Wednesday - March 25, 2009

Council ‘calls pensioners racists’ for objecting to cost of tidying up after travellers.

Well apparently all one has to do is suggest, question or be critical in any way of this newest racial group, and it’s automatic one is a bad person or anyway, a racist.  As labeled by the very left oh so freekin politically correct councils who live and breathe when actually they more deserve to be shot.  Or hung, which ever is cheaper. 

There’s a damn good reason so many people are against this group and if that means the big ‘R’ then screw it.  That’s fine.
Really tired of hearing how bad it is to be racist.  IT ISN’T!  There are often damn good reasons for it.

Especially in this case.

Oh and btw .... re. that tyrannical loon (John Prescott) who is mentioned late in this article. Just so ppl outside UK who are reading this know.
He was Deputy PM under Blair, who brought him ,Prescott, into govt to appease the far left wing of his party.
Prescott wanted to do all he could to “stick it to the well off and the comfortable.”

So called Travelers and others of their kind are a blight on the landscape!
I do not dislike them because of who they are, but what they do. 

Council ‘calls pensioners racists’ for objecting to cost of tidying up after travellers

By Dan Newling
Last updated at 4:50 PM on 25th March 2009

An elderly couple who suggested that Gipsies and travellers should contribute towards the cost of cleaning up any mess they make have been branded ‘racist’.

Pensioners Rita and Norman Brookhouse were told that their views - expressed in response to a public consultation - breached race laws and would be ignored.

However, rather than objecting to proposed new Gipsy and traveller camps, all the couple did was to point out that the planned sites might be messy.

They went on to suggest that any families living on the new sites should be asked to make a financial contribution towards their cleaning costs.

Angry: Pensioners Rita and Norman Brookhouse say they were effectively branded racists by their regional assembly.

The couple, from Havant in Hampshire, were shocked to receive an official reply which told them their views were based on ‘negative assumptions’.

The letter cited the Race Relations Act and concluded that their opinion ‘could be construed as offensive’ and would therefore be ignored.

The Brookhouses’ experience is just the latest example of how local authorities - under pressure from central Government to establish more permanent Gipsy and traveller sites - are using every possible legal tactic to do get their way.

Earlier this year Bedfordshire Police was branded ‘racist’ when it too was told that its official objection to a planned Gipsy camp ‘breached the Race Relations Act’.

The Brookhouses wrote their letter in response to a public consultation carried out late last year by the South East England Regional Assembly .

The unelected organisation - which coordinates the work of 76 local councils - wanted to gauge public opinion on plans to build 1,076 new Gipsy and traveller pitches across its area.

The authority placed advertisements in local libraries asking for views on the camps such as how they should distributed around South-East England.

In their response Norman Brookhouse, 73, and his wife Rita, 76, wrote: ‘Travellers use their current areas because they can find work and facilities available there.  Keeping most in the same area should be less expensive than starting mainly new areas.

‘Reasonable charges must be made for use of sites so that local people know the travellers are contributing to the community finances.

‘At present travellers give nothing to the community where they stay, indeed they create expense (rubbish clearance, etc. after they have departed).’

Catriona Riddell, Seera’s director of planning, wrote back to the couple.

She told them their letter ‘contains statements that are based on negative assumptions about the gypsy, travellers and travelling showpeople communities and / or could reasonably be construed as offensive to such groups’.

The letter went on: ‘While we appreciate that you may not have intended for your comments to be perceived as such, we and our legal advisers consider such comments to be of a discriminatory nature.’

Mrs Brookhouse, a retired scientist, today insisted that she is not racist.  She said she supports the idea of Gipsy and traveller sites that are properly managed.

She said: ‘We are not racist. We have friends from all different walks of life.  It doesn’t matter to me as long as people respect the area they live in and pull their weight.’

She added: ‘This country is supposed to be a democracy - we are all supposed to have a say in what happens.  To be told that they don’t like what you’re saying and therefore going to discount it is utterly ridiculous.

‘This assembly does not represent the country.  I’m a taxpayer in a town where the council has to spend thousands of pounds a year clearing up after travellers and we don’t get anything back.’

The Brookhouses’ Conservative MP David Willetts described Seera’s actions as ‘political correctness gone mad’.

He said: ‘It was a consultation on sites for travellers and the Brookhouses have drawn attention to widespread concern about the expense that’s created by having to clear up their rubbish after they depart.

‘This is basically a statement of fact.  There were no abusive or offensive remarks about gypsies or travellers as an ethnic group.  It is completely absurd to suggest it is and undermines the consultation.’

A spokesman for Seera revealed that it had rejected 147 of the 1,129 consultation responses it received for being racist.

Moira Gibson, chair of Seera’s Regional Planning Committee, said: ‘Under the Race Relations Act it is against the law for local councils or the Assembly to discriminate against anyone on the grounds of their race, colour, or ethnic or national group.

‘Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers are legally recognised ethnic groups.  As such we have had to discount and return any responses that we and independent legal advisors reasonably considered to be of a discriminatory nature.

‘A vast majority of the responses we received were not discriminatory and have been taken into account.’

In 2006, John Prescott, then deputy Prime Minister, told local authorities that council provision for gipsies and travellers should be ‘significantly increased’.  Since then the number of new sites has doubled.

THE MAIL

Posted by peiper     on 03/25/2009 at 12:20 PM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Jack Booted Thugs • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner