Councillors approve outline plans to build homes on Thorney Bay Caravan Park (From Echo)

That's Grand news, get rid of those caravan dwellers, a real step forward..

Carnabackable wrote:
That's Grand news, get rid of those caravan dwellers, a real step forward..

HERE HERE but wait for the moaners!!!

It really is great to see a local council attempting to put government policy into action.

What next?

Homosexual Marriages at Kiln Road?

Oh, nearly forgot;

"MOAN MOAN MOAN"

marshman wrote:
It really is great to see a local council attempting to put government policy into action.

What next?

Homosexual Marriages at Kiln Road?

Oh, nearly forgot;

"MOAN MOAN MOAN"

Nice to see the cap fits.

upset wrote:

marshman wrote: It really is great to see a local council attempting to put government policy into action. What next? Homosexual Marriages at Kiln Road? Oh, nearly forgot; "MOAN MOAN MOAN"

Nice to see the cap fits.

Said that to my first wife once ;o)

upset wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:
That's Grand news, get rid of those caravan dwellers, a real step forward..

HERE HERE but wait for the moaners!!!

Does this get rid of the all the caravans?
Not a moan, just answer the question.
Just for the record do you know why this uncontrolled development of unlimited caravans on what was a holiday camp was allowed to happen?
Before I tell you, you tell me.

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:
That's Grand news, get rid of those caravan dwellers, a real step forward..

HERE HERE but wait for the moaners!!!

Does this get rid of the all the caravans?
Not a moan, just answer the question.
Just for the record do you know why this uncontrolled development of unlimited caravans on what was a holiday camp was allowed to happen?
Before I tell you, you tell me.

Oh do tell

Why, you say you know everything so you go first or admit you have no idea at all have you.

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:
That's Grand news, get rid of those caravan dwellers, a real step forward..

HERE HERE but wait for the moaners!!!

Does this get rid of the all the caravans?
Not a moan, just answer the question.
Just for the record do you know why this uncontrolled development of unlimited caravans on what was a holiday camp was allowed to happen?
Before I tell you, you tell me.

Oh do tell

Come on 'upset" see my above post. Answer.

marshman wrote:

upset wrote:

marshman wrote: It really is great to see a local council attempting to put government policy into action. What next? Homosexual Marriages at Kiln Road? Oh, nearly forgot; "MOAN MOAN MOAN"

Nice to see the cap fits.

Said that to my first wife once ;o)

Nice reply

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:
That's Grand news, get rid of those caravan dwellers, a real step forward..

HERE HERE but wait for the moaners!!!

Does this get rid of the all the caravans?
Not a moan, just answer the question.
Just for the record do you know why this uncontrolled development of unlimited caravans on what was a holiday camp was allowed to happen?
Before I tell you, you tell me.

Oh do tell

Come on 'upset" see my above post. Answer.

No it's you and the nice person from Rochford that know all the answers, so you think.

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:
That's Grand news, get rid of those caravan dwellers, a real step forward..

HERE HERE but wait for the moaners!!!

Does this get rid of the all the caravans?
Not a moan, just answer the question.
Just for the record do you know why this uncontrolled development of unlimited caravans on what was a holiday camp was allowed to happen?
Before I tell you, you tell me.

Oh do tell

Come on 'upset" see my above post. Answer.

No it's you and the nice person from Rochford that know all the answers, so you think.

Your floundering you have absolutely no idea at all have you? You seem to always have an opinion, based around slagging off the CIIP, but with no factual back up at all. So why not admit it?
Of course, had you taken an active interest and attended Neighbourhood Meetings, you would know, but you don't do you?
So, you have two choices, admit you have no idea and/or attend the next Neighbourhood Meeting where I will you the proof and you never know you may even find out something else Castle Point are not doing, but claim they are.
So which is it?
You see not moans, but concrete facts and questions.

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:
That's Grand news, get rid of those caravan dwellers, a real step forward..

HERE HERE but wait for the moaners!!!

Does this get rid of the all the caravans?
Not a moan, just answer the question.
Just for the record do you know why this uncontrolled development of unlimited caravans on what was a holiday camp was allowed to happen?
Before I tell you, you tell me.

Oh do tell

Come on 'upset" see my above post. Answer.

No it's you and the nice person from Rochford that know all the answers, so you think.

Your floundering you have absolutely no idea at all have you? You seem to always have an opinion, based around slagging off the CIIP, but with no factual back up at all. So why not admit it?
Of course, had you taken an active interest and attended Neighbourhood Meetings, you would know, but you don't do you?
So, you have two choices, admit you have no idea and/or attend the next Neighbourhood Meeting where I will you the proof and you never know you may even find out something else Castle Point are not doing, but claim they are.
So which is it?
You see not moans, but concrete facts and questions.

Should have said "show" you the proof.

You really are a self important, pompous pr&t John Pharro, a know nothing bore.

HOT AIR wrote:
You really are a self important, pompous pr&t John Pharro, a know nothing bore.

Very well said, glad it's not just me thinks this way.

upset wrote:

HOT AIR wrote:
You really are a self important, pompous pr&t John Pharro, a know nothing bore.

Very well said, glad it's not just me thinks this way.

So see you at the next Neighbourhood Meeting then to show you the facts.

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

HOT AIR wrote:
You really are a self important, pompous pr&t John Pharro, a know nothing bore.

Very well said, glad it's not just me thinks this way.

So see you at the next Neighbourhood Meeting then to show you the facts.

Come on John share your info with us al,l as it is not just me who needs educating as you would see it.

You are always asking me yes or no questions so why have you not answered mine.
Is a vote for CIIP a wasted vote if you want to change the overall control of CPBC unless they start a mainland branch or link up with there old friends in the Labour party?

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

HOT AIR wrote:
You really are a self important, pompous pr&t John Pharro, a know nothing bore.

Very well said, glad it's not just me thinks this way.

So see you at the next Neighbourhood Meeting then to show you the facts.

Come on John share your info with us al,l as it is not just me who needs educating as you would see it.

You are always asking me yes or no questions so why have you not answered mine.
Is a vote for CIIP a wasted vote if you want to change the overall control of CPBC unless they start a mainland branch or link up with there old friends in the Labour party?

Told you see you at the Neighbourhood Meeting after all you think I am "a self important pompous pr-tt and a know nothing bore" you will be able to tell to my face then or maybe find out I am not. Bet you don't turn up.

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

Carnabackable wrote:
That's Grand news, get rid of those caravan dwellers, a real step forward..

HERE HERE but wait for the moaners!!!

Does this get rid of the all the caravans?
Not a moan, just answer the question.
Just for the record do you know why this uncontrolled development of unlimited caravans on what was a holiday camp was allowed to happen?
Before I tell you, you tell me.

Oh do tell

Come on 'upset" see my above post. Answer.

No it's you and the nice person from Rochford that know all the answers, so you think.

Your floundering you have absolutely no idea at all have you? You seem to always have an opinion, based around slagging off the CIIP, but with no factual back up at all. So why not admit it?
Of course, had you taken an active interest and attended Neighbourhood Meetings, you would know, but you don't do you?
So, you have two choices, admit you have no idea and/or attend the next Neighbourhood Meeting where I will you the proof and you never know you may even find out something else Castle Point are not doing, but claim they are.
So which is it?
You see not moans, but concrete facts and questions.

Your dealing with an armchair warrior, what do you expect?

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

HOT AIR wrote:
You really are a self important, pompous pr&t John Pharro, a know nothing bore.

Very well said, glad it's not just me thinks this way.

So see you at the next Neighbourhood Meeting then to show you the facts.

Come on John share your info with us al,l as it is not just me who needs educating as you would see it.

You are always asking me yes or no questions so why have you not answered mine.
Is a vote for CIIP a wasted vote if you want to change the overall control of CPBC unless they start a mainland branch or link up with there old friends in the Labour party?

Told you see you at the Neighbourhood Meeting after all you think I am "a self important pompous pr-tt and a know nothing bore" you will be able to tell to my face then or maybe find out I am not. Bet you don't turn up.

I have never called you any of those names, in fact I never called you any names. I may have implied that your support for the CIIP is doubt full in it's correctness and your continued slating of the Tory's is less than fair, but please don't make inflammatory submissions about name calling you are very much mistaken.
Still no answer about the voting though John.

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

HOT AIR wrote:
You really are a self important, pompous pr&t John Pharro, a know nothing bore.

Very well said, glad it's not just me thinks this way.

So see you at the next Neighbourhood Meeting then to show you the facts.

Come on John share your info with us al,l as it is not just me who needs educating as you would see it.

You are always asking me yes or no questions so why have you not answered mine.
Is a vote for CIIP a wasted vote if you want to change the overall control of CPBC unless they start a mainland branch or link up with there old friends in the Labour party?

Told you see you at the Neighbourhood Meeting after all you think I am "a self important pompous pr-tt and a know nothing bore" you will be able to tell to my face then or maybe find out I am not. Bet you don't turn up.

I have never called you any of those names, in fact I never called you any names. I may have implied that your support for the CIIP is doubt full in it's correctness and your continued slating of the Tory's is less than fair, but please don't make inflammatory submissions about name calling you are very much mistaken.
Still no answer about the voting though John.

Excuse me you agreed with Hot Air so it amounts to the same thing.

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:

HOT AIR wrote:
You really are a self important, pompous pr&t John Pharro, a know nothing bore.

Very well said, glad it's not just me thinks this way.

So see you at the next Neighbourhood Meeting then to show you the facts.

Come on John share your info with us al,l as it is not just me who needs educating as you would see it.

You are always asking me yes or no questions so why have you not answered mine.
Is a vote for CIIP a wasted vote if you want to change the overall control of CPBC unless they start a mainland branch or link up with there old friends in the Labour party?

Told you see you at the Neighbourhood Meeting after all you think I am "a self important pompous pr-tt and a know nothing bore" you will be able to tell to my face then or maybe find out I am not. Bet you don't turn up.

I have never called you any of those names, in fact I never called you any names. I may have implied that your support for the CIIP is doubt full in it's correctness and your continued slating of the Tory's is less than fair, but please don't make inflammatory submissions about name calling you are very much mistaken.
Still no answer about the voting though John.

Excuse me you agreed with Hot Air so it amounts to the same thing.

Come on John tell us all about the vote!!!!

I have it on good authority that the Tory's are please that the INDIES are on Canvey because they have split the opposition vote and they only have to now satisfy mainland voters to stay in power.
What do you think John?

upset wrote:
I have it on good authority that the Tory's are please that the INDIES are on Canvey because they have split the opposition vote and they only have to now satisfy mainland voters to stay in power.
What do you think John?

I won't bother to in future to respond to anyone who thinks I am "self important pompous pr-tt" then denies it. Clearly whatever I say they (you) will ignore it anyway.
You however, can still come to the next Neighbourhood Meeting where I will show you the proof of what I first posted about, which you still have not replied to.

John T Pharro wrote:

upset wrote:
I have it on good authority that the Tory's are please that the INDIES are on Canvey because they have split the opposition vote and they only have to now satisfy mainland voters to stay in power.
What do you think John?

I won't bother to in future to respond to anyone who thinks I am "self important pompous pr-tt" then denies it. Clearly whatever I say they (you) will ignore it anyway.
You however, can still come to the next Neighbourhood Meeting where I will show you the proof of what I first posted about, which you still have not replied to.

John do you not understand that everyone on here will now believe you have either something to hide and or you have no answer to my various voting questions.
I have no wish to meet you, but unbeknown to both of us we have probably been in the same Neighbourhood meeting. The Echo makes these pages available for people to exchange views and opinions, So answer the questions and put your evidence up for us all to see.

Q / What's going on in Castle Point ?
A / Castle Point as have other Boroughs have to set a new homes target that have to stand scrutiny of a Government Inspector, a figure could be as high as 280 per year but is suggested that 200 maybe defendable..

Q/ Why are mainland Cllrs voting for new homes in Castle Point ?
A/ because failure to prepare a local plan or provide adequate housing numbers will result in Castle Point loosing it Development Control, so what you may say , but developers who are waiting to develop our Green Belt sites would then submit applications direct to an Inspector plans that have not been negotiated just submitted , ALL Green Belt will be at risk.

Q/ Why aren't CIIP Cllrs voting for new homes in Castle Point?
A/ Ask them , and ask what alternatives are there?

Q / What could happen if the new local plan is not in place ?
A/ Could result in Castle Point loosing it Development Control, with developers waiting to submit applications direct to an Inspector plans that have not been negotiated just submitted , ALL Green Belt will be at risk.

Whatthe* wrote:
Q / What's going on in Castle Point ?
A / Castle Point as have other Boroughs have to set a new homes target that have to stand scrutiny of a Government Inspector, a figure could be as high as 280 per year but is suggested that 200 maybe defendable..

Q/ Why are mainland Cllrs voting for new homes in Castle Point ?
A/ because failure to prepare a local plan or provide adequate housing numbers will result in Castle Point loosing it Development Control, so what you may say , but developers who are waiting to develop our Green Belt sites would then submit applications direct to an Inspector plans that have not been negotiated just submitted , ALL Green Belt will be at risk.

Q/ Why aren't CIIP Cllrs voting for new homes in Castle Point?
A/ Ask them , and ask what alternatives are there?

Q / What could happen if the new local plan is not in place ?
A/ Could result in Castle Point loosing it Development Control, with developers waiting to submit applications direct to an Inspector plans that have not been negotiated just submitted , ALL Green Belt will be at risk.

Point 3. Just a question, what do you think the alternatives are, or where do you think the housing should be built?

John T Pharro wrote:

Whatthe* wrote:
Q / What's going on in Castle Point ?
A / Castle Point as have other Boroughs have to set a new homes target that have to stand scrutiny of a Government Inspector, a figure could be as high as 280 per year but is suggested that 200 maybe defendable..

Q/ Why are mainland Cllrs voting for new homes in Castle Point ?
A/ because failure to prepare a local plan or provide adequate housing numbers will result in Castle Point loosing it Development Control, so what you may say , but developers who are waiting to develop our Green Belt sites would then submit applications direct to an Inspector plans that have not been negotiated just submitted , ALL Green Belt will be at risk.

Q/ Why aren't CIIP Cllrs voting for new homes in Castle Point?
A/ Ask them , and ask what alternatives are there?

Q / What could happen if the new local plan is not in place ?
A/ Could result in Castle Point loosing it Development Control, with developers waiting to submit applications direct to an Inspector plans that have not been negotiated just submitted , ALL Green Belt will be at risk.

Point 3. Just a question, what do you think the alternatives are, or where do you think the housing should be built?

John
I don't know have to wait and see what comes up , but a blanket No is a No No, but I guess that would stop any awkward decissions having to be made and the blame would be aimed at the inspector .
These targets are from the previous Government and not rescinded by the current Government we are left with forced housing targets that probably won't sell but the land will still be allocated.

"the caravan dwellers" are people with families and have no choice