
5:23pm Mon 15 Mar 10
j-w wrote:No they haven't. Only a small percentage of the plots on Dale Farm are legal, the rest are illegal construction on greenbelt.
Southendmechanic, At least the Travellers have illegally developed their own land, they are not occupying public land and putting structures up.
Carrie, Anna Waite is one councillor out of 51 she is not the council.
Also some road schemes and changes this council have bought in have worked very well.
But then it is no surprise to see you fighting in favour of the travelers, seeing as you are one yourself.
southendreb
says...
5:33pm Mon 15 Mar 10
firedog
says...
5:49pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Partyboy2
says...
5:59pm Mon 15 Mar 10
perini
says...
6:06pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Partyboy2 wrote:So what??? All you'll do is take longer to join the queue at the Bell! This is not going to resolve any of the traffic issues when balanced against the costs involved.
It took me 20 minutes to get past cuckoo corner on Saturday around 11am. Whatever way you look at it this is not acceptable for a town the size of Southend and something needs to be done about it. I would rather the council try something rather than sit on their hands doing nothing. And as for the tree huggers, Your camp is a disgrace and should be torn down immediately. I personally volunteer to attach your tents to the back of my car and move them myself.
'V'
says...
6:10pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Partyboy2 wrote:I drove through Priory Crescent at 11.00am Saturday too. Only took me a couple of minutes. Must be something wrong with your car.
It took me 20 minutes to get past cuckoo corner on Saturday around 11am. Whatever way you look at it this is not acceptable for a town the size of Southend and something needs to be done about it. I would rather the council try something rather than sit on their hands doing nothing. And as for the tree huggers, Your camp is a disgrace and should be torn down immediately. I personally volunteer to attach your tents to the back of my car and move them myself.
fc1967
says...
6:27pm Mon 15 Mar 10
We need to get people out of their cars. That is the only solution to congestion. Everyone with the courage to face the core issues understands this. I will try again for the sake of the Echo 5 but I know they will run a mile rather than address this: 1. UK is one of the most densely populated countries in the world - we need an enlighted means of getting people around, focussing upon public transport, walking and cycling. 2. Climate Change means we have to cut emissions by around 90% - we cannot do that by investing in road schemes that propomte car use. All available funds need to go into public transport walking & cycling. 3. Peak Oil. When the world comes out of recession we bump into the problem of peak oil - fuel costs go up and force us back into recession. We need an intelligent response to diminishing fossil fuel reserves - that means using less fuel ! 4. The UK is in poor shape to recover from recession - one of our big problems is an inability to move goods around the UK quickly (i.e. cheaply). If we are to do that we need to get ever more private motorists out of the way - and onto public transport.
Finally - still no answers from the Tories on their commitment to The Notttingham Declaration (40%+ cut in CO2 emissions by 2020). They can only do that by getting more people out of their cars. And they have shown precious little interest in that thus far - e.g. increasing car parking provision at Leigh Station. If you go to the major cycling towns in England you see relatively few car parking spaces and masses of cycles parked by commuters.
Those at Camp Cuckoo are standing up to an irrational council that has been defeated at every turn of the debate. But they are stubborn and will not listen to reason - so people have a right to protest.
The Echo 5 feel that the British people should lose their right to protest peacefully. They feel we Brits should become slaves to authority and never question anything goverrnment does. I disagree.
southendmechanic
says...
6:28pm Mon 15 Mar 10
'V' wrote:partyboy2 you are correct the traffic this saturday was very heavy at 11am as i went to tescos to get the mothers day stuff. it was even worse at 2pm just before southend united played at home
Partyboy2 wrote: It took me 20 minutes to get past cuckoo corner on Saturday around 11am. Whatever way you look at it this is not acceptable for a town the size of Southend and something needs to be done about it. I would rather the council try something rather than sit on their hands doing nothing. And as for the tree huggers, Your camp is a disgrace and should be torn down immediately. I personally volunteer to attach your tents to the back of my car and move them myself.I drove through Priory Crescent at 11.00am Saturday too. Only took me a couple of minutes. Must be something wrong with your car.
The traffic was heavy because only 1 car got away from priory crescent at a time due to the traffic being constant going into victoria avenue.
Oh and guess what loads of cars turned left in the afternoon going to the football but only if we had a turn left lane the traffic wouldnt have been so bad.
southendmechanic
says...
6:38pm Mon 15 Mar 10
fc1967 wrote:this is meant to be a locals upset about trees being cut down and possible impact on the local park. stop trying to hijack.
The Vic Circus scheme shows SBC is incompetent. Everyone with a grain of common sense can see that the current Priory Cresenr scheme is a waste of money and will achieve virtually nothing. We need to get people out of their cars. That is the only solution to congestion. Everyone with the courage to face the core issues understands this. I will try again for the sake of the Echo 5 but I know they will run a mile rather than address this: 1. UK is one of the most densely populated countries in the world - we need an enlighted means of getting people around, focussing upon public transport, walking and cycling. 2. Climate Change means we have to cut emissions by around 90% - we cannot do that by investing in road schemes that propomte car use. All available funds need to go into public transport walking & cycling. 3. Peak Oil. When the world comes out of recession we bump into the problem of peak oil - fuel costs go up and force us back into recession. We need an intelligent response to diminishing fossil fuel reserves - that means using less fuel ! 4. The UK is in poor shape to recover from recession - one of our big problems is an inability to move goods around the UK quickly (i.e. cheaply). If we are to do that we need to get ever more private motorists out of the way - and onto public transport. Finally - still no answers from the Tories on their commitment to The Notttingham Declaration (40%+ cut in CO2 emissions by 2020). They can only do that by getting more people out of their cars. And they have shown precious little interest in that thus far - e.g. increasing car parking provision at Leigh Station. If you go to the major cycling towns in England you see relatively few car parking spaces and masses of cycles parked by commuters. Those at Camp Cuckoo are standing up to an irrational council that has been defeated at every turn of the debate. But they are stubborn and will not listen to reason - so people have a right to protest. The Echo 5 feel that the British people should lose their right to protest peacefully. They feel we Brits should become slaves to authority and never question anything goverrnment does. I disagree.
The council have listened to enviromental issues thats why a few weeks ago they gave some companys in southend lesson on economical driving and planning routes to reduce cost and damage to the enviroment. What you are asking is for southend council to throw the local people into the darkages whilst other councils carry on with building good stable economys for their residents.
What you are asking is too much too soon and needs doing on a national if not global stage and camping in a steptoe look backyard wont achive this or anything.
How do people walk or cycle to work when employers set up outside of towns because the roads are too busy to attract them inside towns?
fc1967
says...
7:00pm Mon 15 Mar 10
The Echo 5 will then be free to hurle their hate at those of us who are altruistic, compassionate and work hard to find solutions to the problems we all face.
But - to answer your points. 1. As I have said before, there are loads of people protesting against various council schemes and they have come together with a shared understanding that what the council is doing is extremely damaging, wasteful and self defeating. Just because one person cares about the trees first and the climate second, and another person cares about climate change first and the trees second, doesn't mean they don't both have the right to speak and protest peacefully in Britain. You want everything to be debated on your (simplistic) terms we, on our side, are way more intelligent than that.
We are capable of considering a range of related issues and reaching a logicval conclusion - that we need policies put in place to reduce car use.
That answers your second point. Namely that we want more money to be spent on the buses to get more people out of their cars and we want demand management techniques (like reducing commuter car parking supply) adopted. That will ensure more people car share, more people use public transport and more people walk and cycle. Many towns in the UK but particularly abroad have shown what can be done. It saves money, reduces emissions, reduces congestion and the cost that congestion imposes upon the UK economy. We have time and again produced absolute proof to the council that such techniques work to reduce car use but the Tories don't want to know.
It is my opinion that they simply want to drive when and where they like and have no care or consideration for the wider impacts of their behaviour. The Tories would rather see the country go bankrupt (and we could if we don't get the economy sorted) and see the world's very poorest people starve due to climate change than adopt traffic reduction measures that would actually solve the problem of congestion in Southend.
fc1967
says...
7:00pm Mon 15 Mar 10
The Echo 5 will then be free to hurle their hate at those of us who are altruistic, compassionate and work hard to find solutions to the problems we all face.
But - to answer your points. 1. As I have said before, there are loads of people protesting against various council schemes and they have come together with a shared understanding that what the council is doing is extremely damaging, wasteful and self defeating. Just because one person cares about the trees first and the climate second, and another person cares about climate change first and the trees second, doesn't mean they don't both have the right to speak and protest peacefully in Britain. You want everything to be debated on your (simplistic) terms we, on our side, are way more intelligent than that.
We are capable of considering a range of related issues and reaching a logicval conclusion - that we need policies put in place to reduce car use.
That answers your second point. Namely that we want more money to be spent on the buses to get more people out of their cars and we want demand management techniques (like reducing commuter car parking supply) adopted. That will ensure more people car share, more people use public transport and more people walk and cycle. Many towns in the UK but particularly abroad have shown what can be done. It saves money, reduces emissions, reduces congestion and the cost that congestion imposes upon the UK economy. We have time and again produced absolute proof to the council that such techniques work to reduce car use but the Tories don't want to know.
It is my opinion that they simply want to drive when and where they like and have no care or consideration for the wider impacts of their behaviour. The Tories would rather see the country go bankrupt (and we could if we don't get the economy sorted) and see the world's very poorest people starve due to climate change than adopt traffic reduction measures that would actually solve the problem of congestion in Southend.
southendmechanic
says...
7:09pm Mon 15 Mar 10
southendmechanic
says...
7:37pm Mon 15 Mar 10
They looked so pleased in the press only a couple of weeks ago when they issued their legal notice of it being their dwelling. perhaps that demo on the steps of the civic centre would have been a better idea.
Max Impact
says...
7:39pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Just send the diggers in, just wait and see it will be tree climbers and tunnels time...
Nebs
says...
7:41pm Mon 15 Mar 10
fc1967 wrote:Rubbish. We should be reducing the number of buses on the roads, especially outside the rush hour. Most of them churn out loads of smoke and pollution, and have one or two people on board.
Southend Mechanic produces yet another irrational argument. That is why most people now ignore you. I too will soon run out of patience and igore you. The Echo 5 will then be free to hurle their hate at those of us who are altruistic, compassionate and work hard to find solutions to the problems we all face. But - to answer your points. 1. As I have said before, there are loads of people protesting against various council schemes and they have come together with a shared understanding that what the council is doing is extremely damaging, wasteful and self defeating. Just because one person cares about the trees first and the climate second, and another person cares about climate change first and the trees second, doesn't mean they don't both have the right to speak and protest peacefully in Britain. You want everything to be debated on your (simplistic) terms we, on our side, are way more intelligent than that. We are capable of considering a range of related issues and reaching a logicval conclusion - that we need policies put in place to reduce car use. That answers your second point. Namely that we want more money to be spent on the buses to get more people out of their cars and we want demand management techniques (like reducing commuter car parking supply) adopted. That will ensure more people car share, more people use public transport and more people walk and cycle. Many towns in the UK but particularly abroad have shown what can be done. It saves money, reduces emissions, reduces congestion and the cost that congestion imposes upon the UK economy. We have time and again produced absolute proof to the council that such techniques work to reduce car use but the Tories don't want to know. It is my opinion that they simply want to drive when and where they like and have no care or consideration for the wider impacts of their behaviour. The Tories would rather see the country go bankrupt (and we could if we don't get the economy sorted) and see the world's very poorest people starve due to climate change than adopt traffic reduction measures that would actually solve the problem of congestion in Southend.
.
The car is the future. Not necessarily powered by oil - alternative fuels are available and slowly becoming more common. But we need an expanded road system to cope with the expanding population and the expanding number of cars.
Soozie
says...
7:46pm Mon 15 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:I'd wipe that smirk off your ugly mug greaseball. I know of a few people who will be helping financially for this AND as you have stated, benefits in some cases are not means tested - so draw your own conclusions....
has anyone seen the longpier peice on this story. go have a look it makes intresting reading it seems Skipp are worried because they are possibly being held responsible for cost of the legal procedings. They looked so pleased in the press only a couple of weeks ago when they issued their legal notice of it being their dwelling. perhaps that demo on the steps of the civic centre would have been a better idea.
Facebook is a mighty tool
southendmechanic
says...
7:56pm Mon 15 Mar 10
I lived with camp bling on my door step for 4 years and cant wait to finally see a court put these people in their place with the law. Peaceful protest is fine. this highway man hold up approach is highly unpopular with the public and disliked in the courts.
Soozie
says...
8:02pm Mon 15 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:we shall see
pmsl oh soozie it is all over on thursday and the trees come down on sunday a new road closure has been set and once the high court rule the protest will be 100% illegal on that land and removal justified. I lived with camp bling on my door step for 4 years and cant wait to finally see a court put these people in their place with the law. Peaceful protest is fine. this highway man hold up approach is highly unpopular with the public and disliked in the courts.
southendmechanic
says...
8:14pm Mon 15 Mar 10
woodsman
says...
8:16pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Good luck to the campaigners
evilc
says...
8:40pm Mon 15 Mar 10
One question If they are actually in the park SURELY the Bye -law is enough to move them there and then.
All the loud minority will believe yet again that they are speaking on everyone's behalf THEY ARE NOT!!
Try mixing with the ordinary quiet majority.
bronte
says...
8:40pm Mon 15 Mar 10
I for one will consider not going into Southend if these roadworks cause major problems.
bronte
says...
8:40pm Mon 15 Mar 10
I for one will consider not going into Southend if these roadworks cause major problems.
fc1967
says...
8:56pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Unless of course you are content to see gridlock and the near ruination of our economy?!
So we need lots of new buses - running on zero emission fuels hopefully. But don't kid yourself that is going to be cheap. To run a car on hydrogen will cost you around £100K ! To run a battery electric car will cost you 50% more and you will get a range of up to 50 miles. There are better electric cars that have a much better range but you have to add £20K to the price tag. But we can all share the costs of xero emission public transport - making that affordable.
Since you don't understand the first thing about the UK's dire economic situation I will explain - the UK's manufacturing sector is incredibly weak, our costs of making goods is going to increase over the coming years, comparative to other nations, because we will have to import all our oil and gas. Foreigh investors are already reluctant to invest in the UK because they know how expensive it is to move goods around the UK.
Since our goverments refuse to reduce car use, we are in real trouble - because it is impossible to build enough roads to cater for 60 million car dependent people, let alone 70 million. Since the financial services sector has damaged the UK economy so badly, and will not grow again at any rate close to that which could support our needs, the future tax base will not come from the financial nor the services sector. But, since our car dependency puts off foreigh investors because it causes so much congestion - we are seriously screw£d - and not in a nice way!
