Council releases new list of potential Newport Gipsy sites – and old proposals aren’t on it

PROTEST MARCH: Previous proposals for a Gipsy site at Bettws prompted an angry reaction from residents

TEMPORARY HOME: An unofficial Gipsy site at Telford Road

LONG-STANDING ISSUE: Past Argus coverage of the issue

First published in Gwent news South Wales Argus: Photograph of the Author by

NEWPORT council has released a new list of 11 potential sites for Gipsy and traveller families.

Following the council’s decision in June to scrap a previous controversial shortlist of potential sites and go back to the drawing board, the new list has now been drawn up for consultation.

New potential sites include a former chicken processing plant at Castleton and the former Ringland allotments.

But sites which were previously named as potential locations, including Yew Tree Cottages at Bettws which was the subject of a protest march, are no longer on the list.

A council spokeswoman emphasised that no decisions have been made at this stage and a final list of proposed sites will be drawn up following the consultation on October 4.

Both residential and transit sites must be identified by the council in its local development plan.

A shortlist of sites which included Yew Tree Cottages at Bettws and Queensway Meadows was scrapped by the council in June, as it made the decision to go back to the drawing board and reviewa long list of potential sites.

A cross-party project team was set up in June which invited members of the public to suggest sites. A total of 33 responses were received and the suggestions were included in a list of more than 220 locations.

The sites were examined against a list of criteria and other locations were also visited by the party before the list of 11 was drawn up.

The council will consider comments when it prepares a final public report and a recommended shortlist for the scrutiny committee.

If the committee and cabinet accept the proposals, further investigations would be carried out before the sites could be developed.

Members of the public will also have the opportunity to make further comments in the future.

Further information on all 220 sites is available at newport.gov.uk and comments on the sites can be sent to scrutiny@newport.gov.uk or by post to Gipsy and traveller site review, Overview and scrutiny unit, Newport city council, Civic Centre, Newport, NP20 4UR.

Locations now under consideration

● Land at Brickyard Lane (residential only);

● Former Allt-yr-yn brickworks (residential only);

● Yard adjacent to the A449 (transit only);

● Land to the west of Llanmartin Primary School (residential only);

● Former Langstone Nursery, Magor Road (residential only);

● Land to the south of Langstone Cottage, Old Chepstow Road (residential only);

● Former Ringland allotments (residential or transit);

● Former road safety centre and surrounding land, Hartridge Farm Road (residential only);

● Former speedway site, Plover Close (transit only);

● Former chicken processing plant, Castleton (residential only);

● Land at Celtic Way, Marshfield (transit only).

The five previous potential sites were:

● Yew Tree Cottages, Bettws;

● Queensway Meadows;

● Two former Army sites at Pye Corner, Nash;

● Pound Hill, Coedkernew.

Comments (68)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:00am Fri 7 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Amazing. You will noite that most sites are in non lab areas
Amazing. You will noite that most sites are in non lab areas james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

11:59am Fri 7 Sep 12

DaisysPetShop says...

Who taught this reporter to spell?
its "Gypsy"
goodness knows what a Gipsy is!
Who taught this reporter to spell? its "Gypsy" goodness knows what a Gipsy is! DaisysPetShop
  • Score: 0

12:57pm Fri 7 Sep 12

Amberboy says...

This council should be ashamed
This council should be ashamed Amberboy
  • Score: 0

1:08pm Fri 7 Sep 12

chris warman says...

well as one of the campaign team all i can say is well done to all for all the support and backing.

its been difficult at times reading threw hundreds of pages of planning policy to get our argument across but always had faith that we could identify the specific policy's that would stop the sites form being reconsidered and built.

again well done to all that took part
well as one of the campaign team all i can say is well done to all for all the support and backing. its been difficult at times reading threw hundreds of pages of planning policy to get our argument across but always had faith that we could identify the specific policy's that would stop the sites form being reconsidered and built. again well done to all that took part chris warman
  • Score: 0

1:12pm Fri 7 Sep 12

welshmen says...

Amberboy. your right, but the people of this City will vote Labour again and again, its the same with the Westminster the people keep voting for the same policies weather it's Con Lab Lib, this will never change, we need a party that takes the needs of the indigenous people first you know the people who PAY THEIR TAXES year in year out...
Amberboy. your right, but the people of this City will vote Labour again and again, its the same with the Westminster the people keep voting for the same policies weather it's Con Lab Lib, this will never change, we need a party that takes the needs of the indigenous people first you know the people who PAY THEIR TAXES year in year out... welshmen
  • Score: 0

1:32pm Fri 7 Sep 12

Howie' says...

Amberboy wrote:
This council should be ashamed
Why should the Council be ashamed?, seems to me that they listened to people's views on the first sites and they are no longer on the list. They seem to have reached cross party consensus and are making it easy for the public to be involved in the process, what else could they have done? All Unitary Councils in England and Wales are obliged by UK legislation to set up residential and transit sites for Gipsy's/travelers.
[quote][p][bold]Amberboy[/bold] wrote: This council should be ashamed[/p][/quote]Why should the Council be ashamed?, seems to me that they listened to people's views on the first sites and they are no longer on the list. They seem to have reached cross party consensus and are making it easy for the public to be involved in the process, what else could they have done? All Unitary Councils in England and Wales are obliged by UK legislation to set up residential and transit sites for Gipsy's/travelers. Howie'
  • Score: 0

2:09pm Fri 7 Sep 12

alwaytom says...

I hope the Ringland councillors try to stop any sites coming to Ringland; the leader of the council represents Ringland but lives in Allt-yr-yn?
I hope the Ringland councillors try to stop any sites coming to Ringland; the leader of the council represents Ringland but lives in Allt-yr-yn? alwaytom
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Fri 7 Sep 12

james jackson says...

Labour listened to its cronies. As Mr Dyer says, they are all, bar one, in Tory areas.
Labour has not consulted here at all. They've given in to the views of the mob
These are the people who were dragged out to vote in Lliswerry and Pill in the May elections, without realising that they were actually voting for fake Tories.
Many of this Labour lot promised their cronies that if they won last May, gypsy sites would disappear from Labour areas and be placed in Conservative areas. Hey presto! That's what happened.
There has been no open consultation here. If there were, Hartridge Farm Road wouldn't appear on the list as it's land that is being sold for housing - to fund the new Llanwern High School. O, what an inconvenience.
PS: Gipsy spelt that way is "house style" for the South Wales Argus. It can actually be spelt either way.
Labour listened to its cronies. As Mr Dyer says, they are all, bar one, in Tory areas. Labour has not consulted here at all. They've given in to the views of the mob These are the people who were dragged out to vote in Lliswerry and Pill in the May elections, without realising that they were actually voting for fake Tories. Many of this Labour lot promised their cronies that if they won last May, gypsy sites would disappear from Labour areas and be placed in Conservative areas. Hey presto! That's what happened. There has been no open consultation here. If there were, Hartridge Farm Road wouldn't appear on the list as it's land that is being sold for housing - to fund the new Llanwern High School. O, what an inconvenience. PS: Gipsy spelt that way is "house style" for the South Wales Argus. It can actually be spelt either way. james jackson
  • Score: 0

2:34pm Fri 7 Sep 12

Amberboy says...

Yes Howie - But do the people of Newport really want these sites? I'm not an expert on the matter, but Caerphilly council have not drawn up any plans and are refusing to even discuss it. Why can't we do the same.
Yes Howie - But do the people of Newport really want these sites? I'm not an expert on the matter, but Caerphilly council have not drawn up any plans and are refusing to even discuss it. Why can't we do the same. Amberboy
  • Score: 0

4:21pm Fri 7 Sep 12

Howie' says...

Amberboy wrote:
Yes Howie - But do the people of Newport really want these sites? I'm not an expert on the matter, but Caerphilly council have not drawn up any plans and are refusing to even discuss it. Why can't we do the same.
That's the point though Amberboy, the people may or may not agree with these sites being built in their area and it is not unique to Newport, if you google you will find stories of protests, legal battles and judicial reviews taking place across England and Wales but the Local Authority's are legally bound to identify Gypsy/ Travelers needs in regard to sites.

It is not that Caerphilly Council have refused to discuss it, there is a lot regarding Gypsy's and their needs on their website, the reason that there are zero sites in Caerphilly and Monmouthshire is quite simple...they have very few Gypsy's.

www.cardiff.gov.uk/O
bjView.asp?Object_ID
=19950

Attached at Appendix B, shows that two out
of nine of Cardiff’s neighbouring local authorities in South East Wales have
reported a zero need: Caerphilly and Monmouthshire.
[quote][p][bold]Amberboy[/bold] wrote: Yes Howie - But do the people of Newport really want these sites? I'm not an expert on the matter, but Caerphilly council have not drawn up any plans and are refusing to even discuss it. Why can't we do the same.[/p][/quote]That's the point though Amberboy, the people may or may not agree with these sites being built in their area and it is not unique to Newport, if you google you will find stories of protests, legal battles and judicial reviews taking place across England and Wales but the Local Authority's are legally bound to identify Gypsy/ Travelers needs in regard to sites. It is not that Caerphilly Council have refused to discuss it, there is a lot regarding Gypsy's and their needs on their website, the reason that there are zero sites in Caerphilly and Monmouthshire is quite simple...they have very few Gypsy's. www.cardiff.gov.uk/O bjView.asp?Object_ID =19950 Attached at Appendix B, shows that two out of nine of Cardiff’s neighbouring local authorities in South East Wales have reported a zero need: Caerphilly and Monmouthshire. Howie'
  • Score: 0

4:43pm Fri 7 Sep 12

Welshman76 says...

There is going to be opposition from people who potentially will have the sites in their locality due to the stereotypical view of this culture. Unfortunately a decision will be made and there will be people who will be unhappy and people who will be happy - this will always be the case in a democratic society and life in general. I think people listen to too many rumours and don't know all the facts about these people but at the same time they don't show themselves in a positive light on occasions which further alienates them from the rest of society. After travelling past sites, I wouldn't want to be living near one from what I have seen but at the same time understand that these people are probably all not as bad as we think. This is such a subject that will be debated and argued about for many years without ever coming to an agreed consensus where everybody is happy.
There is going to be opposition from people who potentially will have the sites in their locality due to the stereotypical view of this culture. Unfortunately a decision will be made and there will be people who will be unhappy and people who will be happy - this will always be the case in a democratic society and life in general. I think people listen to too many rumours and don't know all the facts about these people but at the same time they don't show themselves in a positive light on occasions which further alienates them from the rest of society. After travelling past sites, I wouldn't want to be living near one from what I have seen but at the same time understand that these people are probably all not as bad as we think. This is such a subject that will be debated and argued about for many years without ever coming to an agreed consensus where everybody is happy. Welshman76
  • Score: 0

5:00pm Fri 7 Sep 12

james jackson says...

If people are seriously interested in this issue, (without resorting to what amounts to racist attacks), they should check out Bristol.
People were generally against gypsy sites and there were protests about mess and litter and anti-social behaviour.
But once the council bit the bullet and provided both a transit site and a permanent site, problems disappeared and the costs to Bristol council taxpayers fell enormously.
Gypsy and traveller families are happy to pay their way and this has proved to be the case in Bristol, where the sites are strictly monitored.
Newport should try to be a little more progressive and do the right thing for once. People may find that gypsies are, after all, people just like themselves, but with a different lifestyle..Come on Newport Council, leave your phony Labour credentials in the 20th century and move with the times!
If people are seriously interested in this issue, (without resorting to what amounts to racist attacks), they should check out Bristol. People were generally against gypsy sites and there were protests about mess and litter and anti-social behaviour. But once the council bit the bullet and provided both a transit site and a permanent site, problems disappeared and the costs to Bristol council taxpayers fell enormously. Gypsy and traveller families are happy to pay their way and this has proved to be the case in Bristol, where the sites are strictly monitored. Newport should try to be a little more progressive and do the right thing for once. People may find that gypsies are, after all, people just like themselves, but with a different lifestyle..Come on Newport Council, leave your phony Labour credentials in the 20th century and move with the times! james jackson
  • Score: 0

5:00pm Fri 7 Sep 12

james jackson says...

If people are seriously interested in this issue, (without resorting to what amounts to racist attacks), they should check out Bristol.
People were generally against gypsy sites and there were protests about mess and litter and anti-social behaviour.
But once the council bit the bullet and provided both a transit site and a permanent site, problems disappeared and the costs to Bristol council taxpayers fell enormously.
Gypsy and traveller families are happy to pay their way and this has proved to be the case in Bristol, where the sites are strictly monitored.
Newport should try to be a little more progressive and do the right thing for once. People may find that gypsies are, after all, people just like themselves, but with a different lifestyle..Come on Newport Council, leave your phony Labour credentials in the 20th century and move with the times!
If people are seriously interested in this issue, (without resorting to what amounts to racist attacks), they should check out Bristol. People were generally against gypsy sites and there were protests about mess and litter and anti-social behaviour. But once the council bit the bullet and provided both a transit site and a permanent site, problems disappeared and the costs to Bristol council taxpayers fell enormously. Gypsy and traveller families are happy to pay their way and this has proved to be the case in Bristol, where the sites are strictly monitored. Newport should try to be a little more progressive and do the right thing for once. People may find that gypsies are, after all, people just like themselves, but with a different lifestyle..Come on Newport Council, leave your phony Labour credentials in the 20th century and move with the times! james jackson
  • Score: 0

5:14pm Fri 7 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Yes , I know all about Bristol and the proper gypsies deserve some merit. However the majority in Newpoirt are not and that is the problem. For example, France had the right idea recently in getting rid of the Romas there. In any case no-one is ever going to be happy with them in their area and given the 'traveller' element who don't want to travel, i don't blame them!
Yes , I know all about Bristol and the proper gypsies deserve some merit. However the majority in Newpoirt are not and that is the problem. For example, France had the right idea recently in getting rid of the Romas there. In any case no-one is ever going to be happy with them in their area and given the 'traveller' element who don't want to travel, i don't blame them! james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

5:32pm Fri 7 Sep 12

Welshman76 says...

james.dyer7@ntlworld
.com
wrote:
Yes , I know all about Bristol and the proper gypsies deserve some merit. However the majority in Newpoirt are not and that is the problem. For example, France had the right idea recently in getting rid of the Romas there. In any case no-one is ever going to be happy with them in their area and given the 'traveller' element who don't want to travel, i don't blame them!
so you would get rid of them all even the proper ones that deserve some credit? How many 'Newport' ones do you personally know?
[quote][p][bold]james.dyer7@ntlworld .com[/bold] wrote: Yes , I know all about Bristol and the proper gypsies deserve some merit. However the majority in Newpoirt are not and that is the problem. For example, France had the right idea recently in getting rid of the Romas there. In any case no-one is ever going to be happy with them in their area and given the 'traveller' element who don't want to travel, i don't blame them![/p][/quote]so you would get rid of them all even the proper ones that deserve some credit? How many 'Newport' ones do you personally know? Welshman76
  • Score: 0

5:47pm Fri 7 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Welshman - i never said that. In fact i said PROPER gypsies desrve some help. I know many people of many nationalities all over the world. What is the relevace of your question Welshman?
Welshman - i never said that. In fact i said PROPER gypsies desrve some help. I know many people of many nationalities all over the world. What is the relevace of your question Welshman? james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

8:13pm Fri 7 Sep 12

james jackson says...

The Roma are genuine. France has a nasty streak of racism in its make-up and to praise the French government for "getting rid" of them is not good.
It smacks of Nazi Germany's purges in the 1930s and is, of course, a form of ethnic cleansing.
It appears to be the case that people are allowed to be as racist as they like towards this minority. If it's OK to persecute gypsies, then it could be OK to persecute other groups in society, just as Hitler did.

"First, they came for the communists, but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist..."
The Roma are genuine. France has a nasty streak of racism in its make-up and to praise the French government for "getting rid" of them is not good. It smacks of Nazi Germany's purges in the 1930s and is, of course, a form of ethnic cleansing. It appears to be the case that people are allowed to be as racist as they like towards this minority. If it's OK to persecute gypsies, then it could be OK to persecute other groups in society, just as Hitler did. "First, they came for the communists, but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist..." james jackson
  • Score: 0

9:04pm Fri 7 Sep 12

chris227 says...

before you read my post is does not effect where i live.

But i hope the residents of the proposed areas demonstrate and lobby their mp. A gypsy site was put in near my friends house in gloucester all the houses in the area became worthless quad bikes were raced up and down all night and (i can vouch for this) rubbish was thrown all around the neighbourhood. The council can pay a fine if they do not house these scum.
before you read my post is does not effect where i live. But i hope the residents of the proposed areas demonstrate and lobby their mp. A gypsy site was put in near my friends house in gloucester all the houses in the area became worthless quad bikes were raced up and down all night and (i can vouch for this) rubbish was thrown all around the neighbourhood. The council can pay a fine if they do not house these scum. chris227
  • Score: 0

9:24pm Fri 7 Sep 12

Welshman76 says...

james.dyer7@ntlworld
.com
wrote:
Welshman - i never said that. In fact i said PROPER gypsies desrve some help. I know many people of many nationalities all over the world. What is the relevace of your question Welshman?
my point is you implied in yr post that France had the right idea in getting rid of the gypsies which in my eyes means that you are in agreement with this policy. In relation to my question you compare Newport gypsies to Bristol gypsies who are 'decent' and I was just wondering what your foundation for this piece of information you share!
[quote][p][bold]james.dyer7@ntlworld .com[/bold] wrote: Welshman - i never said that. In fact i said PROPER gypsies desrve some help. I know many people of many nationalities all over the world. What is the relevace of your question Welshman?[/p][/quote]my point is you implied in yr post that France had the right idea in getting rid of the gypsies which in my eyes means that you are in agreement with this policy. In relation to my question you compare Newport gypsies to Bristol gypsies who are 'decent' and I was just wondering what your foundation for this piece of information you share! Welshman76
  • Score: 0

10:38pm Fri 7 Sep 12

digispamman says...

why not build chav camps? we could house half of newport in them. imagine how much nicer the council/social housing estates could be if we did this!
safe to go out after dark, less crime, less dog **** on the pavements, people taking a pride in the area in which they live,,,,,,,, the possibilities are endless!
why not build chav camps? we could house half of newport in them. imagine how much nicer the council/social housing estates could be if we did this! safe to go out after dark, less crime, less dog **** on the pavements, people taking a pride in the area in which they live,,,,,,,, the possibilities are endless! digispamman
  • Score: 0

11:21pm Fri 7 Sep 12

chris warman says...

just to put this in to some context we the people of bettws were not a mob nor did we discriminate. the site the council wished to used was unsuitable due to its location and previous history.also it was against the planning guidelines for such sites as road infrastructure was very poor. a lot of time and effort went in to identifying the correct planning policy's to make our objection we were never told which policy's were being used incorrectly we had to research this ourselves.

for the record the objections raised were the same if it was a holiday company that wanted to build a holiday park on the same site,it was never ever about who the site was for.
just to put this in to some context we the people of bettws were not a mob nor did we discriminate. the site the council wished to used was unsuitable due to its location and previous history.also it was against the planning guidelines for such sites as road infrastructure was very poor. a lot of time and effort went in to identifying the correct planning policy's to make our objection we were never told which policy's were being used incorrectly we had to research this ourselves. for the record the objections raised were the same if it was a holiday company that wanted to build a holiday park on the same site,it was never ever about who the site was for. chris warman
  • Score: 0

12:11am Sat 8 Sep 12

julie the bitch says...

chris warman wrote:
well as one of the campaign team all i can say is well done to all for all the support and backing.

its been difficult at times reading threw hundreds of pages of planning policy to get our argument across but always had faith that we could identify the specific policy's that would stop the sites form being reconsidered and built.

again well done to all that took part
let them live where they want it can,t get any worse than it is
[quote][p][bold]chris warman[/bold] wrote: well as one of the campaign team all i can say is well done to all for all the support and backing. its been difficult at times reading threw hundreds of pages of planning policy to get our argument across but always had faith that we could identify the specific policy's that would stop the sites form being reconsidered and built. again well done to all that took part[/p][/quote]let them live where they want it can,t get any worse than it is julie the bitch
  • Score: 0

1:39am Sat 8 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

welshman - Still don't understand the relevance oif your question. Neither did i/do i compare Bristol; gypsies with Newport ones. There is a great difference between Proper gypsies and tinkers and travellers. Whichever way you look at it the later are scrounging, waste of space.They don't deserve special treatment and are not an identifiable ethnic group. As for the French and the Romas there all i can say is that they were from Romania, and to me that's where they belong. This country is being swamped by immigrants and it should be stopped, gypsies or not.
welshman - Still don't understand the relevance oif your question. Neither did i/do i compare Bristol; gypsies with Newport ones. There is a great difference between Proper gypsies and tinkers and travellers. Whichever way you look at it the later are scrounging, waste of space.They don't deserve special treatment and are not an identifiable ethnic group. As for the French and the Romas there all i can say is that they were from Romania, and to me that's where they belong. This country is being swamped by immigrants and it should be stopped, gypsies or not. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

2:48am Sat 8 Sep 12

angry12 says...

Hi all. I have read the comments above and accept the arguements fore and against. However, I have been a resident in Newport for 36 years and have slowly seen the demise of the city, the idea of accomodating travellers i.e gypsies seems bizarre! Why is it that the government feel the need to support these people when they effectivley give nothing back to the state. E.G
g Council Tax, Water Rates, TV Licence! Being one half of a young couple who have struggled to own a home, pay our bills on time of which I think we speak for a great percentage of the population. These people continue to be given handouts and are accomodated???
Hi all. I have read the comments above and accept the arguements fore and against. However, I have been a resident in Newport for 36 years and have slowly seen the demise of the city, the idea of accomodating travellers i.e gypsies seems bizarre! Why is it that the government feel the need to support these people when they effectivley give nothing back to the state. E.G g Council Tax, Water Rates, TV Licence! Being one half of a young couple who have struggled to own a home, pay our bills on time of which I think we speak for a great percentage of the population. These people continue to be given handouts and are accomodated??? angry12
  • Score: 0

9:28am Sat 8 Sep 12

jups says...

well said angry12...I have to agree with your point of view...these people choose to live this way and make lots of money when they arrive in our towns and cities and as you said pay nothing back. Yet it is then up to our councils to clean the site behind them costing thousands ! They get richer but are a HUGE drain on the councils resources..its a joke...
Some of these travellers are travelling around our country (some of the Irish ones ) only because they are not allowed to travel in their own countries ! so why should they travel in ours !
well said angry12...I have to agree with your point of view...these people choose to live this way and make lots of money when they arrive in our towns and cities and as you said pay nothing back. Yet it is then up to our councils to clean the site behind them costing thousands ! They get richer but are a HUGE drain on the councils resources..its a joke... Some of these travellers are travelling around our country (some of the Irish ones ) only because they are not allowed to travel in their own countries ! so why should they travel in ours ! jups
  • Score: 0

9:41am Sat 8 Sep 12

Carrot's says...

I am simply astonished that anyone (traveller or not) should have any desire to come and live in Newport.
Given the choice between going into a traveller community and going into Ringland (I did both as a deliver driver) - I have to say I only got stones thrown at my van in one of those places - Ringland.
I am simply astonished that anyone (traveller or not) should have any desire to come and live in Newport. Given the choice between going into a traveller community and going into Ringland (I did both as a deliver driver) - I have to say I only got stones thrown at my van in one of those places - Ringland. Carrot's
  • Score: 0

9:43am Sat 8 Sep 12

Welshman76 says...

james.dyer7@ntlworld
.com
wrote:
welshman - Still don't understand the relevance oif your question. Neither did i/do i compare Bristol; gypsies with Newport ones. There is a great difference between Proper gypsies and tinkers and travellers. Whichever way you look at it the later are scrounging, waste of space.They don't deserve special treatment and are not an identifiable ethnic group. As for the French and the Romas there all i can say is that they were from Romania, and to me that's where they belong. This country is being swamped by immigrants and it should be stopped, gypsies or not.
Read the first 2 sentences from yr first post and it is clear you are making a comparison! Unless what you wrote isn't as clear as what you were thinking at the time, if this is the case you need to be clearer in your wording when you post.
[quote][p][bold]james.dyer7@ntlworld .com[/bold] wrote: welshman - Still don't understand the relevance oif your question. Neither did i/do i compare Bristol; gypsies with Newport ones. There is a great difference between Proper gypsies and tinkers and travellers. Whichever way you look at it the later are scrounging, waste of space.They don't deserve special treatment and are not an identifiable ethnic group. As for the French and the Romas there all i can say is that they were from Romania, and to me that's where they belong. This country is being swamped by immigrants and it should be stopped, gypsies or not.[/p][/quote]Read the first 2 sentences from yr first post and it is clear you are making a comparison! Unless what you wrote isn't as clear as what you were thinking at the time, if this is the case you need to be clearer in your wording when you post. Welshman76
  • Score: 0

9:47am Sat 8 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

welshman - i repeat i made no comparison with Bristol and Newport. I suggest it is what you thought i meant. Perhaps you need to read more carefully. By the way, I know quiote a few Newport gypsies , proper ones, who have settled here and are nice people.
welshman - i repeat i made no comparison with Bristol and Newport. I suggest it is what you thought i meant. Perhaps you need to read more carefully. By the way, I know quiote a few Newport gypsies , proper ones, who have settled here and are nice people. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

9:47am Sat 8 Sep 12

Welshman76 says...

chris warman wrote:
just to put this in to some context we the people of bettws were not a mob nor did we discriminate. the site the council wished to used was unsuitable due to its location and previous history.also it was against the planning guidelines for such sites as road infrastructure was very poor. a lot of time and effort went in to identifying the correct planning policy's to make our objection we were never told which policy's were being used incorrectly we had to research this ourselves.

for the record the objections raised were the same if it was a holiday company that wanted to build a holiday park on the same site,it was never ever about who the site was for.
From the basis of your opposition to the site in your location, it looks like a few sites mentioned above will also be inappropriate for the same reasons.
[quote][p][bold]chris warman[/bold] wrote: just to put this in to some context we the people of bettws were not a mob nor did we discriminate. the site the council wished to used was unsuitable due to its location and previous history.also it was against the planning guidelines for such sites as road infrastructure was very poor. a lot of time and effort went in to identifying the correct planning policy's to make our objection we were never told which policy's were being used incorrectly we had to research this ourselves. for the record the objections raised were the same if it was a holiday company that wanted to build a holiday park on the same site,it was never ever about who the site was for.[/p][/quote]From the basis of your opposition to the site in your location, it looks like a few sites mentioned above will also be inappropriate for the same reasons. Welshman76
  • Score: 0

10:08am Sat 8 Sep 12

Welshman76 says...

james.dyer7@ntlworld
.com
wrote:
Yes , I know all about Bristol and the proper gypsies deserve some merit. However the majority in Newpoirt are not and that is the problem. For example, France had the right idea recently in getting rid of the Romas there. In any case no-one is ever going to be happy with them in their area and given the 'traveller' element who don't want to travel, i don't blame them!
Your first sentences are clearly comparative. You know all about Bristol gypsies and proper gypsies deserve merit but Newport ones are not!! If that's not a comparison then the definition has changed and I wasnt aware it had. So going back to my original question, how many of them do you personally know to conclude whether they are decent gypsies or not? Or are your opinions founded on rumour, 2nd hand articles and information or have you actively engaged with them?
[quote][p][bold]james.dyer7@ntlworld .com[/bold] wrote: Yes , I know all about Bristol and the proper gypsies deserve some merit. However the majority in Newpoirt are not and that is the problem. For example, France had the right idea recently in getting rid of the Romas there. In any case no-one is ever going to be happy with them in their area and given the 'traveller' element who don't want to travel, i don't blame them![/p][/quote]Your first sentences are clearly comparative. You know all about Bristol gypsies and proper gypsies deserve merit but Newport ones are not!! If that's not a comparison then the definition has changed and I wasnt aware it had. So going back to my original question, how many of them do you personally know to conclude whether they are decent gypsies or not? Or are your opinions founded on rumour, 2nd hand articles and information or have you actively engaged with them? Welshman76
  • Score: 0

10:18am Sat 8 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

welshman. May i ask you the same question. How many do you know and do you interact with them? Why do you assume (which you did with the Bristol comparison) i am any different than the average Joe. what is your knowledge?

Again. I repeat my sentence about Bristol; is separate from Newport and AGAIN does not compare the two. The second sentence refers to proper gypsies NOt Bristol.

Lets get some common sense ghere. Are you a gypsy or some sort of jobsworth for them? I think we should be told.
welshman. May i ask you the same question. How many do you know and do you interact with them? Why do you assume (which you did with the Bristol comparison) i am any different than the average Joe. what is your knowledge? Again. I repeat my sentence about Bristol; is separate from Newport and AGAIN does not compare the two. The second sentence refers to proper gypsies NOt Bristol. Lets get some common sense ghere. Are you a gypsy or some sort of jobsworth for them? I think we should be told. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

10:21am Sat 8 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

welshman -= Also there is a great differnce between gypsies and tinkers and travellers. If you read properly you willl see that i have answered yopur question about knowing some gypsies.
welshman -= Also there is a great differnce between gypsies and tinkers and travellers. If you read properly you willl see that i have answered yopur question about knowing some gypsies. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

10:44am Sat 8 Sep 12

pinpong says...

Everyone should lobby their councillors and tell them that we dont want gypsy sites anywhere in Newport. The councillors must be told to vote against and if they dont then we can vote against them next time.
Dont be fooled the councillors are more concerned with getting elected than they are with dealing with issues. PUT PRESSURE ON THEM. Remind the labour ones what happened in Bettws. Two independents got elected and labours hold on Bettws was pushed aside something that i thought i would never see.
Everyone should lobby their councillors and tell them that we dont want gypsy sites anywhere in Newport. The councillors must be told to vote against and if they dont then we can vote against them next time. Dont be fooled the councillors are more concerned with getting elected than they are with dealing with issues. PUT PRESSURE ON THEM. Remind the labour ones what happened in Bettws. Two independents got elected and labours hold on Bettws was pushed aside something that i thought i would never see. pinpong
  • Score: 0

11:25am Sat 8 Sep 12

Welshman76 says...

I know none of these people although I have interacted with them. They removed scrap for me which saved me time and money as I either had to pay for it to be removed or take it to the tip myself. In this instance they were helpful and polite and just trying to make a living. As in all parts of society there are elements that do not contribute to society. There are many non gypsies who don't look after the area in which they live or cause offence and nuisance. I am neutral in my opinion and would rather judge a person on their own character than just accept a stereotypical view and cast a net over them all.
At the start of your 2nd sentence you use the word 'however' which is a synonym for 'but'. In its use in your writing it serves as a tool to compare your opening sentence to your second one where your first sentence mentions Bristol and proper gypsies and your second Newport.
I made no assumptions and sought clarity with the questions that I asked. I also stated that I would be opposed to living near a possible site but at the same time understand that all are not as bad as we all think.
I know none of these people although I have interacted with them. They removed scrap for me which saved me time and money as I either had to pay for it to be removed or take it to the tip myself. In this instance they were helpful and polite and just trying to make a living. As in all parts of society there are elements that do not contribute to society. There are many non gypsies who don't look after the area in which they live or cause offence and nuisance. I am neutral in my opinion and would rather judge a person on their own character than just accept a stereotypical view and cast a net over them all. At the start of your 2nd sentence you use the word 'however' which is a synonym for 'but'. In its use in your writing it serves as a tool to compare your opening sentence to your second one where your first sentence mentions Bristol and proper gypsies and your second Newport. I made no assumptions and sought clarity with the questions that I asked. I also stated that I would be opposed to living near a possible site but at the same time understand that all are not as bad as we all think. Welshman76
  • Score: 0

11:33am Sat 8 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Welshman - thank you for your honesty. I am pretty much the same though i know a few who are well settled in Newport and not in caravans. Nice people. My main gripe is the irish tinkers and travellers. They do not deserve anything and that is the problem ie separating them from the real gypsies.

As for scrap collection. there are dozens who whizz around the streets here.
Welshman - thank you for your honesty. I am pretty much the same though i know a few who are well settled in Newport and not in caravans. Nice people. My main gripe is the irish tinkers and travellers. They do not deserve anything and that is the problem ie separating them from the real gypsies. As for scrap collection. there are dozens who whizz around the streets here. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

12:11pm Sat 8 Sep 12

Howie' says...

pinpong wrote:
Everyone should lobby their councillors and tell them that we dont want gypsy sites anywhere in Newport. The councillors must be told to vote against and if they dont then we can vote against them next time.
Dont be fooled the councillors are more concerned with getting elected than they are with dealing with issues. PUT PRESSURE ON THEM. Remind the labour ones what happened in Bettws. Two independents got elected and labours hold on Bettws was pushed aside something that i thought i would never see.
It does not matter one jot the political colour of the Council, they are required by legislation from the UK Government to identify and provide sites for Gypsy's. You can vote this lot out but if they refuse to go through this process they will be removed by the Welsh Government for not carrying out their duties, they really have no choice.
[quote][p][bold]pinpong[/bold] wrote: Everyone should lobby their councillors and tell them that we dont want gypsy sites anywhere in Newport. The councillors must be told to vote against and if they dont then we can vote against them next time. Dont be fooled the councillors are more concerned with getting elected than they are with dealing with issues. PUT PRESSURE ON THEM. Remind the labour ones what happened in Bettws. Two independents got elected and labours hold on Bettws was pushed aside something that i thought i would never see.[/p][/quote]It does not matter one jot the political colour of the Council, they are required by legislation from the UK Government to identify and provide sites for Gypsy's. You can vote this lot out but if they refuse to go through this process they will be removed by the Welsh Government for not carrying out their duties, they really have no choice. Howie'
  • Score: 0

12:18pm Sat 8 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

howie - not that simple i am afraid. I think the real problem in Newport should be identified first. Ie how mant, where and REAL gypsies. This info is probably available but i haven't seen it. A big problem but for the life of me i cannot see how Monmouthshire and caerphilly haven;'t a need.
howie - not that simple i am afraid. I think the real problem in Newport should be identified first. Ie how mant, where and REAL gypsies. This info is probably available but i haven't seen it. A big problem but for the life of me i cannot see how Monmouthshire and caerphilly haven;'t a need. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 1

12:31pm Sat 8 Sep 12

merlin the silure says...

digispamman wrote:
why not build chav camps? we could house half of newport in them. imagine how much nicer the council/social housing estates could be if we did this!
safe to go out after dark, less crime, less dog **** on the pavements, people taking a pride in the area in which they live,,,,,,,, the possibilities are endless!
great idea digi !! chav camps-I'm all for that-put them all on Flat Holm or Steep Holm ,remove any boats and let them all get on with it-perfect!!
[quote][p][bold]digispamman[/bold] wrote: why not build chav camps? we could house half of newport in them. imagine how much nicer the council/social housing estates could be if we did this! safe to go out after dark, less crime, less dog **** on the pavements, people taking a pride in the area in which they live,,,,,,,, the possibilities are endless![/p][/quote]great idea digi !! chav camps-I'm all for that-put them all on Flat Holm or Steep Holm ,remove any boats and let them all get on with it-perfect!! merlin the silure
  • Score: 0

2:42pm Sat 8 Sep 12

Howie' says...

james.dyer7@ntlworld
.com
wrote:
howie - not that simple i am afraid. I think the real problem in Newport should be identified first. Ie how mant, where and REAL gypsies. This info is probably available but i haven't seen it. A big problem but for the life of me i cannot see how Monmouthshire and caerphilly haven;'t a need.
James, if you read the link that I posted in reply to 'Amberboy' it shows what Cardiff have done to identify and assess the needs of the traveling community so I can only assume that Newport have done the same, after all whats the point of looking for sites if you don't know the size of the problem.
I was surprised as well reading that Caerphilly and Monmouthshire don't need sites but reading the Caerphilly Council website they say this:

Housing

Under the Housing Act 2004 local authorities have a duty to provide appropriate accommodation for Gypsy and Travellers. This duty means that authorities must assess the accommodation needs of Gypsy and Travellers and include a strategy to meet those needs within their wider housing strategies.

As they do not have any sites then I guess they must put them in Social Housing, I'm not sure on that though.
[quote][p][bold]james.dyer7@ntlworld .com[/bold] wrote: howie - not that simple i am afraid. I think the real problem in Newport should be identified first. Ie how mant, where and REAL gypsies. This info is probably available but i haven't seen it. A big problem but for the life of me i cannot see how Monmouthshire and caerphilly haven;'t a need.[/p][/quote]James, if you read the link that I posted in reply to 'Amberboy' it shows what Cardiff have done to identify and assess the needs of the traveling community so I can only assume that Newport have done the same, after all whats the point of looking for sites if you don't know the size of the problem. I was surprised as well reading that Caerphilly and Monmouthshire don't need sites but reading the Caerphilly Council website they say this: Housing Under the Housing Act 2004 local authorities have a duty to provide appropriate accommodation for Gypsy and Travellers. This duty means that authorities must assess the accommodation needs of Gypsy and Travellers and include a strategy to meet those needs within their wider housing strategies. As they do not have any sites then I guess they must put them in Social Housing, I'm not sure on that though. Howie'
  • Score: 0

2:46pm Sat 8 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Howie - thanks for info. Thought that was the case. Its the travellers issue that bugs me. No time for them at all.
Howie - thanks for info. Thought that was the case. Its the travellers issue that bugs me. No time for them at all. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

6:30pm Sat 8 Sep 12

Woodgnome says...

The quality of comments on this topic leaves a lot to be desired.

It's a pity Newport Council doesn't expend such time and resources raising the quality of lives f Newport residents instead of damaging it.
The quality of comments on this topic leaves a lot to be desired. It's a pity Newport Council doesn't expend such time and resources raising the quality of lives f Newport residents instead of damaging it. Woodgnome
  • Score: 1

6:44pm Sat 8 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

woodgnome - I don't see you coming up with any brainwaves apart from a throw-away comment without any suggestions about how to do it.
woodgnome - I don't see you coming up with any brainwaves apart from a throw-away comment without any suggestions about how to do it. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

9:20am Sun 9 Sep 12

Woodgnome says...

I don't think this site is meant to be a blog for personal ramblings.
.
I don't think this site is meant to be a blog for personal ramblings. . Woodgnome
  • Score: 0

10:10am Sun 9 Sep 12

Howie' says...

Woodgnome wrote:
The quality of comments on this topic leaves a lot to be desired.

It's a pity Newport Council doesn't expend such time and resources raising the quality of lives f Newport residents instead of damaging it.
How are they damaging it?
[quote][p][bold]Woodgnome[/bold] wrote: The quality of comments on this topic leaves a lot to be desired. It's a pity Newport Council doesn't expend such time and resources raising the quality of lives f Newport residents instead of damaging it.[/p][/quote]How are they damaging it? Howie'
  • Score: 0

10:22am Sun 9 Sep 12

Woodgnome says...

Personal abuse is the last resort of the intellectually bereft and the author is not worthy of further attention.

It might be more valuable if contributors confined their remarks simply to weather they support or oppose any sites in Newport. I oppose.

I have now said all I have to say on the matter.
Personal abuse is the last resort of the intellectually bereft and the author is not worthy of further attention. It might be more valuable if contributors confined their remarks simply to weather they support or oppose any sites in Newport. I oppose. I have now said all I have to say on the matter. Woodgnome
  • Score: 1

10:25am Sun 9 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

woodgnome - not sure what youoppose or support. Extremely vagur for a pseud
woodgnome - not sure what youoppose or support. Extremely vagur for a pseud james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

12:46pm Sun 9 Sep 12

chris warman says...

Welshman76 wrote:
chris warman wrote:
just to put this in to some context we the people of bettws were not a mob nor did we discriminate. the site the council wished to used was unsuitable due to its location and previous history.also it was against the planning guidelines for such sites as road infrastructure was very poor. a lot of time and effort went in to identifying the correct planning policy's to make our objection we were never told which policy's were being used incorrectly we had to research this ourselves.

for the record the objections raised were the same if it was a holiday company that wanted to build a holiday park on the same site,it was never ever about who the site was for.
From the basis of your opposition to the site in your location, it looks like a few sites mentioned above will also be inappropriate for the same reasons.
And if they are i hope the residents of the said areas do there homework, to
identify such planning policies that they are able to form a legal argument as to why such development should NOT go ahead.

some of the arguments used here are just not viable to use in a refusal of planning.
[quote][p][bold]Welshman76[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chris warman[/bold] wrote: just to put this in to some context we the people of bettws were not a mob nor did we discriminate. the site the council wished to used was unsuitable due to its location and previous history.also it was against the planning guidelines for such sites as road infrastructure was very poor. a lot of time and effort went in to identifying the correct planning policy's to make our objection we were never told which policy's were being used incorrectly we had to research this ourselves. for the record the objections raised were the same if it was a holiday company that wanted to build a holiday park on the same site,it was never ever about who the site was for.[/p][/quote]From the basis of your opposition to the site in your location, it looks like a few sites mentioned above will also be inappropriate for the same reasons.[/p][/quote]And if they are i hope the residents of the said areas do there homework, to identify such planning policies that they are able to form a legal argument as to why such development should NOT go ahead. some of the arguments used here are just not viable to use in a refusal of planning. chris warman
  • Score: 0

12:56pm Sun 9 Sep 12

lowandhardandinthecorner says...

I'm sure that the these groups of people contain good as well as bad people just like the rest of us, the only thing I've got against them is that they don't do " what it says on the tin".
That is seemingly , " Travellers " simply refuse to travel and therefore need a local site on which to settle. Now maybe I'm being a little naive here but when I decided to live in any location either I had to rent or buy a property as I did in Newport and pay my rates/council tax.
Having seen some of these encampments, I can well understand the local residents' reluctance to have them as neighbours so I think it's silly to criticise residents' reactions as " racist " etc. I'm sure their reaction would be the same if the planning application was for a rubbish dump to be located near to their houses.
I'm sure that the these groups of people contain good as well as bad people just like the rest of us, the only thing I've got against them is that they don't do " what it says on the tin". That is seemingly , " Travellers " simply refuse to travel and therefore need a local site on which to settle. Now maybe I'm being a little naive here but when I decided to live in any location either I had to rent or buy a property as I did in Newport and pay my rates/council tax. Having seen some of these encampments, I can well understand the local residents' reluctance to have them as neighbours so I think it's silly to criticise residents' reactions as " racist " etc. I'm sure their reaction would be the same if the planning application was for a rubbish dump to be located near to their houses. lowandhardandinthecorner
  • Score: 0

1:44pm Sun 9 Sep 12

james jackson says...

It's all about self interest in the end and the last comment makes valid points.
No-one wants a rubbish dump near them; nor do they want take-aways; noisy nightclubs or gypsies.
We live in a small and overcrowded island and there will always be somebody who is unhappy.
In the case of these new sites - I'm told that some of them were rejected as unsuitable by the last council, but the significant thing here is that all but one of the sites are in Tory areas.
Last time, I'm also told, the Tories ruled out several sites in their own areas and the shortlist of sites was mainly in Labour areas.
This is the face of Newport's ping-pong politics.
The two parties loathe each other, but are in fact, good pals.
It's all histrionics. Labour has a God-given right to run Newport (into the ground!) and the Tories know they can never win control. Therefore, a happy status quo for all concerned, but absolutely catastrophic for the general population. One could ask the present council what is happening to the city centre redevelopment. This is much more important than potential gypsy sites. A lot of noise was made about getting this development off the ground, so where is it?
It's all about self interest in the end and the last comment makes valid points. No-one wants a rubbish dump near them; nor do they want take-aways; noisy nightclubs or gypsies. We live in a small and overcrowded island and there will always be somebody who is unhappy. In the case of these new sites - I'm told that some of them were rejected as unsuitable by the last council, but the significant thing here is that all but one of the sites are in Tory areas. Last time, I'm also told, the Tories ruled out several sites in their own areas and the shortlist of sites was mainly in Labour areas. This is the face of Newport's ping-pong politics. The two parties loathe each other, but are in fact, good pals. It's all histrionics. Labour has a God-given right to run Newport (into the ground!) and the Tories know they can never win control. Therefore, a happy status quo for all concerned, but absolutely catastrophic for the general population. One could ask the present council what is happening to the city centre redevelopment. This is much more important than potential gypsy sites. A lot of noise was made about getting this development off the ground, so where is it? james jackson
  • Score: 0

2:20pm Sun 9 Sep 12

Magor says...

There is an official site in Avonmouth which is hardly used,so why would one be used in Newport? I expect because they have to pay.
There is an official site in Avonmouth which is hardly used,so why would one be used in Newport? I expect because they have to pay. Magor
  • Score: 0

6:14pm Sun 9 Sep 12

mark118 says...

NEWPORT SAYS NO TO GYPSIES!
NEWPORT SAYS NO TO GYPSIES! mark118
  • Score: 0

1:14pm Mon 10 Sep 12

Cymru Am Beth says...

lowandhardandintheco
rner
wrote:
I'm sure that the these groups of people contain good as well as bad people just like the rest of us, the only thing I've got against them is that they don't do " what it says on the tin". That is seemingly , " Travellers " simply refuse to travel and therefore need a local site on which to settle. Now maybe I'm being a little naive here but when I decided to live in any location either I had to rent or buy a property as I did in Newport and pay my rates/council tax. Having seen some of these encampments, I can well understand the local residents' reluctance to have them as neighbours so I think it's silly to criticise residents' reactions as " racist " etc. I'm sure their reaction would be the same if the planning application was for a rubbish dump to be located near to their houses.
Totally agree.
Unfortunately, there are not many 'real' gypsies around these days, most of them are Irish Tinkers.
Many do not pay any tax, dealing mostly in cash. They leave piles of rubbish on their encampments, which has to be cleared away by the local authority using taxpayers money.
Within the vicinity of these sites, things start to go missing all of a sudden, etc, etc.
I could go on.
Therefore, I also understand the local rsidents' reluctance to accept these sites on their doorstep.
[quote][p][bold]lowandhardandintheco rner[/bold] wrote: I'm sure that the these groups of people contain good as well as bad people just like the rest of us, the only thing I've got against them is that they don't do " what it says on the tin". That is seemingly , " Travellers " simply refuse to travel and therefore need a local site on which to settle. Now maybe I'm being a little naive here but when I decided to live in any location either I had to rent or buy a property as I did in Newport and pay my rates/council tax. Having seen some of these encampments, I can well understand the local residents' reluctance to have them as neighbours so I think it's silly to criticise residents' reactions as " racist " etc. I'm sure their reaction would be the same if the planning application was for a rubbish dump to be located near to their houses.[/p][/quote]Totally agree. Unfortunately, there are not many 'real' gypsies around these days, most of them are Irish Tinkers. Many do not pay any tax, dealing mostly in cash. They leave piles of rubbish on their encampments, which has to be cleared away by the local authority using taxpayers money. Within the vicinity of these sites, things start to go missing all of a sudden, etc, etc. I could go on. Therefore, I also understand the local rsidents' reluctance to accept these sites on their doorstep. Cymru Am Beth
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Mon 10 Sep 12

Euwan Usami says...

Magor wrote:
There is an official site in Avonmouth which is hardly used,so why would one be used in Newport? I expect because they have to pay.
I work very close to the site you mention. Police recently moved on a group of travellers from a road less than a mile from the site. There then followed the army of cleaners required to remove all their mess left behind. They could dump this stuff but they would have to pay to do that. The Very idea of "Tavelling" is to avoid paying thier way after all. They have relocated now on a field a mile or two up the road. (Not in the site either in case you wondered). The cycle will continue until we get tough on the ones that don't use the designated sites.
[quote][p][bold]Magor[/bold] wrote: There is an official site in Avonmouth which is hardly used,so why would one be used in Newport? I expect because they have to pay.[/p][/quote]I work very close to the site you mention. Police recently moved on a group of travellers from a road less than a mile from the site. There then followed the army of cleaners required to remove all their mess left behind. They could dump this stuff but they would have to pay to do that. The Very idea of "Tavelling" is to avoid paying thier way after all. They have relocated now on a field a mile or two up the road. (Not in the site either in case you wondered). The cycle will continue until we get tough on the ones that don't use the designated sites. Euwan Usami
  • Score: 0

4:44pm Mon 10 Sep 12

Cymru Am Beth says...

Magor wrote:
There is an official site in Avonmouth which is hardly used,so why would one be used in Newport? I expect because they have to pay.
Yes.
They don't like to pay for anything.
I remember when the Tinkers were evicted from land in Newport sometime ago.
The comments that were posted by them at the time, came via a hijacked wireless connection.
This was admitted by one of them who launched a tirade of abuse against Newport people.
[quote][p][bold]Magor[/bold] wrote: There is an official site in Avonmouth which is hardly used,so why would one be used in Newport? I expect because they have to pay.[/p][/quote]Yes. They don't like to pay for anything. I remember when the Tinkers were evicted from land in Newport sometime ago. The comments that were posted by them at the time, came via a hijacked wireless connection. This was admitted by one of them who launched a tirade of abuse against Newport people. Cymru Am Beth
  • Score: 0

5:07pm Mon 10 Sep 12

no justice says...

what is the point in raising all these issues, we are just to soft in this coutry ( check out France ) just stop the P.C .brigade and move these free loaders into the next county. Last time i looked to live in an area i had to pay for water, rates , etc ,If i wanted to spend longer than 2 hours in the sevices on the motorway i would have to pay how can the get special treatment and expect to have all for free what is their problem ? . buy a house /rent a house or get out simples.
what is the point in raising all these issues, we are just to soft in this coutry ( check out France ) just stop the P.C .brigade and move these free loaders into the next county. Last time i looked to live in an area i had to pay for water, rates , etc ,If i wanted to spend longer than 2 hours in the sevices on the motorway i would have to pay how can the get special treatment and expect to have all for free what is their problem ? . buy a house /rent a house or get out simples. no justice
  • Score: 0

5:25pm Mon 10 Sep 12

james jackson says...

Simples?
Simple, maybe. You people on here are making things up as you go. If gypsies were vitriolic about Newport people, what do you think you're being? Nasty, and no idea of what you are talking about.
France does not have the right idea and the next county won't want gypsies either.
Get a grip for heaven's sake, They're PEOPLE. Just like you.
Gypsies (proper ones) are more than happy to pay their way. If they have a site, they will certainly do so because it will be monitored. The ignorance on this board is quite unbelievable. Stop shooting from the hip and do some research.
Simples? Simple, maybe. You people on here are making things up as you go. If gypsies were vitriolic about Newport people, what do you think you're being? Nasty, and no idea of what you are talking about. France does not have the right idea and the next county won't want gypsies either. Get a grip for heaven's sake, They're PEOPLE. Just like you. Gypsies (proper ones) are more than happy to pay their way. If they have a site, they will certainly do so because it will be monitored. The ignorance on this board is quite unbelievable. Stop shooting from the hip and do some research. james jackson
  • Score: 1

5:32pm Mon 10 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

james Jackson - some good points and agree about proper gypsies. And the difference between them and the others is the crux of the problem. However do not mix this up with the mass influx as in France. This is caused by ridiculously stupid EU rules regarding immis.
james Jackson - some good points and agree about proper gypsies. And the difference between them and the others is the crux of the problem. However do not mix this up with the mass influx as in France. This is caused by ridiculously stupid EU rules regarding immis. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

10:50am Tue 11 Sep 12

SizzlerTrainers says...

Newport is awash with immigrants, the Town centre looks like the league of claiming nations, so chuck in a few gypsies, it's not like we have a town centre or community, we lost years ago, it's not our town, it's for who ever turns up with a sob story as well as the smack heads and alcoholics that brighten it up.

Coupled with a huge percentage of fat, Gregg's shareholding, sneering illiterate locals that stagger around, accompanied by "dangerous dogs" that further try to breakdown any feeling of pride for the place.

It all adds up to a wonderful tapestry of human decline and mismanagement by successive councils in ensuring Newport's future is down the drain. It's a hole, with no hope, and no future, apart from an A bomb taking it out.

I love this Town, but if I had the opportunity to press the button, I'd do it in a heartbeat (joke by the way). Some say the streets can be paved with gold, in Newport it's dog mess and syringes.
Newport is awash with immigrants, the Town centre looks like the league of claiming nations, so chuck in a few gypsies, it's not like we have a town centre or community, we lost years ago, it's not our town, it's for who ever turns up with a sob story as well as the smack heads and alcoholics that brighten it up. Coupled with a huge percentage of fat, Gregg's shareholding, sneering illiterate locals that stagger around, accompanied by "dangerous dogs" that further try to breakdown any feeling of pride for the place. It all adds up to a wonderful tapestry of human decline and mismanagement by successive councils in ensuring Newport's future is down the drain. It's a hole, with no hope, and no future, apart from an A bomb taking it out. I love this Town, but if I had the opportunity to press the button, I'd do it in a heartbeat (joke by the way). Some say the streets can be paved with gold, in Newport it's dog mess and syringes. SizzlerTrainers
  • Score: 1

12:36pm Tue 11 Sep 12

Euwan Usami says...

james.dyer7@ntlworld
.com
wrote:
james Jackson - some good points and agree about proper gypsies. And the difference between them and the others is the crux of the problem. However do not mix this up with the mass influx as in France. This is caused by ridiculously stupid EU rules regarding immis.
Agree with both Jame's on the ignorance side of the argument. I include myself in the ignorant majority of "Real gypsies". I really don't know what that term implies. My experience of them has been the same as most folks I think; a sudden deluge of vans cars and dogs on a any unused car park/ road siding or field. Followed by a few days/weeks of fly tipping and a large clean up after they finally move on again. I assume the "Real" gypsies are the ones who play by the rules and use designated sites and pay thier way? No-one is criticising these people in my opinion. We need a little change in ledgislation followed by a task force to ensure the "Not real" gypsies are made to tow the line just like everyone else in this country. (Again just my opinion)
[quote][p][bold]james.dyer7@ntlworld .com[/bold] wrote: james Jackson - some good points and agree about proper gypsies. And the difference between them and the others is the crux of the problem. However do not mix this up with the mass influx as in France. This is caused by ridiculously stupid EU rules regarding immis.[/p][/quote]Agree with both Jame's on the ignorance side of the argument. I include myself in the ignorant majority of "Real gypsies". I really don't know what that term implies. My experience of them has been the same as most folks I think; a sudden deluge of vans cars and dogs on a any unused car park/ road siding or field. Followed by a few days/weeks of fly tipping and a large clean up after they finally move on again. I assume the "Real" gypsies are the ones who play by the rules and use designated sites and pay thier way? No-one is criticising these people in my opinion. We need a little change in ledgislation followed by a task force to ensure the "Not real" gypsies are made to tow the line just like everyone else in this country. (Again just my opinion) Euwan Usami
  • Score: 0

10:02am Wed 12 Sep 12

East Newport Dave says...

Sizzler Trainers has it summed up beautifully. The town (city) is in a terrible mess and it's down to decades of political mismanagement. Dozens of Old F*rts on the council doing nothing more than take the expenses and freebies associated with the post. If you are a decent person, take time to walk through the city centre by day (never mind night) and experience how intimidating it is. Lots of drunks and the pallid faces and dirty appearances of the addicts and no-hopers. The Gypsies are the most racially persecuted group in the world. What makes them any worse than the large proportion of degenerates already populating Newport?
Sizzler Trainers has it summed up beautifully. The town (city) is in a terrible mess and it's down to decades of political mismanagement. Dozens of Old F*rts on the council doing nothing more than take the expenses and freebies associated with the post. If you are a decent person, take time to walk through the city centre by day (never mind night) and experience how intimidating it is. Lots of drunks and the pallid faces and dirty appearances of the addicts and no-hopers. The Gypsies are the most racially persecuted group in the world. What makes them any worse than the large proportion of degenerates already populating Newport? East Newport Dave
  • Score: 1

10:19am Wed 12 Sep 12

Euwan Usami says...

East Newport Dave wrote:
Sizzler Trainers has it summed up beautifully. The town (city) is in a terrible mess and it's down to decades of political mismanagement. Dozens of Old F*rts on the council doing nothing more than take the expenses and freebies associated with the post. If you are a decent person, take time to walk through the city centre by day (never mind night) and experience how intimidating it is. Lots of drunks and the pallid faces and dirty appearances of the addicts and no-hopers. The Gypsies are the most racially persecuted group in the world. What makes them any worse than the large proportion of degenerates already populating Newport?
I hear what your saying Dave but the two issues are not connected in fairness. The social system is to blame for the number of wasters in the town. Genrations of chavs that think the world owes them a living. The economic climate explains the run down nature of the city centre. Neither of these issues have anything to do with gypsies. They chose their lifestyle it isnt forced on them. There are provisions made for them. If they decide to trespass and fly tip there way through life then they will get flak for it like you or I would. I am not at all sure what makes them a special case for pity.
[quote][p][bold]East Newport Dave[/bold] wrote: Sizzler Trainers has it summed up beautifully. The town (city) is in a terrible mess and it's down to decades of political mismanagement. Dozens of Old F*rts on the council doing nothing more than take the expenses and freebies associated with the post. If you are a decent person, take time to walk through the city centre by day (never mind night) and experience how intimidating it is. Lots of drunks and the pallid faces and dirty appearances of the addicts and no-hopers. The Gypsies are the most racially persecuted group in the world. What makes them any worse than the large proportion of degenerates already populating Newport?[/p][/quote]I hear what your saying Dave but the two issues are not connected in fairness. The social system is to blame for the number of wasters in the town. Genrations of chavs that think the world owes them a living. The economic climate explains the run down nature of the city centre. Neither of these issues have anything to do with gypsies. They chose their lifestyle it isnt forced on them. There are provisions made for them. If they decide to trespass and fly tip there way through life then they will get flak for it like you or I would. I am not at all sure what makes them a special case for pity. Euwan Usami
  • Score: 0

2:27pm Wed 12 Sep 12

emlynkide says...

i dont see the civic centre car park on the list, it would be an ideal spot.
i dont see the civic centre car park on the list, it would be an ideal spot. emlynkide
  • Score: 0

4:21pm Wed 12 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

pinpong - wrong on all counts and you still haven't said anything about the issue
pinpong - wrong on all counts and you still haven't said anything about the issue james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

2:16am Thu 13 Sep 12

fudge1969 says...

they are people not issues, who need somewhere to live.
they are people not issues, who need somewhere to live. fudge1969
  • Score: 0

3:05am Thu 13 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

frudge - they have caravans, The provision of sites is an issue.
frudge - they have caravans, The provision of sites is an issue. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

11:41am Thu 13 Sep 12

pinpong says...

james.dyer7@ntlworld
.com
wrote:
pinpong - wrong on all counts and you still haven't said anything about the issue
James. I have said quite a bit about the issue just look at my earlier comments. My apologies if i offended you earlier
[quote][p][bold]james.dyer7@ntlworld .com[/bold] wrote: pinpong - wrong on all counts and you still haven't said anything about the issue[/p][/quote]James. I have said quite a bit about the issue just look at my earlier comments. My apologies if i offended you earlier pinpong
  • Score: 0

11:54am Thu 13 Sep 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

pinpong - No probs. Don't mind a bit of banter but keep it simple please. Yes read your stuff. Very sensible but a) not easy to change cllrs in some areas, and b) the gypsy thing is needed by legislation.
pinpong - No probs. Don't mind a bit of banter but keep it simple please. Yes read your stuff. Very sensible but a) not easy to change cllrs in some areas, and b) the gypsy thing is needed by legislation. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

2:29pm Fri 14 Sep 12

Woodgnome says...

james jackson wrote:
Labour listened to its cronies. As Mr Dyer says, they are all, bar one, in Tory areas.
Labour has not consulted here at all. They've given in to the views of the mob
These are the people who were dragged out to vote in Lliswerry and Pill in the May elections, without realising that they were actually voting for fake Tories.
Many of this Labour lot promised their cronies that if they won last May, gypsy sites would disappear from Labour areas and be placed in Conservative areas. Hey presto! That's what happened.
There has been no open consultation here. If there were, Hartridge Farm Road wouldn't appear on the list as it's land that is being sold for housing - to fund the new Llanwern High School. O, what an inconvenience.
PS: Gipsy spelt that way is "house style" for the South Wales Argus. It can actually be spelt either way.
If anyone has witnessed any of this Labour lot "promise their cronies that if they won last May, gypsy sites would disappear from Labour areas and be placed in Conservative areas" their identity should be publicly disclosed. If any of them did say that they should be quaking in their boots.
[quote][p][bold]james jackson[/bold] wrote: Labour listened to its cronies. As Mr Dyer says, they are all, bar one, in Tory areas. Labour has not consulted here at all. They've given in to the views of the mob These are the people who were dragged out to vote in Lliswerry and Pill in the May elections, without realising that they were actually voting for fake Tories. Many of this Labour lot promised their cronies that if they won last May, gypsy sites would disappear from Labour areas and be placed in Conservative areas. Hey presto! That's what happened. There has been no open consultation here. If there were, Hartridge Farm Road wouldn't appear on the list as it's land that is being sold for housing - to fund the new Llanwern High School. O, what an inconvenience. PS: Gipsy spelt that way is "house style" for the South Wales Argus. It can actually be spelt either way.[/p][/quote]If anyone has witnessed any of this Labour lot "promise their cronies that if they won last May, gypsy sites would disappear from Labour areas and be placed in Conservative areas" their identity should be publicly disclosed. If any of them did say that they should be quaking in their boots. Woodgnome
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree