It annoys me that the council can't put a stop to what's going on more quickly.

 But it surely can't surprise you?

Villagers are angry that, while strict planning controls apply to them, the travellers appear to be able to 'get away with anything' by flouting the rules. Around 120 people attended a meeting with local councillors in the village hall on Monday.

They pointed to a recent planning decision which is available to read on the council's website.The proposal was to convert a barn in a field opposite where the traveller camp now is, and also on Green Belt, into three dwellings. It was refused because the design of the proposed buildings 'would not adequately reflect the agricultural character of the area' and would be contrary to the Warrington Local Plan.

Well there's your problem, better to ask for forgiveness than permission. The travellers know this. 

Maybe it's about time everyone else learned? Maybe it's time everyone else stopped playing by rules that don't appear to be applied fairly to everyone?

Perverse Decisions...

Well, the trial finally concluded.

The court heard how seven-and-a-half stone Mrs Barnes 'simply mistook' his large five-storey seaside home for her hotel after travelling more than 100 miles from Birmingham to the seaside resort for a £95-a-night break.

They make it sound as if she was just tired, and it was a mistake any sober person could have made... 

The retired factory worker had purchased a bottle of gin on a seaside evening stroll before seeking out her B'nB. But she mistook Redfern's large seafront home called Belmont House for her intended hotel - and tipsily went into the wrong home, straight up to bed, unpacked and poured a gin nightcap.

There's little sympathy for a man finding a drunken stranger in his bed, is there? 

Adjourning sentencing until Friday, Mr Justice Bourne told him: 'You are remanded in custody. You have been advised what the sentencing decision will be.'

And still no indication how she got in. As Ivan pointed out in comments, he didn't seem the sort to leave his door unlocked, did he? 

The Very Epitome Of The ‘Pussy Pass’…

A girl - who had just turned 13 years old - met a man for sex sessions on Folkestone beach, a court heard.

The schoolgirl had already engaged in "highly-charged" sex talk on the social network Internet site Facebook with the 19 year old.

And when she was later interviewed by police, the teenager admitted she hadn't been a virgin at the time!

First time I’ve seen an exclamation mark in the MSM in a story of this nature…

But Nicholas Culpan knew the girl's age when they agreed to meet near the harbour, Canterbury Crown Court was told.

Culpan, of Canterbury Road, Folkestone admitted two charges of engaging in sex with an underage girl and was given a suspended jail sentence.

And what was she given, since she’s every bit as culpable?

David Osborne, defending, said that at the time Culpan had been suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder after being the victim in an accidental shooting.

"He is not a bright young man and has limited maturity and ability."

And what about her, since she’s every bit as culpable?

Culpan was given a 12-month jail sentence suspended for two years and ordered to attend a sex offences programme for 104 hours.

He will also be on the Sex Offenders' Register for 10 years.

And does she go on it too, since she’s every bit as culpable?

*crickets*

Oddball Families…

Dea Birkett expands her repertoire to cover IVF and society's attitude to it (or at least, her impression of society's attitude to it):

The media hate assisted motherhood. Women who simply want a little help to have a baby are portrayed as unnatural, evil and downright selfish.

Are they? Odd, I can recall many heartwarming articles on the pain of couples trying for a baby.

Any proof of this, Dea?

Earlier this week, the Daily Mail headlined on two women who'd had IVF treatment – one single, one Nigerian – who were "milking the NHS".

In the next column, it was joyfully revealed that Kate Middleton hoped to have a baby. Ironically, rearing a royal costs the taxpayer millions. But that's a bill we seem to be prepared to pay.

Well, yes. You see, Kate Middleton is English, and has paid into the NHS and the Nigerian woman is, well, Nigerian, and hasn't...

It's not rocket science, love. Even without pointing out that millions will flock to the UK to see a Royal Couple, while the Nigerian will skedaddle home having drained the NHS coffers (not likely to be the case for Kate Middleton).

So, apart from this not-quite-relevant-comparison (unless you want to allow for the Nigerian's pretty rich husband), any other evidence?

The flawed economic argument against IVF is just a screen behind which those opposed to oddball families can conveniently hide. What those who decry assisted conception really don't like is stroppy, single or middle-aged women having babies. Like me.

Ah. That's a 'no' then?

I note that Dea Birkett's wiki profile says she's an ex-circus performer. If true, I can only assume she was a contortionist...

Hey, We Tried This Before And It Failed! Let’s Try It Again, Only Worse!

Britain should stop its obsession with getting single mothers into work and pursue unemployed fathers, David Cameron's poverty adviser said last night.

Hmm, tried that before, didn’t you, iDave?

You remember the CSA. Whatever happened to it, eh?

Oh, yeah. That’s right. It didn’t work. In fact, it did so poorly, it was taken over.

And it mostly targeted people in work, so you can imagine how well targeting the unemployed is going to work.

So what's the plan, Frank?

Speaking at a lecture to the Attlee Foundation, a charity working in disadvantaged areas, he claimed the debate about poverty had been 'feminised', letting feckless fathers off the hook for living off benefits and failing to support their families.

He said men who refused to take a job offered to them should have their benefits cut altogether.

Well, yes, they should.

But if you think you can get that through Parliament, you’ve taken leave of your senses…

Busily Building A Pyre For Martyrs…

It seems that some politicians are still determined to feed the BNP the oxygen of publicity:

The BNP has been refused permission to use a venue in Swanley to hold a party meeting.

Paul Golding, BNP councillor in Swanleys St Mary, says he tried to book a large expensive conference room at The Woodlands in Hilda May Avenue but has been “banned” by Swanley Town Council.

So, of course, he’s wrapped the union flag around himself and called in the media to rely on the British sense of fair play:

Cllr Golding said: “It's absolutely outrageous in the extreme.
“They are aware all their support is coming over to us in droves, they are terrified of losing their remaining seats to the BNP.

“I'm sure they're realising we have enormous support in the area.”

If they didn’t before, they will have now!

He added: “We don't see why they can arbitrarily ban a party from holding meetings especially when the political party they are banning has elected members in the area.

“If the roles were reversed and the BNP had banned a meeting of Labour in Swanley, the whole political establishment would go into a frenzy.”

Which belies the fact that, of course, the BNP probably would do exactly the same if they were ever in a position of power…

So, what excuse have the council proffered for this catastrophic misstep?

The leader of Swanley Town Council, Councillor Robert Woodbridge, says there were concerns about possible protests and negative publicity for Swanley Banqueting, the council department which runs the venue.

Oh, great…

‘We can’t allow you to speak to the public because the radical Muslims and the UAF and other assorted other racemongers and fascists will tear the place down’.

Great! That’s not inflamed anything, has it?

Labour councillor Cllr Woodbridge said: “Yes we did refuse to allow Cllr Golding from using our premises (Ed: Sic) and this decision was taken at the informal leadership group meeting because of the potential conflict that may have been attracted not necessarily by the BNP party members, but perhaps by others who may have wished to protest against the meeting.

“In addition, the leadership considered the potential for conflict and the potential issues including the potential for adverse publicity for Swanley Banqueting that this may cause at a time when banqueting colleagues are doing their utmost to secure bookings.”

How do you think this is going to work out for the BNP, councillor?

Because I think it’s going to work out pretty well. Instead of confirming your commitment to free speech even for those who are your opponents, and stating that any violence from either side will be dealt with, you’ve cravenly blocked a part of the democratic process, thereby giving them every opportunity to point at you and say ‘Look! They don’t want you to hear what we have to say because they are frightened of their pets turning on them!’

/golfclap

Conservatives In ‘Doing Their Job’ Shock!

At least some Conservatives have retained their principles of fair play (though I’m sure the wrath of The Dave will descend soon as he tries to keep in with the in-crowd):

More than a thousand gipsy and traveller children have been given laptop computers to help them with their schoolwork.

The free equipment and wireless internet access is estimated to be worth up to £750 per pupil, and is costing the taxpayer £300,000 a year.

(…speechless…)

Some children are also being handed printers and digital cameras under a controversial Government-backed scheme aimed at encouraging them to stay in education.

Should that be their parent’s job?

Oh, but we’ll see later that no, it isn’t…

Last night, the Conservatives, who obtained the figures, warned that the scheme risked fuelling resentment among taxpayers. Only days ago it emerged that gipsy and traveller children are being given priority admission to popular state schools.

In addition, gipsy and traveller families are getting priority to see GPs and dentists.

Quite. Nothing annoys ‘Middle England’ so much as unfairness. Particularly when they are expected to pay for it…

Studies have shown that children who relocate regularly quickly become demotivated with learning and disengaged with their school friends and school life. In addition, many traveller parents provide little support for their children's academic learning, with a small number believing that formal education offers little or no value to their children's futures.

So, it’s the fault of their lifestyle? Should they be expected, then, to change their lifestyle, at least while their children as school age?

To do otherwise would be…well, deliberately disadvantaging their children, wouldn’t it?

Tory local government spokesman Bob Neill said: 'However well-meaning, I am concerned the Government's policies on travellers threaten to undermine community cohesion and inflame community tensions.

'The British people believe in fair play - it's not fair that one small group get privileged access to public services, whilst hard-working families who struggle to pay their bills and taxes are pushed to the back of the queue.'

Can’t argue with that…