So - if you are so wedded to your car that you are happy to see the UK economy slowly grind to a halt and mass unemployment result in riots on the streets, I have to tell you most people don't agree with you.
Most people are intelligent, undertsand that we have run out of space, that car dependency is ruining our chances of recovery, and want to see all available transport funds to be invested in alternatives to car use.
Now Nabs - got anything intelligent to say?
'V'
says...
8:59pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Nebs wrote:Nebs, you do realise that the end product of such thinking is the entire British mainland concreted over and filled bumper to bumper with cars?
fc1967 wrote:Rubbish. We should be reducing the number of buses on the roads, especially outside the rush hour. Most of them churn out loads of smoke and pollution, and have one or two people on board.
Southend Mechanic produces yet another irrational argument. That is why most people now ignore you. I too will soon run out of patience and igore you. The Echo 5 will then be free to hurle their hate at those of us who are altruistic, compassionate and work hard to find solutions to the problems we all face. But - to answer your points. 1. As I have said before, there are loads of people protesting against various council schemes and they have come together with a shared understanding that what the council is doing is extremely damaging, wasteful and self defeating. Just because one person cares about the trees first and the climate second, and another person cares about climate change first and the trees second, doesn't mean they don't both have the right to speak and protest peacefully in Britain. You want everything to be debated on your (simplistic) terms we, on our side, are way more intelligent than that. We are capable of considering a range of related issues and reaching a logicval conclusion - that we need policies put in place to reduce car use. That answers your second point. Namely that we want more money to be spent on the buses to get more people out of their cars and we want demand management techniques (like reducing commuter car parking supply) adopted. That will ensure more people car share, more people use public transport and more people walk and cycle. Many towns in the UK but particularly abroad have shown what can be done. It saves money, reduces emissions, reduces congestion and the cost that congestion imposes upon the UK economy. We have time and again produced absolute proof to the council that such techniques work to reduce car use but the Tories don't want to know. It is my opinion that they simply want to drive when and where they like and have no care or consideration for the wider impacts of their behaviour. The Tories would rather see the country go bankrupt (and we could if we don't get the economy sorted) and see the world's very poorest people starve due to climate change than adopt traffic reduction measures that would actually solve the problem of congestion in Southend.
.
The car is the future. Not necessarily powered by oil - alternative fuels are available and slowly becoming more common. But we need an expanded road system to cope with the expanding population and the expanding number of cars.
What then? Concrete over the North Sea? The Channel? The Irish Sea?
The car's days are numbered. The only way forward is investment in public mass transit systems.
'V'
says...
9:03pm Mon 15 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:Rubbish. It is only highly unpopular with you.
pmsl oh soozie it is all over on thursday and the trees come down on sunday a new road closure has been set and once the high court rule the protest will be 100% illegal on that land and removal justified.
I lived with camp bling on my door step for 4 years and cant wait to finally see a court put these people in their place with the law. Peaceful protest is fine. this highway man hold up approach is highly unpopular with the public and disliked in the courts.
I and most people I know think it is great that there are people prepared to stand up to the arrogant Chainsaw Waite and the rest of Southend's tory vandals.
southendmechanic
says...
9:12pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Our elected council are removing the unelected protestors from a public land site, so the public can have their new road layout as promised by the elected council which they have managed to get funded by central goverment, really we should thank them for getting the job done and paid for by goverment.
'V'
says...
9:27pm Mon 15 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:Yet again 'southendmechanic' claims to speak for 'the public'.
are you demanding people have the same views as you again V you dont get this democracy thing do you??
Our elected council are removing the unelected protestors from a public land site, so the public can have their new road layout as promised by the elected council which they have managed to get funded by central goverment, really we should thank them for getting the job done and paid for by goverment.
You don't son. You don't speak for me, you don't speak for anyone I know. You only speak for yourself.
southendmechanic
says...
9:37pm Mon 15 Mar 10
BASILBRUSH
says...
9:50pm Mon 15 Mar 10
“The order not only threatens the camp with eviction, it also threatens individuals including myself with liability for all costs of the legal process and the eviction process.
“This is highly vindictive and threatens ordinary working people do what is right with loss of their homes.
“There is no doubt that we represent the vast majority of southend residents, the level of support in the letters pages in the papers has been huge.
.......
A poll of readers of Councilbust.com has demonstrated a lack of support for the protestors at Priory Crescent.
The poll, which was present on the site for a month, asked ‘do you support Camp Cuckoo?’
In the poll 64% of respondents agreed with the statement ‘the protestors are totally wrong to enforce their views in this way.’
33% of respondents said that they supported the protestors, agreeing with the statement ‘someone needs to stand up to the Council on this issue.’
Just 1% agreed with the statement ‘I don’t care, I’m utterly bored of this issue.’
.......
fc1967 wrote.
"one of our big problems is an inability to move goods around the UK quickly (i.e. cheaply). If we are to do that we need to get ever more private motorists out of the way "
And there was me thinking you were all against haulage companies.
southendmechanic
says...
9:54pm Mon 15 Mar 10
'V'
says...
10:24pm Mon 15 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:In this instance they are most definitely NOT speaking, or acting, on my behalf.
100% correct V i do speak for me. And you speak for yourself, and our elected council speak and act for the people of southend. (but you seem to have trouble understanding that bit dont you)
I, and very many more, would prefer we have green areas in our town rather than more and more roads and concrete.
These tory vandals, starting with Chainsaw Waite, are going to discover this to their cost at the ballot box.
We will not forget Chainsaw Waite's pathological hatred of trees and green spaces. We will not forget her open contempt for those of us who disagree with her wasteful destruction of OUR town.
That's right OUR town, Southend, the town SHE doesn't even live in!
southendmechanic
says...
10:43pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Skipp and PPPS supporters keep going on about how they are all taking back handers but never have any proof of this.
I dont seem to find an information on SKIPPS claims of having majority public support in this matter and can only find the one survey done which was posted on this thread earlier.
That survey shows that a majority want the protestors gone and i feel that Skipp and PPPS have not noticed the resentment towards them and had a blinkered veiw.
Yes people come and support them and yes people actively write letters but the people writing the letters also appear on their facebook and twitter pages and have left refrences to the fact they are the letter writers.
As previously said we have several protests going on at this time and it seems that if the people of southend are upset they know how to turn out,which they do in good numbers.
If this issue is as big as SKIPP say people feel about it where are the crowds of people?? We only see an handful at best and 50 as is regualarly claimed is nothing that should make a council think again on any subject.
'V'
says...
11:09pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Check this Facebook group out. It's called 'I support the road widening at Cuckoo Corner'.
It has a grand total of TWELVE members!
http://www.facebook.
com/group.php?gid=33
9536124254&ref=searc
h&sid=1816119208.365
252625..1
HAAA HAAA HAAA!
Which one of those sadsacks is you southendmechanic?
Max Impact
says...
11:18pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Yes most letters do support them but look again... look at the names its the same people over and over again and again and again.
Seems they have a letters page season ticket, always them that moan about any new proposal for Southend.
I really hope the courts come down on the side of the council and hit the protesters with the full cost for the proceedings and the cost of clearing the shanty town Skipp/PPPS/Parklife whatever or they call themselves now
(anyone actually know or how are they linked?)
Go to Longpier.com and listen to the Mark Sharp interview...
So much for being a “peaceful” group.
pw1954
says...
11:30pm Mon 15 Mar 10
.co.uk/2010/03/15/39
/
Max Impact
says...
11:51pm Mon 15 Mar 10
You say that the camp in your "home" and that it has a post code are you paying council tax on the Cuckoo site if it really is your “home”?
or are you defaulting on payments if so why should I somebody who works hard for a living to maintain a house built not of canvas and wood but bricks and mortar with central heating (under floor I might add!) Sky TV a well stocked larder, fridge and a cooker that runs off leccy have to make up the money your are failing to pay?
PS: Also got broadband, a warm bed, double glazing, radio, Wii, car, and a roof over my head.
'V'
says...
11:54pm Mon 15 Mar 10
TWELVE!
HAAA HAAA HAAA!!!
'V'
says...
11:56pm Mon 15 Mar 10
Max Impact wrote:That post is a perfect example of a straw man argument. Go ahead look it up'
A question for the Camp Cuckoo residences.
You say that the camp in your "home" and that it has a post code are you paying council tax on the Cuckoo site if it really is your “home”?
or are you defaulting on payments if so why should I somebody who works hard for a living to maintain a house built not of canvas and wood but bricks and mortar with central heating (under floor I might add!) Sky TV a well stocked larder, fridge and a cooker that runs off leccy have to make up the money your are failing to pay?
PS: Also got broadband, a warm bed, double glazing, radio, Wii, car, and a roof over my head.
Straw. Man. Argument.
Twelve people! HAAA HAAA HAAA!
Soozie
says...
6:50am Tue 16 Mar 10
APR
says...
7:13am Tue 16 Mar 10
Claiming police brutality etc.
Why do these people have to be negotiated with ?
'V'
says...
7:44am Tue 16 Mar 10
TWELVE people! Hahaha!
southendmechanic
says...
7:49am Tue 16 Mar 10
'V' wrote:you sad man didnt you see the last election results the people of southend wanted this council to get the job done thank god we dont have the simplistic view you have that facebook rules because we would have a 12 year old in power who has their whole school on their friends list.
TWELVE people! Just TWELVE people supporting this tory vandalism of our town. TWELVE! HAAA HAAA HAAA!!!
southendmechanic
says...
7:53am Tue 16 Mar 10
Soozie wrote:oh soozie does your high flyer job not come with full internet access
12 people? I was going to look but cannot access it from work. 12 people.....goes to show you that these 12 do no speak for the town ..gotta love it
Obviously the call center you work in dont trust their employees on proper IT use.
Soozie
says...
7:58am Tue 16 Mar 10
Proper IT use? LOL Perhaps you could learn proper English and save us all the hardship of reading your rubbish.
So how many people have signed up now? 13? LOL
'V'
says...
8:06am Tue 16 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:You'd best tell Chainsaw Waite that. She's one of the TWELVE.
'V' wrote:you sad man didnt you see the last election results the people of southend wanted this council to get the job done thank god we dont have the simplistic view you have that facebook rules because we would have a 12 year old in power who has their whole school on their friends list.
TWELVE people! Just TWELVE people supporting this tory vandalism of our town. TWELVE! HAAA HAAA HAAA!!!
TWELVE people, one a schoolboy who lives in Southend, ALL the rest outside Southend in London, Rochford, or elsewhere.
TWELVE people in favour of Chainsaw Waite's vandalism, and one of the TWELVE is Chainsaw Waite!
Hahaha!
TWELVE!
Soozie
says...
8:12am Tue 16 Mar 10
Plonkers the lot of them.
'V'
says...
8:19am Tue 16 Mar 10
Just in case anyone is curious the TWELVE are:
Group creator Sarah M Sharp.
Anna Waite,
Peter Forrest and his girlfriend Joy Humberstone,
Robert Humberstone,
David Young and his son Connor Bloxham
John Armagh
John Tarran
Stirling Harpur
Zec Richardson, and his daughter Katherine Richardson.
I think it would be fun to try putting usernames to faces, which one is southendmechanic, which one is clivE, etc… I have my suspicions!
TWELVE! And it looks like half of those only joined because boyfriends/girlfrien
ds, mothers/fathers joined!
TWELVE!
Hahaha!
Soozie
says...
8:24am Tue 16 Mar 10
j-w
says...
8:43am Tue 16 Mar 10
'V' wrote:Just catching up, you really are slow V, Perhaps you need to type even slower or get more help when reading. I didn't say they had legally built on greenbelt land, i just stated
j-w wrote:No they haven't. Only a small percentage of the plots on Dale Farm are legal, the rest are illegal construction on greenbelt.
Southendmechanic, At least the Travellers have illegally developed their own land, they are not occupying public land and putting structures up.
Carrie, Anna Waite is one councillor out of 51 she is not the council.
Also some road schemes and changes this council have bought in have worked very well.
But then it is no surprise to see you fighting in favour of the travelers, seeing as you are one yourself.
At least the Travellers have illegally developed their own land. Yet again you abuse the poster and show yourself up in the process. What a sad man you are.
Southendreb, I don't know all 51 councillors but theses are the ones i can name from the top of my head, anna waite, nigel foulkard, carole roast, ted lewin, mark flewitt, john lamb, gwen horrigan, nigel holdcroft, ?? garston. do i win a prize?
All elected fair and square to look after the running of the town, not to camp here and there causing a nuisance.
southendmechanic
says...
9:54am Tue 16 Mar 10
'V' wrote:people outside southend shall we start on the tree climber at camp cuckoo called brad he lives in rochford! christine who appears to write so many letters to the echo and posts on saxon king website lives in pitsea. troy another nightly visitor on sat nights is from rayleigh.
southendmechanic wrote:You'd best tell Chainsaw Waite that. She's one of the TWELVE. TWELVE people, one a schoolboy who lives in Southend, ALL the rest outside Southend in London, Rochford, or elsewhere. TWELVE people in favour of Chainsaw Waite's vandalism, and one of the TWELVE is Chainsaw Waite! Hahaha! TWELVE!'V' wrote: TWELVE people! Just TWELVE people supporting this tory vandalism of our town. TWELVE! HAAA HAAA HAAA!!!you sad man didnt you see the last election results the people of southend wanted this council to get the job done thank god we dont have the simplistic view you have that facebook rules because we would have a 12 year old in power who has their whole school on their friends list.
Did you hear that Skipp want a celeb to support them??? i suggest Davina as she is so good at evictions
BASILBRUSH
says...
9:55am Tue 16 Mar 10
At least it won't drag on much longer once the council get these people evicted.
Perhaps the real protestors will then resume reasonable protest methods from then on.
southendmechanic
says...
9:57am Tue 16 Mar 10
GavtheSpav
says...
9:58am Tue 16 Mar 10
southendmechanic
says...
10:08am Tue 16 Mar 10
Even better news is i have iternet at home and nothing planned to do ;-)
apart from clean the wifes car as the birds have pooed on it but with the trees gone that problem should stop at the weekend
Soozie
says...
10:12am Tue 16 Mar 10
Besides having his snout stuck up AW's backside.
GavtheSpav
says...
10:26am Tue 16 Mar 10
j-w
says...
10:29am Tue 16 Mar 10
Bosniavet
says...
11:12am Tue 16 Mar 10
Mind you, I suppose that like Camp Bling we'll be told that all the protestors are local residents who are working & just camping out to ensure the area is occupied. Does anyone have access to the figures for how many Camp Blingers are living & working in the area now?
Bosniavet
says...
11:14am Tue 16 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:Same goes for me, although I am not available on Friday for family reasons.
just like to say anyone needing staff for friday,saturday,and sunday to evict i still have a current SIA card!
I heard it on the grapevine
says...
11:15am Tue 16 Mar 10
southendreb wrote:I phoned the RSPB a short while ago and they say it is against the law to destroy birds habitat during the nesting season.
Is this just posturing by the council anyway as if birds are nesting in the trees they cant cut them down anyway i beleive. Can anyone confirm
Bosniavet
says...
11:17am Tue 16 Mar 10
Soozie wrote:Soozie & Gav, just in case you wish to know, yes, I do have a job, but i am currently on annual holidays & rest days, hence the reason I am available. Also, I do not know Southendmechanic, or have any "love" for AW & her cronies.
Gav does he actually have a job? Besides having his snout stuck up AW's backside.
Thanks
BD
says...
11:17am Tue 16 Mar 10
Trees or no trees I still cant see how people think this will cut their travel times when there will be pedestrian controlled traffic lights at the end of the road...
Soozie
says...
11:24am Tue 16 Mar 10
southendmechanic
says...
11:43am Tue 16 Mar 10
Bosniavet wrote:i would ask them but most are out of town at the moment lol
Good! Let's hope they actually get evicted. Also, I hope that moves are afoot to ensure any future encampments of this type will be given a postcode so the occupants can claim benefits. Mind you, I suppose that like Camp Bling we'll be told that all the protestors are local residents who are working & just camping out to ensure the area is occupied. Does anyone have access to the figures for how many Camp Blingers are living & working in the area now?
BD
says...
12:23pm Tue 16 Mar 10
Dont forget roundabouts were put in place instead on traffic lights inthe first place, reinstalling lights on a busy roundabout is going to cause more hold ups than there were in the first place.
GavtheSpav
says...
1:11pm Tue 16 Mar 10
southendmechanic
says...
1:13pm Tue 16 Mar 10
BD
says...
1:19pm Tue 16 Mar 10
Also as someone just pointed out to me, how many of you go to lakeside? The traffic lights on the sainsbury's roundabout did nothing but cause delays and queues, and now theyre not working the traffic flows a lot better from all directions.
j-w
says...
1:30pm Tue 16 Mar 10
stevesmsh
says...
1:55pm Tue 16 Mar 10
Lets have more cars, more air travel, and WARMER SHORTER WINTERS.
southendmechanic
says...
2:19pm Tue 16 Mar 10
this is what marion (the crazy old lady who screams in the civic centre) just posted on facebook
Does anyone agree that she,and for a matter most of SKIPP not realised protest is allowed setting up home on public land and filling it with junk isnt and that is what the court order is about
southendreb
says...
5:33pm Tue 16 Mar 10
is that correct. Anna and the gang are engineering this whole farce
to put themselves in a good light for the elections.
can the trees actuall be cut down now.
'V'
says...
6:04pm Tue 16 Mar 10
southendmechanic
says...
6:25pm Tue 16 Mar 10
southendreb wrote:good point if you just put a tent up then the police can move you on. but if you put a tent up and then issue a notice saying this is my home and you need a court order to remove me then what can anyone do??
If i put up a tent on the grass verge the police would come and tell me to remove surely under town bye laws is that correct. Anna and the gang are engineering this whole farce to put themselves in a good light for the elections. can the trees actuall be cut down now.
This was self inflicted because of the legal notices they put up on the fence of the camp what else can the council do?
As for the recovery of cost well thats standard practice and not vindictive at all. If you dont pay your council tax the council take you to court and then send the bailiff round.
They then charge the householder the costs for all the action required.
They have a choice on receiving the eviction notice they could leave and save all the problems but they seem to be having trouble grasping that they are going to court and if they dont obey the order they could go to jail as well as lose a lot financially
vanilla ice
says...
6:29pm Tue 16 Mar 10
southendmechanic
says...
6:34pm Tue 16 Mar 10
fc1967
says...
6:57pm Tue 16 Mar 10
Stevesmsh would do well to read the earlier postings. We may lose the fight to save the trees but, if we do, the conservative party will have taken yet another step towards gridlock, greater car use and yet more congestion. They may win this battle but they are the losers, since they will so quickly see that they have done nothing to lessen congestion.
But it aint over till the fat lady sings and she aint even stood up yet!
southendmechanic
says...
7:03pm Tue 16 Mar 10
You are like small children being put to bed, crying you eyes out saying its not fair. well it is you played a game thinking it was smart to put legal notices up you cant hide behind the law and then get upset when the same law is used to evict
vanilla ice
says...
7:06pm Tue 16 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:And what good will any of it is to you, sitting at home in your rocking chair, contemplating your ever diminishing brain, I would have thought you would be working late pricing up more large contracts, still keeps the staff busy they probably wanted the overtime.
vanilla 2010 is my year a new a longer runway at my local airport, the changes i will get to priory crescent and the year i get to be pleased its going my way.
southendmechanic
says...
7:13pm Tue 16 Mar 10
Most of today i posted from the office but this afternoon i posted from the park, some even post from mobiles, dont know why this seems so strange to you people posting during the day as i can easily work and post like so many. As has been said already i am working a lot less than i used to due to my son being ill and having a home tutor. As for the rusty cars you really are behind the times as the price of mixed metals at the scrap yard is such that i weigh any scrap in ASAP.
BASILBRUSH
says...
8:31pm Tue 16 Mar 10
'V' wrote:fc1967 wrote:
Yep, just TWELVE,. Of those TWELVE only ONE lists their current location as Southend, and he's a school kid. The rest are in Rochford or London. Oh, and one is Chainsaw Waite. TWELVE people! Hahaha!
"We have consistently shown the sophistication of our arguments on this site"
Right....
BASILBRUSH
says...
8:33pm Tue 16 Mar 10
GavtheSpav wrote:"We have consistently shown the sophistication of our arguments on this site"
yeah SouthendMechanic, if you love Anna Waite so much why don't you go and marry her?
Right.....
BASILBRUSH
says...
8:37pm Tue 16 Mar 10
'V' wrote:"We have consistently shown the sophistication of our arguments on this site "
southendmechanic wrote:You'd best tell Chainsaw Waite that. She's one of the TWELVE. TWELVE people, one a schoolboy who lives in Southend, ALL the rest outside Southend in London, Rochford, or elsewhere. TWELVE people in favour of Chainsaw Waite's vandalism, and one of the TWELVE is Chainsaw Waite! Hahaha! TWELVE!'V' wrote: TWELVE people! Just TWELVE people supporting this tory vandalism of our town. TWELVE! HAAA HAAA HAAA!!!you sad man didnt you see the last election results the people of southend wanted this council to get the job done thank god we dont have the simplistic view you have that facebook rules because we would have a 12 year old in power who has their whole school on their friends list.
Right.....
keptquietillnow
says...
8:54pm Tue 16 Mar 10
There will be nothing cycling friendly about this project, or the one along the seafront
southendmechanic
says...
8:58pm Tue 16 Mar 10
Southendoldskool
says...
9:07pm Tue 16 Mar 10
Most Southend residents do NOT want to see any of Priory Park destroyed, on the other hand, most Southend residents NEED the traffic congestion eased.
What i haven't seen on these comments, is a suitable solution which could be agreed upon.
What we have is a stale mate between the protesters and the council which is becoming uglier by the minute.
Insulting each others integrity and intelligence is hardly the way forward.
My personal view, is No i do not want any of priory park destroyed, there is enough dank, grey concrete as it is! I can also see that by widening the road in this area, will still lead to a bottle neck further up the road.
We do need a better road system in this area to ease the congestion, but without destroying any of priory park...so where?
How can traffic congestion be eased at that spot without touching the park?
This is the only way that either side will back down, by finding a solution with will appease both.
When some bright spark comes up with this solution, be it protester or non protester, then that is what needs to be handed into the council....not focusing all efforts on stopping each side with legalities or brute force.
Camp Bling had a lot of support in the beginning, but over time with the ugliness of the matter increasing, there are now people with the view that the protesters are adding to a situation which they just want to be over and done with.
A global answer for the enviroment of less cars, less emmissions, more public transport, more park an ride facilities is great...but doesn't immediately deal with this specific situation and is not a quick fix.
The council see's a modern town, with spectactular road, rail and air infrastructure, booming business economy, universaties....
I personally am quite fond of the old victorian look which can be found in treasured areas of southend, Southchurch duck park an the old bandstand along the cliffs... I can't stand the fact that they are concreting over the roundabout by the station, it's a tragic idea! But how to find a medium which incorporates both...?
Work together to find a solution, don't keep trading insults! The majority of comments on here come from intelligent people regardless of what work they do! Use that intelligence productively.
southendmechanic
says...
9:44pm Tue 16 Mar 10
it involves removing some trees and using the land which is currently occupied by SKIPP which was purchased a good few years ago for these changes.
Skipp sayu it will impact on the park, but how??? they say it will affect the root system of 2 trees in the park, but the experts say it wont.
the pavement along priory crescent is excessivly wide for the amout of pedestrians using it.
the loss of some of this path and the trees is a good compromise from what was the original plan, sadly the loos of trees is required but the council have adopted a 2 for 1 policy and have planted semi mature trees within the park.
But the main thing is that there is NO loss of parkland NONE!!
BASILBRUSH
says...
9:45pm Tue 16 Mar 10
I don't want to see needless removal of trees, but these are not needless, and are already being replaced with semi-mature trees South of the fence.
Protest yes, but don't set up illegal camps and threaten the town with eco-warriors and then complain when legal proceedings are taken to remove them.
'V'
says...
9:49pm Tue 16 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:The Titanic was built by experts, an amateur built the Ark.
The road changes being done under this plan take no land from the park
it involves removing some trees and using the land which is currently occupied by SKIPP which was purchased a good few years ago for these changes.
Skipp sayu it will impact on the park, but how??? they say it will affect the root system of 2 trees in the park, but the experts say it wont.
the pavement along priory crescent is excessivly wide for the amout of pedestrians using it.
the loss of some of this path and the trees is a good compromise from what was the original plan, sadly the loos of trees is required but the council have adopted a 2 for 1 policy and have planted semi mature trees within the park.
But the main thing is that there is NO loss of parkland NONE!!
southendmechanic
says...
9:57pm Tue 16 Mar 10
They seemed to be looking at the branches of the trees possibly for birds and they like i saw none
vanilla ice
says...
10:12pm Tue 16 Mar 10
Southendoldskool
says...
10:24pm Tue 16 Mar 10
The council has lessened the plans under compromise, and the road widening will now only affects two mature trees, already encased in concrete adjoining the park.
In brief?
So the council has made a compromise on the original plans, and the protesters are now simply attempting to save two trees.
And this is where the loss of support for the protesters has happened, the council has compromised and the protesters won!
But it is no longer about 'Saving Priory Park' this is now a bigger war against authority and a stage for global enviromental issues... And this is not why the residents backed the camp.
The protesters have done all could and should have left gracefully with what would have been seen as a minor win with the backing of the southend residents.
I do feel strongly that some promise should be made by the council, that none of the park will be removed in the future, should they inevitably win this next legal move.
I also feel that the road widening here will still lead to further bottle necks.
SouthendMechanic i thank you for clarifiying the exact and simpler situation, the many interviews and opinions expressed through the local media can be blindingly confusing!
southendmechanic
says...
10:49pm Tue 16 Mar 10
On top of these 16 trees (which are all in the road area and not the park) are the 2 tress which SKIPP say will die if the road changes go ahead due to root damage.
The protestors said it was about the trees and the lie they beleived the council told them.
There is no proof the counci lied to them and that has led to a stalemate on that one.
The major problem we seem to have is that this has been hijacked (as was bling) by Friends of the earth and Green peace. with the SKIPP com memebers being all from Green peace and the PPPS com members all being from Friends of the Earth. With these people in control of the camp and having bigger agendas than 16 trees this really had no hope of being resolved without either the council backing down which would loose them 5 million pounds from central goverment funding or the council evicting them. With the pending high court case and eviction SKIPP have said that the council are being nasty because they are seeking costs and damages in the court case,but if they dont pay for the eviction which their occupation has caused it will be left to the council tax payer. The council are only doing their job by pressing for costs and damages as it is in the best intrests of the council tax payer and general public of southend. This bring it onto the bit of public support. In the early days of PPPS when the park was at risk many including myself backed the action for the council to stop and rethink the massive public upset lead to the rethink and this plan.
Sadly PPPS and SKIPP have not realised whilst the original project (called F5) was unpopular with the people then new plan isnt so bad and they are keen for it to go ahead.
They have had shows of support on the past 3 saturday nights and on monday 8th when they thought they where going to be evicted without the court order, but these only ever amassed 25 or so people (although skipp claim 50) but even if 50 people had turned up it is far from the public outcry they are trying to perseve in the press and the blog chatter.
vanilla ice
says...
11:07pm Tue 16 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:And I bet they couldn’t believe their luck that the country’s top specialist in arboriculture happened to be setting in the park and who offered his expert opinion which was eagerly taken on board. Have you ever wondered why you never see a neighbour when you walk out of your house?
obviously tree fella are not experts then v well maybe MASON trees who were in priory park having a look today know nothing as well.
They seemed to be looking at the branches of the trees possibly for birds and they like i saw none
Southendoldskool
says...
11:24pm Tue 16 Mar 10
The council compromised, the original protesters essentially won the plight....
The southend residents did not sign up to support a global enviromental cause to be staged at this camp, they wanted the park saved, end of.
The protesters insist on remaining after this victory, and pursuing this fight, significantly losing the backing of the Southend residents and becoming part of the problem instead of the solution.
I feel if the protesters had left once the council had compromised, the legal fee's would not have been an issue.
But it's all now gone too far, and it's each side for there own, if the protesters wished to fight this till the bitter end, then they must have been informed of the implecations, should they be on the losing side...are greenpeace going to fund the legal bill?
Max Impact
says...
12:08am Wed 17 Mar 10
If they had not posted the “our home” notices then they would not be facing a big bill.
Anyone hear Mark Sharp on the radio?
Seem like they are going to let all sorts of people descend on the park from all parts of the country he claims they can’t stop them...
Yes you can stop them...
Tell these other groups that it’s a LOCAL issue for the people of Southend ONLY and that we do NOT want you here.
Do you seriously believe we want the same sort of riots in Southend that certain anarchists insist is their right these are people who attend peaceful rallies and protest groups with the sole intention on causing trouble.
Can you seriously believe your groups will not be compromised by the risk of such people joining your group and using it as a springboard for public disturbance?
These people who are coming from outside Southend are nothing but “professional campaigners” only happy when protesting, most of the time many miles from their home towns.
Why should council tax payers pick up the bill for your eviction, it’s you who is in the wrong and NOT the law abiding people of Southend.
The council have not lied the council have stuck to the letter of the law.
So what you have only had three days to prepare for court, Ahh diddums poor you.
'V'
says...
7:46am Wed 17 Mar 10
The protesters have NOT 'remained' on site after they stopped the council damaging the park and the burial site. They left the burial site in July 2009. The current camp is a completely new protest, set up after Chainsaw Waite went back on her word that none of Priory Crescent would be widened.
Regarding public support, do not go by these postings on the Echo website. Or by anything Chainsaw Waite says, the figures she uses are heavily manipulated and come from very biased sources. For example the council claims there was a public consultation of Southend's residents. When? Where? I know of NO-ONE who has been consulted by Southend Borough Council over Cuckoo Corner.
There are two Facebook groups covering the Priory Crescent issue. One for those who support this vandalism, and one against. The one in support has, as of today, 26 members.
The one against widening has, as of today, 230 members.
The one in favour had Anna Waite as Admin yesterday, today she is no longer even in the group (not under her own name anyway). Even the person who started the group, Sarah M Sharp, has hidden the note naming her as group creator. Why? Is she ashamed to be party to this vandalism of our town by Chainsaw Waite?
Oh and by the way Max Impact, of the Facebook group in favour of the widening, only ONE person, a schoolboy, lists his location as 'Southend'.
Biosniavet and southendmechanic, funny how, now there's an ad on local radio asking for people with current SIA licences, you both start talking about having SIA licences.
What big brave soldiers you are! Offering to go down to Cuckoo Corner and 'sort out' some peaceful environmental protesters. You must be SO big and tough! Once you're done there maybe you could both go sort out some real troublemakers somewhere like the Kursaal estate? Or perhaps tackling drugged up hoodies is too much for you? Oh but I forget, family commitments. What a great excuse not to back your mouths up, eh? If you really had SIA licences you would know that threatening violence would get an SIA licence revoked. What a pair of benefit sponging Walter Mittys!
Thats my say for today, unlike southendmechanic and his little crew, I have to go earn money to pay taxes so he and the rest of his buddies here can sponge off benefits.
southendmechanic
says...
7:50am Wed 17 Mar 10
As for mark saying he cant stop this he is the one who a few weeks ago warned that he had these people to call upon. What dream finish he had in his head i do not know but it wasnt ever going to be him winning. Basically the council cannot afford for that 5 million to go back to central goverment and nothing get done. An eviction notice is just that its telling you to get out or off of someone elses property and if you dont we will take you to court.
So if you dont want court action or costs you have a choice. The council on the other hand have no choice they have to get SKIPP off that land, be it for cutting the trees down or just clearing council property of this eyesore.
Soozie
says...
8:08am Wed 17 Mar 10
Nothing but a pissant and troublemaker you are - a real family man to be proud of. Your poor kids.
I for one will gladly donate some of my cash to the protesters fighting fund.
I think SBC have a good old (and not one that will be easily won) fight on their hands!!
BASILBRUSH
says...
9:35am Wed 17 Mar 10
SBC WROTE:
In respect of your first request for an announcement re the widening of Priory Crescent, I can, and have previously said, that the proposal to widen Priory Crescent - which has never included taking land from Priory Park - is not going ahead. To be absolutely clear on this, the earlier scheme has been split into two - Prittlebrook Entrance and Cuckoo Corner. We are proceeding with Cuckoo Corner.
When, and if, the Prittlebrook Business Park goes ahead, it may be preferable to consolidate its current three entrances into a modified single junction.
Whilst we now have funding in place to improve traffic flows at Cuckoo Corner, as yet there are no firm proposals. However, I am hopeful that a roundabout can be retained and therefore there may be an extra west travelling slip lane at the roundabout, and/or a widened approach adjacent to the roundabout. This will not encroach into the park.
........
I'm sorry V but that doe's not translate as none of Priory Crescent will be widened.
.......
http://minutes.south
end.gov.uk/akssouthe
nd/images/att16167.p
df
.....
Please take take time to actually look at the plans, and whats being used.
......
V also wrote: "The current camp is a completely new protest"
Exactly.. So why are members of your supporters claiming 23000 members of the public signed a petition against this?
......
V also wrote : "What big brave soldiers you are! Offering to go down to Cuckoo Corner and 'sort out' some peaceful environmental protesters."
According to Mr Sharp, groups from all over the country will be descending on Southend and he can't be held responsible for their actions. ..Mark Sharp also says even if the case goes against the campaigners, the council will still have a hard job to evict those on the site.
.... Doesn't sound to peaceful to me?
soufend girl!
says...
10:21am Wed 17 Mar 10
'V' wrote:Yes, but Noar had divine guidance!
southendmechanic wrote: The road changes being done under this plan take no land from the park it involves removing some trees and using the land which is currently occupied by SKIPP which was purchased a good few years ago for these changes. Skipp sayu it will impact on the park, but how??? they say it will affect the root system of 2 trees in the park, but the experts say it wont. the pavement along priory crescent is excessivly wide for the amout of pedestrians using it. the loss of some of this path and the trees is a good compromise from what was the original plan, sadly the loos of trees is required but the council have adopted a 2 for 1 policy and have planted semi mature trees within the park. But the main thing is that there is NO loss of parkland NONE!!The Titanic was built by experts, an amateur built the Ark.
fc1967
says...
12:03pm Wed 17 Mar 10
The fact is that the overwhelming majority of people recognise that we have to reduce car dependency to tackle national and global issues. Southend Council however is flying in the face of that need by trying to encourage greater car use. They plan to spend a huge sum of money by providing greater space for private car use. That is not only immoral it is a waste of public money. It also flies in the face of the council's own "Nottingham Declaration" (cuts of over 40% CO2 by 2020).
SouthendOldSkool should try writing to his councillor and/or the local press. Ask them to ex,pain how they plan to achieve cuts of that magnitude when they keep on promoting polluting activities. But I am sorry to tell you that you will not get an answer. It is certainly beyond the intellectual capacity of the Echo 5 AOM to answer.
You will also see that they are incpable of addressing the points made earlier about a 23% cycling rate in The Netherlands. When the Echo 5 AOM see that they have absolutely no answer - apart from abuse.
Next you need to understand that there have been a series of threats made recently against the Walker family on this site, as well as a huge quantity of abuse from the Echo 5 AOM. So naturally decent people are challenging these louts in a forthright manner.
Turning back to the visual damage to the Park. You need to understand that when Parklife obtained the commitment from Anna Waite we were under the impression that the council would only undertake minor work at Cuckoo Corner. The scheme before us however shows that the implications go an awful lot further and we feel we have been misled by the council. We are angry about that and so many local residents support those at Camp Cuckoo.
SouthendOldSkool - you will see that the Echo5 AOM do not want to understand our perspective. There are many very good reasons, not just one, why we want to stop the council's scheme.
Virtually everyone who attends the camp understand the big issues and understand the meaning of the old slogan "think global - act local". We have a duty and a responsibility to act and that is what we are doing.
If you have any more questions please post them here and someone of the side of sanity in transport policy will come back to you.
sav25
says...
12:23pm Wed 17 Mar 10
Soozie
says...
12:30pm Wed 17 Mar 10
I would think with the price ofpetrol soon to reach 1.20 a litre people would be put off driving a bit more. I certainly am.
southendmechanic
says...
2:27pm Wed 17 Mar 10
BASILBRUSH wrote:not at all peaceful and remember they are inviting these out of town protestors remember that both coms of SKIPP and PPPS are members of green peace and friends of the earth. It is other members of these groups from outside the town who have said they will attend and as such Denis Walker and Mark Sharpe who both hold local roles in these groups should be help responsible as should peter walker who is chaiman of PPPS and on the com of the local friend of the earth.
V WROTE: "The current camp is a completely new protest, set up after Chainsaw Waite went back on her word that none of Priory Crescent would be widened." SBC WROTE: In respect of your first request for an announcement re the widening of Priory Crescent, I can, and have previously said, that the proposal to widen Priory Crescent - which has never included taking land from Priory Park - is not going ahead. To be absolutely clear on this, the earlier scheme has been split into two - Prittlebrook Entrance and Cuckoo Corner. We are proceeding with Cuckoo Corner. When, and if, the Prittlebrook Business Park goes ahead, it may be preferable to consolidate its current three entrances into a modified single junction. Whilst we now have funding in place to improve traffic flows at Cuckoo Corner, as yet there are no firm proposals. However, I am hopeful that a roundabout can be retained and therefore there may be an extra west travelling slip lane at the roundabout, and/or a widened approach adjacent to the roundabout. This will not encroach into the park. ........ I'm sorry V but that doe's not translate as none of Priory Crescent will be widened. ....... http://minutes.south end.gov.uk/akssouthe nd/images/att16167.p df ..... Please take take time to actually look at the plans, and whats being used. ...... V also wrote: "The current camp is a completely new protest" Exactly.. So why are members of your supporters claiming 23000 members of the public signed a petition against this? ...... V also wrote : "What big brave soldiers you are! Offering to go down to Cuckoo Corner and 'sort out' some peaceful environmental protesters." According to Mr Sharp, groups from all over the country will be descending on Southend and he can't be held responsible for their actions. ..Mark Sharp also says even if the case goes against the campaigners, the council will still have a hard job to evict those on the site. .... Doesn't sound to peaceful to me?
They started this camp with their press release of joining forces and both SKIPP and PPPS should and from the looks of it will be held responsable.
The more resistance put up the greater the costs and this needs to be passed on.
DannyK86
says...
3:48pm Wed 17 Mar 10
'V'
says...
4:35pm Wed 17 Mar 10
DannyK86 wrote:Quite right. Let's start with getting rid of Chainsaw Waite. After all, she doesn't live in Southend, so who the hell does she think she is coming to our town and vandalising it?.
Why are there out of town serial protestors at the site if this is supposed to be 'local people'? They have no place in Southend, it's none of their business. I see Mr Walker has been sticking his oar in and trying to attract idiots to his cause.
southendmechanic
says...
5:36pm Wed 17 Mar 10
DannyK86 wrote:Danny you are very right these people have no place on this issue they are coming here from out of the southend district many from outside of essex to join a protest on the grounds of climate change.
Why are there out of town serial protestors at the site if this is supposed to be 'local people'? They have no place in Southend, it's none of their business. I see Mr Walker has been sticking his oar in and trying to attract idiots to his cause.
Thank good the bailiffs are going in to remove them at their own cost and then the land can be returned to the people of southend and their elected council
southendmechanic
says...
6:52pm Wed 17 Mar 10
Max Impact
says...
11:06pm Wed 17 Mar 10
Soozie wrote:So Soozie your backing camp cuckoo's illegal trespass and development on the council owned land.
southendmechanic wrote: Just spoken to a bloke i used to do door work with and he is working as a bailiff and he said if the court grants immediate eviction to say a breach of the peace then the protestors camp could be removed while they are returning from london tomorrow.t-w-a-t
Therefore can I set up a tent in your garden (if you have one) and expect to be permitted to saty for as long as I want?
A qustion for any of the campers, what are you dong for Number ones and number twos?
If you are burying it in a hole in the ground then your breaking the law and contaminating the land.
Soozie
says...
6:39am Thu 18 Mar 10
As for camping in my garden (yes I have one)....they are not camping in yours, but on council land...big difference.
southendmechanic
says...
6:40am Thu 18 Mar 10
southendmechanic
says...
6:40am Thu 18 Mar 10
'V'
says...
9:07am Thu 18 Mar 10
Soozie wrote:The way I see it, we finance the council through our council tax. So it is public land, not council land. As public land people can use it to camp if they want.
Max - They are doing what they feel they need to do and I respect that.
As for camping in my garden (yes I have one)....they are not camping in yours, but on council land...big difference.
I camped wherever I wanted when I did LEJOG a few years ago.
Soozie
says...
9:22am Thu 18 Mar 10
'V' wrote:Fair point V, and agreed.
Soozie wrote: Max - They are doing what they feel they need to do and I respect that. As for camping in my garden (yes I have one)....they are not camping in yours, but on council land...big difference.The way I see it, we finance the council through our council tax. So it is public land, not council land. As public land people can use it to camp if they want. I camped wherever I wanted when I did LEJOG a few years ago.
I wish the protesters all the best today!
j-w
says...
9:58am Thu 18 Mar 10
Hypocrytes the pair of you.
vanilla ice
says...
10:02am Thu 18 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:Do you mean that you paint doors or that in your dreams you work at nightclubs, I should think the only door security job you have ever held is as a doorman at Mothercare, and as to your conversation to a bloke who’s only claim to fame is the two knuckle dragging occupations he could get work with, it must have been near impossible to interpret each other’s grunts, now that would have been an belly laugh of a conversation to overhear.
Just spoken to a bloke i used to do door work with and he is working as a bailiff and he said if the court grants immediate eviction to say a breach of the peace then the protestors camp could be removed while they are returning from london tomorrow.
j-w
says...
10:05am Thu 18 Mar 10
Hypocrites is what i meant ! ;-)
Soozie
says...
10:12am Thu 18 Mar 10
vanilla ice
says...
10:17am Thu 18 Mar 10
southendmechanic wrote:I really hate to point it out but you have started to repeat yourself, if diagnosed early it can sometimes be treated but it might be wise to get your so called business affairs in order.
Its the final countdown da da da dada da
BASILBRUSH
says...
10:26am Thu 18 Mar 10
'V' wrote:So you would be happy for joe public to use Priory park as a camping or caravan site in the summer? Or East Beech perhaps?
Soozie wrote:The way I see it, we finance the council through our council tax. So it is public land, not council land. As public land people can use it to camp if they want.
Max - They are doing what they feel they need to do and I respect that.
As for camping in my garden (yes I have one)....they are not camping in yours, but on council land...big difference.
I camped wherever I wanted when I did LEJOG a few years ago.
Maybe even build some small wooden structures to stay in? Afterall, it's council land and owned by the people.
.....
I suspect if that became reality your comment may change.
karen29
says...
5:44pm Thu 18 Mar 10
vanilla ice
says...
9:19am Sun 21 Mar 10
More Local News stories
- Fake banknotes crop up in Leigh
- Burglar flees empty-handed
- Man disturbs burglars in his home
- Street cleaner strikes gold by finding £21,000 Rolex watch
- My uni art project has become big business
- Southend Council set to oppose Boris's Thames Estuary airport
- Fast and Furious film could be shot on Southend seafront
- Today's Echo: Joe Ball's mum speaks of her anguish
- Essex Police step up patrols after spate of car crime in Wickford
- Police probe two arsons in Grays
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
DannyK86 says...
3:40pm Mon 15 Mar 10