Hove MP Mike Weatherley attacked at Sussex University (From The Argus)

Mike Weatherley and his assistant sound like two barking dogs, and as everyone knows, barking dogs seldom bite back.
At least they have a kennel over their heads, which makes the spite they show towards squatters and the homeless even more unacceptable.
What repugnent specimens they portray themselves as,glad they got a warm welcome at sussex uni.
It highlights how so out of touch these motherf#ckxxs are with the rest of the society they claim to represent.
True horrors, the pair of em.
Should be strung up.

Why would someone from a government that hates and despises young people want to visit them anyway?

Hang on?! Yesterday Wetherley is all over the media saying someone tried to punch him, now your saying it was one of his colleagues?

“I am very angry that that this could happen.”

Awww, you poor thing, you thought you could criminalize a collective outside the law without suffering the consequences? Welcome to the real world, Mr. Weatherley.

If you had the misfortune of living in a community with students you would despise them too and until you have done it, you really have no idea what they are like. And no, don't tell us the nuisance ones are the minority. They are not.
In the past ten years, when 50 per cent of half witted kids could buy their way into uni, our communities were littered with chavvy types with no interest in study, they were just delighted to have a loan to spend as they liked, a house in party city and no grown ups to watch them. They despised local families, they had no affiliation to the city, and they didn't care about the streets or community. The council even had to spend thousands of a public scutiny report into the problems. Shocking that an 'industry' was allowed unrestrained growth with so many unresolved social problems attached.
The past ten years of student gay abandon completely destroyed the link between the unis and the community so that there is little support for any student issues hence no real national outcry over fees.
That is the tragic legacy of the last Labour Government and also the last Labour city council which did nothing, absolutely nothing to address the thousands of people in the city who asked for the unis and the council to manage the anti-social behaviour and slum housing the increase in the student population brought with it.
I have no affiliation to the Tories and I loathed the fee increases, but you go into any student community now, the residents will tell you that the fee increase has already reduced numbers and has also had an affect or removing many of the chavvy element and those now at college are having to work longer hours so there is less time to party all night during the week.
Perhaps The Argus could check the council's EHO team and see if it has experienced a drop in complaints.
It's sad that Britain's great educational system has been destroyed by money by Labour and the Tories but in very different ways.

What do you expect - this 'man' Weatherly is directly responsible for people literally dying on the streets to line his own pockets with a few pennies more.



Just shows the depth of anger and frustration that has risen within people due to this Coalition's actions.

Mike Weatherley did the British public a great service by getting the squatting ban through. It's something that the vast majority would agree with. I'm delighted to see the left wingers amongst us frothing.

I also see that people still confuse the student loan system, and its means of payback with normal commercial loans.

Where did all the comments left yesterday vanish to?

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
If you had the misfortune of living in a community with students you would despise them too and until you have done it, you really have no idea what they are like. And no, don't tell us the nuisance ones are the minority. They are not.
In the past ten years, when 50 per cent of half witted kids could buy their way into uni, our communities were littered with chavvy types with no interest in study, they were just delighted to have a loan to spend as they liked, a house in party city and no grown ups to watch them. They despised local families, they had no affiliation to the city, and they didn't care about the streets or community. The council even had to spend thousands of a public scutiny report into the problems. Shocking that an 'industry' was allowed unrestrained growth with so many unresolved social problems attached.
The past ten years of student gay abandon completely destroyed the link between the unis and the community so that there is little support for any student issues hence no real national outcry over fees.
That is the tragic legacy of the last Labour Government and also the last Labour city council which did nothing, absolutely nothing to address the thousands of people in the city who asked for the unis and the council to manage the anti-social behaviour and slum housing the increase in the student population brought with it.
I have no affiliation to the Tories and I loathed the fee increases, but you go into any student community now, the residents will tell you that the fee increase has already reduced numbers and has also had an affect or removing many of the chavvy element and those now at college are having to work longer hours so there is less time to party all night during the week.
Perhaps The Argus could check the council's EHO team and see if it has experienced a drop in complaints.
It's sad that Britain's great educational system has been destroyed by money by Labour and the Tories but in very different ways.

Is chav not just a cheap way of saying working class but sounding very slightly less of a snob?

If so, surely it was a positive that some of the poorer and less privileged in society had the chance to go to University and increase their social mobility. Well that's just my opinion anyway.

In regard to this article, violence is never the answer but good on the students/protesters for showing Mike Weatherly that we do have the courage, decency to stand up for people less fortunate than ourselves and to give a voice to the homeless. One that was ignored when this law was passed.

Dealing with idiots wrote:
Where did all the comments left yesterday vanish to?

They haven't http://www.theargus.
co.uk/news/10047096.
Mike_Weatherley_atta
cked_at_University_o
f_Sussex/?ref=ms

A few days ago a Stanford professor claimed we were getting more stupid. Some of these comments offer the proof.

Sounds like the sort of reception Erastus Piggott would receive if he went public; lol

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
If you had the misfortune of living in a community with students you would despise them too and until you have done it, you really have no idea what they are like. And no, don't tell us the nuisance ones are the minority. They are not. In the past ten years, when 50 per cent of half witted kids could buy their way into uni, our communities were littered with chavvy types with no interest in study, they were just delighted to have a loan to spend as they liked, a house in party city and no grown ups to watch them. They despised local families, they had no affiliation to the city, and they didn't care about the streets or community. The council even had to spend thousands of a public scutiny report into the problems. Shocking that an 'industry' was allowed unrestrained growth with so many unresolved social problems attached. The past ten years of student gay abandon completely destroyed the link between the unis and the community so that there is little support for any student issues hence no real national outcry over fees. That is the tragic legacy of the last Labour Government and also the last Labour city council which did nothing, absolutely nothing to address the thousands of people in the city who asked for the unis and the council to manage the anti-social behaviour and slum housing the increase in the student population brought with it. I have no affiliation to the Tories and I loathed the fee increases, but you go into any student community now, the residents will tell you that the fee increase has already reduced numbers and has also had an affect or removing many of the chavvy element and those now at college are having to work longer hours so there is less time to party all night during the week. Perhaps The Argus could check the council's EHO team and see if it has experienced a drop in complaints. It's sad that Britain's great educational system has been destroyed by money by Labour and the Tories but in very different ways.

Except that "A university spokeswoman said: “...We believe that the violent disruption was led by activist protestors from outside of the university, not by our students.”

I've spoken to several people who were present yesterday and, sure enough, there were no rocks.

Weatherley and flunky Nemeth spinning again.

Funniest thing from yesterday was Weatherley whining on local TV that Sussex Uni security staff failed to accord him the respect and attention he clearly think is his due.

Ironically, it is now being suggested that "Weatherley's Law" has more holes in it than a fishing net, and that after the initial flurry of police activity, there will be few squatter prosecutions and even fewer convictions.

I wonder if Mr Weatherley has ever read that book 'How to win friends and influence people?'

I can understand Mr Weatherley's distress at being pelted by a variety of objects, but as my Mighty Horse said to me recently; "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." I think he was quoting from Charles Dickens. The reason my Mighty Horse feels so strongly about this is due to an incident that took place only a couple of weeks ago.

After a challenging parade back to Brighton all the way from Seaford, me and my Mighty Horse were in urgent need of refreshment, and went into Brighton's "Regency Tavern" to sample their fine drinks they have on offer there. To our surprise, there was Mike Weatherley MP, propping up the bar. He soon found himself in earnest conversation with my Mighty Horse, and after buying us a round of "electro-brandies", his favourite drink (it is a brandy served over ice with a lemon in, but the lemon is attached to a 9V battery with some wires), he persuaded me and my Mighty Horse to invite him back to our house for a "nightcap".

All of this sounds quite reasonable. However, within minutes of coming through the door, Mr Weatherley was rummaging around in our spirits cabinet, and had found the bottle of Creme De Menthe that we were saving for New Years Eve. Rapidly, he cracked the bottle open, and proceeded to consume it in what seemed like four colossal gulps!

Naturally, both myself and my Mighty Horse were alarmed at this behaviour from one of our elected representatives, but the next thing he did was one step too far! Making a deep and unsettling whooping sound, he drove both myself and my Mighty Horse into the garden, and proceeded to pelt us with crockery, damaging six plates, four cups and a teapot that I was very fond of. Me and my Mighty Horse were not going to put up with this for long, and moving like a co-ordinated machine, drove the MP for Hove and Portslade out from our kitchen and through the front door, as my Mighty Horse cried; "Begone! Leave, Weatherley, leave! You are a destroyer of crockery, a consumer of New Years Mint Liqueur! Begone!"

For a couple of minutes, Weatherley was shouting something along the line of "Fiends! Horse-favourer! Cruelty! Cruelty!", but soon left, and a great stillness and tranquility descended upon our neighbourhood.

Please do not let me be misunderstood - both myself and my Mighty Horse are great believers in representative democracy, but that does not count for much when the elected representative for Hove and Portslade is hurling kitchenware at you in your own house! May this stand here as a warning to any others who may want to invite Mike back for a drink after a "night on the town". Beware!

gnarlychaos wrote:
Mike Weatherley and his assistant sound like two barking dogs, and as everyone knows, barking dogs seldom bite back.
At least they have a kennel over their heads, which makes the spite they show towards squatters and the homeless even more unacceptable.
What repugnent specimens they portray themselves as,glad they got a warm welcome at sussex uni.
It highlights how so out of touch these motherf#ckxxs are with the rest of the society they claim to represent.
True horrors, the pair of em.
Should be strung up.

Not bitter and twisted at all then, Just a chip on both shoulders!

Careful Now !!

Down with this sort of thing !!

Ahhhh rick must be the same spokeswoman who spoke the police about issues in our community until we filmed the culprits and gave their names courses details and phone numbers to the uni.
Most of the staff seem a little off kilter with reality when you meet them.
All very nice middle class mums and dads who don't think that students get into crime. Like last weeks stabbing incident on campus.
The unis are adrift from the rest of the city.

Were the activists recently evicted from squats? Poor things having to go and pay for a place to live. Society is so cruel.

jyan wrote:
Were the activists recently evicted from squats? Poor things having to go and pay for a place to live. Society is so cruel.

Society is indeed cruel. Criminalise a section of society for the convenience of vested interests and there will be consequences.

jyan wrote:
Were the activists recently evicted from squats? Poor things having to go and pay for a place to live. Society is so cruel.

ditto!!! awwww diddums now shall i turn my heating on 4 or 6 tonight, hmmm i might even invite some law abidding tax paying friends over for a bbq in my heated garden,maybe a dip in the hot tub overlooking ovingdean bay!!!!

Priam or what ever they want to call themselves are obviously anti Mike and every policy he stands for like;

Wild Animal Circus Ban Supported by Mike

International Whaling Motion Sponsored by Mike

Parliamentary Motion Against Use of Stray Animals for Experiments Signed by Mike

Mike joins Blue Badger group against badger cull

Mike Against Fox Hunting

Live Music and Intellectual Property Rights

Promotion of Small Businesses

be assured mr weatherley i shall be sending you a bottle of your fave champagne for christmas,what a terrible experience you had yesterday being attacked by inbred,un educated,worthless scum!! apparently the galapagos islands are a great place to perhaps relocate,its uninhabited and its main occupants are rats,yall all get along just great----just dont eat the blue pellets about to be dumped on the island

Angryoldman wrote:
Why would someone from a government that hates and despises young people want to visit them anyway?

So they can get some free, sympathetic publicity by provoking this reaction..?

whereisthe...? wrote:
What do you expect - this 'man' Weatherly is directly responsible for people literally dying on the streets to line his own pockets with a few pennies more. Just shows the depth of anger and frustration that has risen within people due to this Coalition's actions.

if squaters are that desperate,GET A JOB

funkyyoyo wrote:

whereisthe...? wrote:
What do you expect - this 'man' Weatherly is directly responsible for people literally dying on the streets to line his own pockets with a few pennies more. Just shows the depth of anger and frustration that has risen within people due to this Coalition's actions.

if squaters are that desperate,GET A JOB

Exactly, squatters are not genuine homeless people they are freeloading jobshy scum.

hubris or hybris (ˈhjuːbrɪs)
— n
1. pride or arrogance
2. (in Greek tragedy) an excess of ambition, pride, etc, ultimately causing the transgressor's ruin

c.f. Collins, 10th edition

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=gCUg4GXBn
FU

As you can see, Weatherley doesn't like the feel of the audience (presumably this tory brown-noser, who seems to fit the description Maxwell's Ghost describes of his less than ideal student, assured him that the level of student support for his policies was somewhat higher than he expected), gets spooked and leaves. Or perhaps he had made his mind up not to debate in the first place? After all, the police commissioner elections are today, and the report of the 'incident' went out on AP less than an hour after Weatherley left campus. Rather suspicious. Speaking of Maxwell, I suppose you are familiar with thermodynamic relations? If you increase the pressure, and turn students into squatters and anarchists, what do you think will happen? Is it inconceivable that current students, the first generation asked to go through University with no government support and uncomparably abysmal job prospects, might become distrustful of said government? Is it inconceivable that those who can't rely on parental support or predatory credit might decide to live 'above the law'?

gnarlychaos wrote:
Mike Weatherley and his assistant sound like two barking dogs, and as everyone knows, barking dogs seldom bite back. At least they have a kennel over their heads, which makes the spite they show towards squatters and the homeless even more unacceptable. What repugnent specimens they portray themselves as,glad they got a warm welcome at sussex uni. It highlights how so out of touch these motherf#ckxxs are with the rest of the society they claim to represent. True horrors, the pair of em. Should be strung up.

Strung up! Well that just shows what a narrow minded idiot you are and where are you squatting!

Why should squatters have the right to take over a property and normally trash it leaving the owner to pay for the repairs.

We are living in the 21st century not the middle ages or didn’t you realise it?

Mr Weatherly was going about his lawful business in what is called a democracy.

The people that took part in the protest are no better than cavemen and are not fit to live in our community.

The police should have arrested them all and charged them with common assault.

As I said before we live in a democracy and people have the right to protest but in a sensible manor.

All I can say is they are a load of degenerate idiots and if they like stoning people they should go to a country where it is still an acceptable practice!

Hovite wrote:
Priam or what ever they want to call themselves are obviously anti Mike and every policy he stands for like;

Wild Animal Circus Ban Supported by Mike

International Whaling Motion Sponsored by Mike

Parliamentary Motion Against Use of Stray Animals for Experiments Signed by Mike

Mike joins Blue Badger group against badger cull

Mike Against Fox Hunting

Live Music and Intellectual Property Rights

Promotion of Small Businesses

I should imagine Priam are, like me and many others, vehemently against the £50 million of cuts to B&H's budget over the next two years by the government both Weatherley and Kirby are members of. How about asking them Argus? They are supposed to be representing the city.

funkyyoyo wrote:
be assured mr weatherley i shall be sending you a bottle of your fave champagne for christmas,what a terrible experience you had yesterday being attacked by inbred,un educated,worthless scum!! apparently the galapagos islands are a great place to perhaps relocate,its uninhabited and its main occupants are rats,yall all get along just great----just dont eat the blue pellets about to be dumped on the island

Well, I too would buy him a bottle of bubbly if that is all it took to get him to leave! Rats and Tory MPs would seem suited to each other. Could make a game show out of it....

alexwildcat wrote:
hubris or hybris (ˈhjuːbrɪs)
— n
1. pride or arrogance
2. (in Greek tragedy) an excess of ambition, pride, etc, ultimately causing the transgressor's ruin

c.f. Collins, 10th edition

http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=gCUg4GXBn

FU

As you can see, Weatherley doesn't like the feel of the audience (presumably this tory brown-noser, who seems to fit the description Maxwell's Ghost describes of his less than ideal student, assured him that the level of student support for his policies was somewhat higher than he expected), gets spooked and leaves. Or perhaps he had made his mind up not to debate in the first place? After all, the police commissioner elections are today, and the report of the 'incident' went out on AP less than an hour after Weatherley left campus. Rather suspicious. Speaking of Maxwell, I suppose you are familiar with thermodynamic relations? If you increase the pressure, and turn students into squatters and anarchists, what do you think will happen? Is it inconceivable that current students, the first generation asked to go through University with no government support and uncomparably abysmal job prospects, might become distrustful of said government? Is it inconceivable that those who can't rely on parental support or predatory credit might decide to live 'above the law'?

Yes, good point. I had missed the convenient timing of the Police Commissioner elections.

Andy R wrote:
I've spoken to several people who were present yesterday and, sure enough, there were no rocks. Weatherley and flunky Nemeth spinning again. Funniest thing from yesterday was Weatherley whining on local TV that Sussex Uni security staff failed to accord him the respect and attention he clearly think is his due. Ironically, it is now being suggested that "Weatherley's Law" has more holes in it than a fishing net, and that after the initial flurry of police activity, there will be few squatter prosecutions and even fewer convictions.

Are you doing all this in Council time, your own time or the time the public is forced to pay for you to carry out trade union duties?

Andy R wrote:
I've spoken to several people who were present yesterday and, sure enough, there were no rocks.

Weatherley and flunky Nemeth spinning again.

Funniest thing from yesterday was Weatherley whining on local TV that Sussex Uni security staff failed to accord him the respect and attention he clearly think is his due.

Ironically, it is now being suggested that "Weatherley's Law" has more holes in it than a fishing net, and that after the initial flurry of police activity, there will be few squatter prosecutions and even fewer convictions.

You spoke to them? Where did you speak to them Andy? I only ask as I didn't think you were a student.

Andy R wrote:
I've spoken to several people who were present yesterday and, sure enough, there were no rocks.

Weatherley and flunky Nemeth spinning again.

Funniest thing from yesterday was Weatherley whining on local TV that Sussex Uni security staff failed to accord him the respect and attention he clearly think is his due.

Ironically, it is now being suggested that "Weatherley's Law" has more holes in it than a fishing net, and that after the initial flurry of police activity, there will be few squatter prosecutions and even fewer convictions.

You spoke to them? Where did you speak to them Andy? I only ask as I didn't think you were a student.

WHERE did I speak to them?? What's that got to do with anything?

You "didn't think I was a student"? But then you're pretty confused most of the time anyway.

Squatters = Scum
Students protesting in this undemocratic thuggish manner = Scum
non students attending protest to mix it = Scum
People who double park their cars blocking emergency vehicles = Scum
thats just to let you so called students/pro squatters know you are not entirely alone in plumbing the depths

If you want to live in a house, in a community, then contribute to that community. If not, you should go and live in the woods, make your own home there.
Maybe not all squatters are bad, but the resounding evidence is that they are criminals damaging property, causing nuisance to neighbours and refusing to leave when asked. If I was homeless and found an empty property to live in I would cherish it and take care of it, and if the owner returned and asked me to leave I would.
The nuisance squatters have 'made the bed' for all squatters to lie in.

gaz scott wrote:

jyan wrote:
Were the activists recently evicted from squats? Poor things having to go and pay for a place to live. Society is so cruel.

Society is indeed cruel. Criminalise a section of society for the convenience of vested interests and there will be consequences.

Oh dear never mind. Get a job and pay your way in life like the majority.

My mate Kent Pocknall started it.

funkyyoyo wrote:

jyan wrote:
Were the activists recently evicted from squats? Poor things having to go and pay for a place to live. Society is so cruel.

ditto!!! awwww diddums now shall i turn my heating on 4 or 6 tonight, hmmm i might even invite some law abidding tax paying friends over for a bbq in my heated garden,maybe a dip in the hot tub overlooking ovingdean bay!!!!

Well done for that illiterate rant, are you 5 years old or just badly educated?

Mr.Logical1 wrote:
If you want to live in a house, in a community, then contribute to that community. If not, you should go and live in the woods, make your own home there.
Maybe not all squatters are bad, but the resounding evidence is that they are criminals damaging property, causing nuisance to neighbours and refusing to leave when asked. If I was homeless and found an empty property to live in I would cherish it and take care of it, and if the owner returned and asked me to leave I would.
The nuisance squatters have 'made the bed' for all squatters to lie in.

Agree Mr.Logical1, this law protects the empty houses which are in the process of being put on the market.

It just makes it easier to get the squatters out insead of causing stress and high cost in legal fees.

A property may be empty because of a death in the family or some other good reason. They are the victims not the sqatters in this, and this law is here to protect them.

Squatters just have to pick the right places, it's not a free for all where they can lay claim to any property.

Cyril Bolleaux wrote:

Andy R wrote:
I've spoken to several people who were present yesterday and, sure enough, there were no rocks. Weatherley and flunky Nemeth spinning again. Funniest thing from yesterday was Weatherley whining on local TV that Sussex Uni security staff failed to accord him the respect and attention he clearly think is his due. Ironically, it is now being suggested that "Weatherley's Law" has more holes in it than a fishing net, and that after the initial flurry of police activity, there will be few squatter prosecutions and even fewer convictions.

Are you doing all this in Council time, your own time or the time the public is forced to pay for you to carry out trade union duties?

And your excuse is?

Oh No! they upset at not getting their own way!

Question: Is this a first? Has any MP in the history of Parliament ever been ambushed like this before, driven from a building, pelted with an assortment of flying objects and forced to shelter in a riot van? Prevented from doing the gig by so many and so violently?

It is a great shame that the really good things Mike Weaterley has done for Hove now lie crushed under the weight and memorability of this event.

This attack will see him notorious and remembered much as Enoch Powell was for his 'rivers of blood' comment.

It is reminding me of an old saying: 'Live by the sword; die by the sword'. And that first law of physics I learned at school: "For every action, thre is an equal and opposite reaction".

Let this be a lesson to every arrogant, swaggering politician out there lording it over the public and bigging themselves up with constant fatuous PR about themselves.

A comment above digs out th definition of hubris. Apt.

The daughter of a friend told me a while back that she could not afford to rent anywhere. She sofa-surfs among a wide circle of friends. She is not a shirker or someone whose appearance messages "homeless". She is wonderful young person who is unable to earn the amount needed to pay rent & the bills that come with it. Her father is dead. Her mother (a heavy drinker) moved to southern climes and there are no relatives to help her. She is proud and not living on benefits.

There are vicious comments here that imply that there are lots of jobs if young people want them and plenty of rental opportunities if people only assume responsibility for taking them. They have no idea how close to losing everything even they are.

There are too many people in this country who will never have something to lose.

Valerie, you speak such rubbish yet you try to be so poetic.

crushed under the weight and memorability?

rivers of blood?

Live by the sword; die by the sword?

Let this be a lesson to every arrogant, swaggering politician.

Valerie, as far as arrogance goes you are the biggest offender.

Hovite wrote:
Valerie, you speak such rubbish yet you try to be so poetic.

crushed under the weight and memorability?

rivers of blood?

Live by the sword; die by the sword?

Let this be a lesson to every arrogant, swaggering politician.

Valerie, as far as arrogance goes you are the biggest offender.

Mike Weatherley should be asking himself if you are friend or foe.

See there you go again, friend or foe, cloak and daggers etc etc, all words no substance.

Judging by the look of these protestors, an encounter with the fire hoses may do them a bit of good-some of them need a jolly good wash and scrub down with a flannel. A trip to the barbers wouldn’t go amiss either.

Hovite wrote:
See there you go again, friend or foe, cloak and daggers etc etc, all words no substance.

..."cloak and daggers"....? Your words, not mine. Stop flailing about in a panic.

I wish you luck with the sheer scale of the damage limitation task you face now. You got yourselves into this and writing black propaganda against me does nothing to make you look other than what you are: bitter, twisted & vengeful.

Mike Weatherley did the majority of home owners a grey service when he championed the new anti squatting law. Squatters are simply thieves of other peoples property.

Valerie, you are condoning violent behavior in poetry and using phrases and quotes from history for your own propaganda reasons.

I just use the Argus to respond in my own words to stupid comments, not for propaganda purposes and I am against extremist views on all sides of the argument.

I also try to put a bit of humour in my posts and keep it real. I'm certainly not bitter, twisted or vengeful.

As I said you use these powerful phrases but they are full of emptyness.

Valerie Paynter wrote:

Hovite wrote:
See there you go again, friend or foe, cloak and daggers etc etc, all words no substance.

..."cloak and daggers"....? Your words, not mine. Stop flailing about in a panic.

I wish you luck with the sheer scale of the damage limitation task you face now. You got yourselves into this and writing black propaganda against me does nothing to make you look other than what you are: bitter, twisted & vengeful.

Valerie I fear you are fighting a valiant but losing battle here.

Too many are interested in kneejerk and simplistic solutions to complex problems. There is a worrying tendancy of many commentors to de-humanise and demonise parts of the population least able to defend themselves such as those that find themselves, for whatever reason, in poverty and that may be homeless in particular.

Thanks to government policies we may well find ourselves shortly with families on the streets with not even the possibility of occupying long empty buildings. Oh I forgot, they just have to stop being lazy and get a job because getting a well paid job is just so easy isn't it.

inadaptado wrote:
“I am very angry that that this could happen.”

Awww, you poor thing, you thought you could criminalize a collective outside the law without suffering the consequences? Welcome to the real world, Mr. Weatherley.

You are below contempt

Andy R wrote:
WHERE did I speak to them?? What's that got to do with anything?

You "didn't think I was a student"? But then you're pretty confused most of the time anyway.

Jesus what is your problem Andy? I asked you a very simple and civil question and you come back with this reply. Why are you so angry with everyone all the time? Just answer the question and stop being so defensive and down right rude to people all the time.

gaz scott wrote:

jyan wrote:
Were the activists recently evicted from squats? Poor things having to go and pay for a place to live. Society is so cruel.

Society is indeed cruel. Criminalise a section of society for the convenience of vested interests and there will be consequences.

Yes, we will get the nasty, scruffy, benefit claiming miscreants off the streets and Brighton will be a much better place for the 99.9% who contribute!

I suspect Gaz that you would be one of the 0.1% who becomes incarcerated and I cannot personally think of any better outcome.

What a sad day for democracy when a butch of lowed mouthed violent activist protestors showing there way of freedom of speech or should I say freedom to enter another persons property empty or occupied strip it of all its fittings and then openly smash and brake what these squatting can not take away and sell and how may I ask can a law turn a victims into criminals that sounds like a person that has no respect for the law therefore is a criminal and as it is now THANK GOD a criminal offense to squat that would make you a criminal if you did, now personally the only rights being removed from you VANDALS o’ sorry victims is your soil purpose to live in a property that’s you have not had permission to enter and live scot free wile making money out of the fixtures and fittings its one thing you saying this property has been empty for 8-10 years but some of the property’s you squatters brake into are peoples homes where they live where there family lives so its ok to make them homeless duo to your selfish attitudes to live freely in other peoples property’s that’s why the law was changed to protect these family homes from you thugs.

AmboGuy wrote:

Andy R wrote:
WHERE did I speak to them?? What's that got to do with anything?

You "didn't think I was a student"? But then you're pretty confused most of the time anyway.

Jesus what is your problem Andy? I asked you a very simple and civil question and you come back with this reply. Why are you so angry with everyone all the time? Just answer the question and stop being so defensive and down right rude to people all the time.

Its people like Gaz and Andy who give a bad name to these minority miscreant groups.

I was captivated by the comments of Cyril Bolleaux - 1246 on 15 Nov. (what a superb french name) regarding the enquiry as to whether a union shop steward was carrying out lefty intelligence gathering in his own, or, the councils time. It brought me back to my letter on the same subject, which the Argus do not choose to publish. A good reason to post it here, while not entirely related to the MP situation, it is a major issue:

"Having observed considerable previous comment on this particular subject, I was surprised to read the recent letter from UNISON convenor, Sue Beatty, in this weeks Argus, regarding the funding of full time and part time union shop stewards. I, like a good deal of other people, fully agree with Ms Beatty that, YES, union shop stewards are a good idea. They do serve a purpose in cultivating good relations between bosses and workers in larger organisations, and, YES, they do minimise the number of working days lost to industrial action, through quick resolution of conflict. The point is that, the public purse should not have to pay for this facility. I assume that shop stewards are all initially employed in a primarily role, and are clearly not working in this role when carrying out their union duties, which must result in another member of staff covering their workload. All unions receive considerable subscription fees from their members, to the point that they can afford to use large amounts of this money to bankroll the labour party. which Indirectly, equates to the public involuntarily funding the Labour party. It should be for the relevent union to fully fund the employment of all their union stewards, NOT the employer."
Trevor Alford

HJarrs wrote:

Cyril Bolleaux wrote:

Andy R wrote:
I've spoken to several people who were present yesterday and, sure enough, there were no rocks. Weatherley and flunky Nemeth spinning again. Funniest thing from yesterday was Weatherley whining on local TV that Sussex Uni security staff failed to accord him the respect and attention he clearly think is his due. Ironically, it is now being suggested that "Weatherley's Law" has more holes in it than a fishing net, and that after the initial flurry of police activity, there will be few squatter prosecutions and even fewer convictions.

Are you doing all this in Council time, your own time or the time the public is forced to pay for you to carry out trade union duties?

And your excuse is?

Don't understand the question. I was trying to find out if I am subsidising Mr R's leftist smears and spin. He has not responded.

The world yesterday saw the true face of the Occupy movement, violent thugs.

TrevorA wrote:
I was captivated by the comments of Cyril Bolleaux - 1246 on 15 Nov. (what a superb french name) regarding the enquiry as to whether a union shop steward was carrying out lefty intelligence gathering in his own, or, the councils time. It brought me back to my letter on the same subject, which the Argus do not choose to publish. A good reason to post it here, while not entirely related to the MP situation, it is a major issue:

"Having observed considerable previous comment on this particular subject, I was surprised to read the recent letter from UNISON convenor, Sue Beatty, in this weeks Argus, regarding the funding of full time and part time union shop stewards. I, like a good deal of other people, fully agree with Ms Beatty that, YES, union shop stewards are a good idea. They do serve a purpose in cultivating good relations between bosses and workers in larger organisations, and, YES, they do minimise the number of working days lost to industrial action, through quick resolution of conflict. The point is that, the public purse should not have to pay for this facility. I assume that shop stewards are all initially employed in a primarily role, and are clearly not working in this role when carrying out their union duties, which must result in another member of staff covering their workload. All unions receive considerable subscription fees from their members, to the point that they can afford to use large amounts of this money to bankroll the labour party. which Indirectly, equates to the public involuntarily funding the Labour party. It should be for the relevent union to fully fund the employment of all their union stewards, NOT the employer."
Trevor Alford

Couldn't agree more

All this has done is prove to everyone that those opposing a law against squatters are nothing more than common thugs and criminals.

The cowards in the Occupy movement who launched this vile attack show their true colours by al disabling and removing nearly 243 message of disgust that were added to their sick video of this event on you tube.

Free speech Occupy Brighton?

When it suits is the reply.

It is common knowledge that the sorts of people (sic) who belong to the miscreant group - occupy, are typically scheming, devious and underhand miscreants who are prepared to go to great lengths to mislead and groom gullible folk to gain their support.

We have seen enough now to understand their real agenda and it does not look good.

Rents too high? Shortage of properties? Poor quality low cost rental properties? Yep, that's B&H for you - high rents, congested and in demand. My nephew who is a recent university grad couldn't find a suitable property so had a look in Worthing and Hastings, and now has a brilliant 1 bed flat in Hastings for about half of what it would it cost here, and he was spoilt for choice. There is plenty of affordable choice out there if you're prepared to move farther afield. Problem is too many people want the lot straight off, and would rather squat in Brighton then start off somewhere else more affordable. No sympathy. Adapt, take responsibility and live within your means!

Generally speaking, the majority of MPs seem to me to be grasping scroungers - ruthlessly bleeding an outrageous expenses and pension system. From wart of the political spectrum MPs so often seem to eventually give the impression of being duplicitous, self-interested, awful people.

The vast majority of squatters appear to be scumbags with a remarkably similar sense of over-entitlement that has so often been demonstrated by some MPs.

Both groups seem to have far more in common than either would like to admit.

At times like this that people often forget about the real victims here...what happened to the fruit and eggs?

...I know some old folk who I could drop the fruit off to so that they might save a little money - to pay the bonuses and dividends of ruthless utility companies that have been outrageously ripping them off for years whilst MPs spout nonsense about getting tough.

Do any of our MPs need a new project? Something that actually would help the vast majority of the people they are paid (too much) to represent.

No progress on many issues as fudging investigations about market rigging, but parliament is making sure it urgently sorts out a better deal for MP payments. I would expect such behaviour from scumbags throwing fruit at people.

Somethingsarejustwro
ng wrote:

AmboGuy wrote:

Andy R wrote:
WHERE did I speak to them?? What's that got to do with anything?

You "didn't think I was a student"? But then you're pretty confused most of the time anyway.

Jesus what is your problem Andy? I asked you a very simple and civil question and you come back with this reply. Why are you so angry with everyone all the time? Just answer the question and stop being so defensive and down right rude to people all the time.

Its people like Gaz and Andy who give a bad name to these minority miscreant groups.

Agreed. I'm afraid that Andy in particular has a habit of not responding on this forum when people disagree with him. His pathetic and unjustified attack on me for asking a perfectly normal question show just what kind of a person he is.

DONTvotegreen wrote:
The cowards in the Occupy movement who launched this vile attack show their true colours by al disabling and removing nearly 243 message of disgust that were added to their sick video of this event on you tube.

Free speech Occupy Brighton?

When it suits is the reply.

Yes I noticed that. They didn't like the responses they were getting on YouTube so they just deleted them. The irony is that as they both like to freeload from society and tell lies and spin they're really not that different from the average politician.

They only have themselves to blame these squatter types of today .We used to squat back in the early "80`s ,there was no dole then for under 18`s and so a lot of youngsters my age who weren`t still at home ,which was quite a lot of us,couldn`t afford rent on a basic wage .We usually lived in empty offices,sometimes for up to a year at a time without hardly anyone ,including the neighbours,getting het up about it.Mostly acting civil (or in other words treating as how we would like to be ourselves)in the area people were usually tolerant or weren`t even aware we were there.This all changed when we decided to get into a private basement flat one time,have a party and the (very) locals went ballistic,very soon we lost the good ambience in the area we once had.Lessons learned,it was swiftly back to keeping our noses clean and staying in commercial premises with absent landlords right up until some of us were in our "20`s.So many day to day people these days have been getting very angry about coming home from a hard earned holiday or visiting their recently dead nans well kept house to find it has been trashed beyond hope.How would you like it?Stick to big business.It is still legal to squat in commercial buildings ,at the moment,though I can see the squatter of today throwing that away as well..

TrevorA wrote:
I was captivated by the comments of Cyril Bolleaux - 1246 on 15 Nov. (what a superb french name) regarding the enquiry as to whether a union shop steward was carrying out lefty intelligence gathering in his own, or, the councils time. It brought me back to my letter on the same subject, which the Argus do not choose to publish. A good reason to post it here, while not entirely related to the MP situation, it is a major issue:

"Having observed considerable previous comment on this particular subject, I was surprised to read the recent letter from UNISON convenor, Sue Beatty, in this weeks Argus, regarding the funding of full time and part time union shop stewards. I, like a good deal of other people, fully agree with Ms Beatty that, YES, union shop stewards are a good idea. They do serve a purpose in cultivating good relations between bosses and workers in larger organisations, and, YES, they do minimise the number of working days lost to industrial action, through quick resolution of conflict. The point is that, the public purse should not have to pay for this facility. I assume that shop stewards are all initially employed in a primarily role, and are clearly not working in this role when carrying out their union duties, which must result in another member of staff covering their workload. All unions receive considerable subscription fees from their members, to the point that they can afford to use large amounts of this money to bankroll the labour party. which Indirectly, equates to the public involuntarily funding the Labour party. It should be for the relevent union to fully fund the employment of all their union stewards, NOT the employer."
Trevor Alford

The point here is that the 'shop steward' (a term now rarely used) is not working for the benefit of the union, but for the benefit of the employees of the private company or government department and - as you say - in furtherance of good industrial relations. It has long been the case that union officials are allowed a *limited* amount of time to spend on such work. Hard not to see the current Conservative attack on it as a distraction tactic, given the complete failure of their economic strategy.

As for the public purse indirectly funding Labour, you'd have to be a very careful shopper to avoid paying an unwitting subsidy to the Conservatives given that party's complete reliance on big business. Without union funding for Labour we would have something close to a one-party state, with that one party completely in hock to big business and the City - in other words, the very people who got us into this economic mess in the first place.

FACT - Squatting law is sickening. Try imposing EXISTING laws to stop the TAX CHEATS WHO OWN THESE WASTED, EMPTY PROPERTIES, then whine about someone on the streets wanting shelter!!



FACT - Weatherly proven to be lying, nasty piece of work - e.g, NO ROCKS THROWN IN THE INCIDENT.


FACT - You rich Tories can whine all you like here - but until there is more wealth spread fairly, all around, NOT ACCORDING TO WHO YOUR PARENTS WERE / WHO YOUR DADDY KNOWS, there will likley be MORE incidents like this.


FACT - YOUR TIME HAS COME ANYWAY - look at America - Republican party in its death rattle. And here, Tories in-fighting, awful approval figures etc. The world is evolving - the dinosaurs are getting left behind, and slowly dying out. Thank goodness.

in before whining about caps...

Somethingsarejustwro
ng wrote:
It is common knowledge that the sorts of people (sic) who belong to the miscreant group - occupy, are typically scheming, devious and underhand miscreants who are prepared to go to great lengths to mislead and groom gullible folk to gain their support.

We have seen enough now to understand their real agenda and it does not look good.

Sounds like they would make good Tory politicians, bankers or directors of large companies.

whereisthe...? wrote:
FACT - Squatting law is sickening. Try imposing EXISTING laws to stop the TAX CHEATS WHO OWN THESE WASTED, EMPTY PROPERTIES, then whine about someone on the streets wanting shelter!!



FACT - Weatherly proven to be lying, nasty piece of work - e.g, NO ROCKS THROWN IN THE INCIDENT.


FACT - You rich Tories can whine all you like here - but until there is more wealth spread fairly, all around, NOT ACCORDING TO WHO YOUR PARENTS WERE / WHO YOUR DADDY KNOWS, there will likley be MORE incidents like this.


FACT - YOUR TIME HAS COME ANYWAY - look at America - Republican party in its death rattle. And here, Tories in-fighting, awful approval figures etc. The world is evolving - the dinosaurs are getting left behind, and slowly dying out. Thank goodness.

in before whining about caps...

FACT - The squatting law was long overdue and is supported by the vast majority of the population.

FACT - Most people support a law to make squatting in commercial properties illegal as well.

FACT - If people can't afford to live in Brighton then maybe they should move to a cheaper area. I'd love a penthouse apartment in Mayfair but its not going to happen.

FACT - The pro squatting group who put the video of the incident on YouTube deleted any comments they didn't agree with. Freedom of speech anyone?

FACT - There have been too many incidents of squatters in Brighton trashing the properties they stay in and making neighbours lives misery with constant parties.

FACT - They are NOT the most vulnerable people in society. Most are 'professional' squatters.

FACT - Your 'facts' aren't actually facts but just your opinion.

http://www.thisismon
ey.co.uk/money/news/
article-2183076/Prem
ature-austerity-meas
ures-cost-Britain-16
-5-GDP-growth-warns-
NIESR.html?ito=feeds
-newsxml

(Coalition shows how clueless it is on economy - imagine how much worse things would be now if THEY had been in power, not Labour.)

http://www.guardian.
co.uk/politics/2012/
apr/20/cameron-famil
y-tax-havens

(Cameron just other week(!) called tax dodgers "shameful" - must have 'forgotten' its how he ended up so filthy rich)

http://www.guardian.
co.uk/society/2011/d
ec/05/income-inequal
ity-growing-faster-u
k

(inequality growing faster under Cameron than any other comparable country )

http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/sciencetech/a
rticle-2095549/Right
-wingers-intelligent
-left-wingers-says-c
ontroversial-study--
conservative-politic
s-lead-people-racist
.html

(Conservatives less intelligent, leads to racism - from Tories own beloved paper!)

http://www.guardian.
co.uk/business/2011/
jan/30/michael-lewis
-the-big-short-inter
view

("the US Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, which last week blamed the crash on the failings of regulators, greedy bankers".)

Not to mention Coalitions cruelty to, and blaming the disabled / mothers / immigrants / the homeless / everyone but themselves, etc.

History will not judge supporters of such policies kindly. While many people don't believe in good and evil, few now doubt the Tories come **** close to it...

As for "THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE" wanting this law?

The "VAST MAJORITY" in this country want people like you gone for good. Time to face reality - your party is deeply unpopular, useless on the economy, fighting with itself, cruel to women, the disabled, etc. You, my friend, are deluding yourself about the 'state of this nation'.

http://www.thesun.co
.uk/sol/homepage/new
s/politics/4647491/L
abour-poised-to-reta
ke-Corby-in-Louise-M
ensch-by-election.ht
ml


Even 'The Sun', your Tory bible, is smart enough to know the Tories and are done for...


Have a nice day!

whereisthe...? wrote:
As for "THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE" wanting this law?

The "VAST MAJORITY" in this country want people like you gone for good. Time to face reality - your party is deeply unpopular, useless on the economy, fighting with itself, cruel to women, the disabled, etc. You, my friend, are deluding yourself about the 'state of this nation'.

http://www.thesun.co

.uk/sol/homepage/new

s/politics/4647491/L

abour-poised-to-reta

ke-Corby-in-Louise-M

ensch-by-election.ht

ml


Even 'The Sun', your Tory bible, is smart enough to know the Tories and are done for...


Have a nice day!

I don't see any relevance in your replies. I am a public sector worker and hate the Tories too. You didn't actually counter ANY of the points I made, you just came out with more rhetoric about wanting the Tories out of power. Would you like to try and quote something about squatting (call me pernickety but that is what this story is about).

Now maybe you'd like to try that again.

Students have always protested its a rite of passage.
Then they get middle class careers and have holidays in Tuscany and become middle aged and you never see then out in force again.
In the UK the pensioners have a better turn out at protest than the middle aged former students who are all too scared that their employment may be terminated at any point if they are seen to protest.
anyone who has ever protested soon learns as an adult that nothing really changes. Money still brings power and influence and it buys anything.

I totally appreciate everyones view here, but I ask one thing. Give me an alternative to this law. Now I totally agree with this law. Only for residential properties, not commercial ones and here is why. A few years ago I was in a decent financial situation with a partner and we owned a flat in Brighton (worth about £150,000). We then saved all of our spare money and put that down as a deposit for a buy-to-let house (about £10,000 for a house worth about £100,000 - so a 10% deposit). We got a tenant in and life was good for a while. 2 years later we had a child and a year after that we separated. She got the place in Brighton, i got the buy-to-let. The BTL was several hundred miles away from my work so I kept renting it out and started renting a flat myself ( a studio flat in Brighton). After a while the tenant refused to pay, there was legal action and the place was vacant. I had around £4,000 worth of decorating, stolen appliances to replace and loss of earnings from no tenant whilst it was vacant. Then there was the recession and my house which was originally bought for £100,000 was now worth £86,000 (less than the mortgage I have on it - i.e if i sold it now, i would still owe the band £4,000). I then got squatters. I phoned the police who said tough and there is nothing they can do. So i had to take legal action. I finally got them out after it cost me another £1,800 in costs....then I had to do the place up again to get it rented. They had trashed it and stolen metal piping (to sell for money I assume). This was a further £5,000. Now I owe £9,800 in credit cards and loans. I have bad credit and no one will touch me. I have a debt management plan to pay back those fees, I'm living in a studio flat (basically a bedsit) and my home up north is worth 15-20% less then when I bought it. My monthly income is about £1,700. I am not rich by anyones standards and I work 40hrs a week and give a good chunk of that money to my ex for our child. Is that fair on me? The squatters even left a note behind saying 'thanks for making us homeless, we might die now'. These squatters don't realise how close I came to being made bankrupt, homeless and mentally unwell. That is why I agree with this law. If I earn money and buy something with that money, it should be mine. If you are homeless then use one of the homeless shelters in Brighton (that we the tax payers pay for)...like St Patricks, like the YMCA at hove, or Old Steine. Like the shelter at New Steine Mews. Or get on the council housing register. Or even better get working, earn money and rent a room in a houseshare to start with. I have worked all my life and I have paid taxes all my life and I have never claimed any benefits or housing etc. But yet I, as a landlord, am somehow the enemy? I'm in a worst position than most of these squatters. You may not have money...but i am not far off £110,000 in debt and with a child to support... Other than soundbites, someone please share with my why I am wrong here?

whereisthe...? wrote:
As for "THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE" wanting this law?

The "VAST MAJORITY" in this country want people like you gone for good. Time to face reality - your party is deeply unpopular, useless on the economy, fighting with itself, cruel to women, the disabled, etc. You, my friend, are deluding yourself about the 'state of this nation'.

http://www.thesun.co

.uk/sol/homepage/new

s/politics/4647491/L

abour-poised-to-reta

ke-Corby-in-Louise-M

ensch-by-election.ht

ml


Even 'The Sun', your Tory bible, is smart enough to know the Tories and are done for...


Have a nice day!

If I give you a £1 for a can of cider will you go away?

Brighton local never use the police for civil disputes. Get a group of mates and turn up at the property and smash your way in and move in.
I have done this twice. The squatters threaten to call the police but who gives a ****. Just move in if you try to be nice and honest it doesn't work. They soon move out.
You can also trace them to their families. You will be very surprised to find that some come from very lovely homes in the Home Counties and have no need to squat which is why they often give false names.
I do wish The Argus would spend more time revealing these people.
Reclaim your rights and your homes. You too have a right to protest. Go on get in there.

Cyril Bolleaux wrote:

whereisthe...? wrote:
As for "THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE" wanting this law?

The "VAST MAJORITY" in this country want people like you gone for good. Time to face reality - your party is deeply unpopular, useless on the economy, fighting with itself, cruel to women, the disabled, etc. You, my friend, are deluding yourself about the 'state of this nation'.

http://www.thesun.co


.uk/sol/homepage/new


s/politics/4647491/L


abour-poised-to-reta


ke-Corby-in-Louise-M


ensch-by-election.ht


ml


Even 'The Sun', your Tory bible, is smart enough to know the Tories and are done for...


Have a nice day!

If I give you a £1 for a can of cider will you go away?

Ha ha love it. I wonder if he wrote his reply while sitting by a cash machine with all of his street drinker mates and the mandatory dog on a piece of rope!

Look at the perfectly turned out blond who's blocking the police van ( the one with the grey skirt and cute little boots). You're seriously telling me that someone who's dressed like that needs a place to squat?

I've put up homeless friends in my home on occasion. They have all found places to live, albeit not in the area of their first choice.

I've also had a friend spending thousands on evicting squatters ( none of whom where starving to death) and redecorating.

The squatting law needed to be changed.

I used to have every sympathy for those squatting, until I read some of the comments here... Now I feel utterly repulsed and revolted by them, it makes me ashamed to live in the same city as them.

I'll now no longer support squatters and homeless charities.

You were attacked because you and your Party (and Labour too) have done nothing to increase prison sentencing. Nothing to deter violent moronic thugs. People are victims of worse violence everyday... This is the first time I've seen a song and dance about it. How about bringing back PUNISHMENT / DETERRENTS.

HJarrs wrote:

Somethingsarejustwro

ng wrote:
It is common knowledge that the sorts of people (sic) who belong to the miscreant group - occupy, are typically scheming, devious and underhand miscreants who are prepared to go to great lengths to mislead and groom gullible folk to gain their support.

We have seen enough now to understand their real agenda and it does not look good.

Sounds like they would make good Tory politicians, bankers or directors of large companies.

I think you may be deluded, these folk sit with you in the so called 'green' space and its people like you that allow this type of parasite to survive. You should be ashamed of yourself.

This arrogant Tory gets everything he deserves!

tonupboy wrote:
This arrogant Tory gets everything he deserves!

What about the arrogant squatters though?

Solution to your situation. Join in chaps, have a bath, loose the nasty notty hair that looks like a poorly cared for cat and play a part in society. Room for all but not for those who won't contribute and expect the rest of us to carry you.

At my age (58) I'v heard it all before, the unworldly, well paid, smug, political right wing (the hang em and flog them brigade)! always spouting off, (get off your backside get a job, buy a home)!

However the saddest thing I see everyday now is, these smug bum holes now standing in the dole ques, after losing their cushy jobs and having had their homes reposesed...

The worst thing is? as a mature human being, I struggle to have sympathy for them!

tonupboy wrote:
At my age (58) I'v heard it all before, the unworldly, well paid, smug, political right wing (the hang em and flog them brigade)! always spouting off, (get off your backside get a job, buy a home)!

However the saddest thing I see everyday now is, these smug bum holes now standing in the dole ques, after losing their cushy jobs and having had their homes reposesed...

The worst thing is? as a mature human being, I struggle to have sympathy for them!

Couldn't agree with you more, the sooner we get these people out of the dole queue and back to work contributing the better for all of us.

Lets hope you find yourself back in work as soon as possible.

I am most upset to discover that Mike Weatherley was attacked. I feel that this entire issue has caused him much unneccesary upset and distress. It must have been a difficult decision for him to make by criminalising squatting. As one of the last remaining squatters in the UK I feel that the law was passed much too quickly and not enough consideration was made, nor were enough representations made by enough groups against the passing of the law. This country is is medium term decline and in ten years time, depending on how destructive people are, there are going to be more and more empty properties and many more people living on the streets. This law will be an absolubte `monster' for law enforcement and the police. All that the new law really meant to do is enhance the rights of PIO's (Protected Intending Occupiers). But wasn't that covered under Trespass squatting laws anyway? Big property businesses now have an advantage. They have a way of getting the police to `muck out theyre stables' for free. Problably about two percent of squatter incidents involve families with children who cannot `move in' because of the squatters who are almost always (in those cases) people from other parts of the world, not the UK. I agree that the law should not have been passed. Are one of the students responsibe going to start making sense? whay don't they write an application to the court of appeal as a Lady from Wales is now doing. http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-wales-mid-w
ales-19521139

Well somethingsarejustwro
ng, I have even less sympthay for the smug tax payers that complain about people in the dole ques! those that are and were lucky enough not to lose their jobs and their homes.
They are truly the definition of a gutless coward...In a position to kick people when they're down!

tjbaker1979 wrote:
I am most upset to discover that Mike Weatherley was attacked. I feel that this entire issue has caused him much unneccesary upset and distress. It must have been a difficult decision for him to make by criminalising squatting. As one of the last remaining squatters in the UK I feel that the law was passed much too quickly and not enough consideration was made, nor were enough representations made by enough groups against the passing of the law. This country is is medium term decline and in ten years time, depending on how destructive people are, there are going to be more and more empty properties and many more people living on the streets. This law will be an absolubte `monster' for law enforcement and the police. All that the new law really meant to do is enhance the rights of PIO's (Protected Intending Occupiers). But wasn't that covered under Trespass squatting laws anyway? Big property businesses now have an advantage. They have a way of getting the police to `muck out theyre stables' for free. Problably about two percent of squatter incidents involve families with children who cannot `move in' because of the squatters who are almost always (in those cases) people from other parts of the world, not the UK. I agree that the law should not have been passed. Are one of the students responsibe going to start making sense? whay don't they write an application to the court of appeal as a Lady from Wales is now doing. http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/uk-wales-mid-w

ales-19521139

"Problably about two percent of squatter incidents involve families with children who cannot `move in' because of the squatters who are almost always (in those cases) people from other parts of the world, not the UK."

Only families matter? What about people - like me- who are landlords, but rely on renting that property to pay the mortgage, people like me who cannot aford legal battles to reclaim the property i worked hard to buy. Should the law not protect people like me, as well as the 2% you speak of?

tonupboy wrote:
Well somethingsarejustwro

ng, I have even less sympthay for the smug tax payers that complain about people in the dole ques! those that are and were lucky enough not to lose their jobs and their homes.
They are truly the definition of a gutless coward...In a position to kick people when they're down!

Squatters chose to be homeless. There are virtually no homeless people in Brighton who dont want to be. Brighton & Hove council will offer them accommodation, if they dont want it, the location, or dont want to be split from their pet, then that is their choice. How one can complain that someone should not be allowed to take their residential property (they paid for) and steal it, making the person who worked hard for a living to buy it homeless is a very odd view. Perhaps if you go on holiday, or in to hospital for a few weeks and I break in to your home, trash it and then make you spend your savings (or get another loan, almost bankrupting yourself) just to get me out.....Well, maybe then you may understand.

Brightonlocal wrote:

tjbaker1979 wrote: I am most upset to discover that Mike Weatherley was attacked. I feel that this entire issue has caused him much unneccesary upset and distress. It must have been a difficult decision for him to make by criminalising squatting. As one of the last remaining squatters in the UK I feel that the law was passed much too quickly and not enough consideration was made, nor were enough representations made by enough groups against the passing of the law. This country is is medium term decline and in ten years time, depending on how destructive people are, there are going to be more and more empty properties and many more people living on the streets. This law will be an absolubte `monster' for law enforcement and the police. All that the new law really meant to do is enhance the rights of PIO's (Protected Intending Occupiers). But wasn't that covered under Trespass squatting laws anyway? Big property businesses now have an advantage. They have a way of getting the police to `muck out theyre stables' for free. Problably about two percent of squatter incidents involve families with children who cannot `move in' because of the squatters who are almost always (in those cases) people from other parts of the world, not the UK. I agree that the law should not have been passed. Are one of the students responsibe going to start making sense? whay don't they write an application to the court of appeal as a Lady from Wales is now doing. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-wales-mid-w ales-19521139

"Problably about two percent of squatter incidents involve families with children who cannot `move in' because of the squatters who are almost always (in those cases) people from other parts of the world, not the UK." Only families matter? What about people - like me- who are landlords, but rely on renting that property to pay the mortgage, people like me who cannot aford legal battles to reclaim the property i worked hard to buy. Should the law not protect people like me, as well as the 2% you speak of?

To quote Brightonlocal: "

What about people - like me- who are landlords, but rely on renting that property to pay the mortgage"?

Hmm,

If properly written, timely legal applications are made under the fasstrack court system, a landlord could get a tenant out in 14days along with a drop of `strong arm'. After getting quite rightfully `flung out', their stuff placed in bin bags and the locks changed. The public view was that it was the landlord could be sued silly. Bollocked for getting their biscuit back and even in some cases it was suggested on websites like shelter that the courts could order to put the goons back in the place. This wasnt how things really were lets be frank. For how long does someone steal a car and then continue driving it with the police behind them? The right approach came one day when me and a fellow squatter arrived back from the takeaway and found everything outside. Presto, we had been `illegally evicted'. We had a windows to claim but no solicitor would take it on so we would have needed to fund it ourselves. It just so happened that the flat remained empty for 20 months afterwards. We offered to pay rent but they couldent because the owners were in London and owners were only interested in the 200 shops they owned and were not finianially motivated to rent the upstairs flat out possibly because they would have to declare it. Technicalities put me and my friend on the streets. A bit like having a medieval sword but no oncoming knights to slash open. Sorry if you dont find my humour funny. ;) Anyway. Just to finish. What I suggest is that if the old laws were applied properley and you invoked your brave instinct to protect your castle then the police would not be need to get involved thus protect your interests as a landlord. In Ten years time this law will be one that the police wish didn't exist. Anything that encourages colonies culture and Tribalism is something that shouldent have been disturbed. I hope some people agree. Tribalism is coming to the UK. Please see: http://m.theglobeand
mail.com/commentary/
tribalism-is-back-in
-the-uk/article13673
34 . Poor old Mike Weatherly. I hope these events don't cause him to resign before I get the chance to meet him to discuss the strange lights above Brighton featured in the Argus on 11th Sept 2011. He must be too busy to return my memo I left for him back in July following a personal visit to his office. I accept he may be busy at the moment particularly because of the recent PCC elections. I dont think the lights in the sky are going anywhere without his help to stop them if that says anything. I remain sympathetic to him and hope that nothing like this happens again. Regards, Thomas

Oops, I know if was a bit off topic but the Strange lights above brighton story was on the 11th September 2012, not in September 2011 as I previously stated. Apologies for the mistake. Oh, the nu location for the strange lights, spotters may find them above the BN1 2FF postcode area.

tjbaker1979 wrote:

Brightonlocal wrote:

tjbaker1979 wrote: I am most upset to discover that Mike Weatherley was attacked. I feel that this entire issue has caused him much unneccesary upset and distress. It must have been a difficult decision for him to make by criminalising squatting. As one of the last remaining squatters in the UK I feel that the law was passed much too quickly and not enough consideration was made, nor were enough representations made by enough groups against the passing of the law. This country is is medium term decline and in ten years time, depending on how destructive people are, there are going to be more and more empty properties and many more people living on the streets. This law will be an absolubte `monster' for law enforcement and the police. All that the new law really meant to do is enhance the rights of PIO's (Protected Intending Occupiers). But wasn't that covered under Trespass squatting laws anyway? Big property businesses now have an advantage. They have a way of getting the police to `muck out theyre stables' for free. Problably about two percent of squatter incidents involve families with children who cannot `move in' because of the squatters who are almost always (in those cases) people from other parts of the world, not the UK. I agree that the law should not have been passed. Are one of the students responsibe going to start making sense? whay don't they write an application to the court of appeal as a Lady from Wales is now doing. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-wales-mid-w ales-19521139

"Problably about two percent of squatter incidents involve families with children who cannot `move in' because of the squatters who are almost always (in those cases) people from other parts of the world, not the UK." Only families matter? What about people - like me- who are landlords, but rely on renting that property to pay the mortgage, people like me who cannot aford legal battles to reclaim the property i worked hard to buy. Should the law not protect people like me, as well as the 2% you speak of?

To quote Brightonlocal: "

What about people - like me- who are landlords, but rely on renting that property to pay the mortgage"?

Hmm,

If properly written, timely legal applications are made under the fasstrack court system, a landlord could get a tenant out in 14days along with a drop of `strong arm'. After getting quite rightfully `flung out', their stuff placed in bin bags and the locks changed. The public view was that it was the landlord could be sued silly. Bollocked for getting their biscuit back and even in some cases it was suggested on websites like shelter that the courts could order to put the goons back in the place. This wasnt how things really were lets be frank. For how long does someone steal a car and then continue driving it with the police behind them? The right approach came one day when me and a fellow squatter arrived back from the takeaway and found everything outside. Presto, we had been `illegally evicted'. We had a windows to claim but no solicitor would take it on so we would have needed to fund it ourselves. It just so happened that the flat remained empty for 20 months afterwards. We offered to pay rent but they couldent because the owners were in London and owners were only interested in the 200 shops they owned and were not finianially motivated to rent the upstairs flat out possibly because they would have to declare it. Technicalities put me and my friend on the streets. A bit like having a medieval sword but no oncoming knights to slash open. Sorry if you dont find my humour funny. ;) Anyway. Just to finish. What I suggest is that if the old laws were applied properley and you invoked your brave instinct to protect your castle then the police would not be need to get involved thus protect your interests as a landlord. In Ten years time this law will be one that the police wish didn't exist. Anything that encourages colonies culture and Tribalism is something that shouldent have been disturbed. I hope some people agree. Tribalism is coming to the UK. Please see: http://m.theglobeand

mail.com/commentary/

tribalism-is-back-in

-the-uk/article13673

34 . Poor old Mike Weatherly. I hope these events don't cause him to resign before I get the chance to meet him to discuss the strange lights above Brighton featured in the Argus on 11th Sept 2011. He must be too busy to return my memo I left for him back in July following a personal visit to his office. I accept he may be busy at the moment particularly because of the recent PCC elections. I dont think the lights in the sky are going anywhere without his help to stop them if that says anything. I remain sympathetic to him and hope that nothing like this happens again. Regards, Thomas

You're missing the point. I am a landlord who is not a millionaire, like many others. I am someone who just about had enough money to put a deposit down on a place and get a 90% mortgage and then the property bubble burst, my place is worth less then i bought it for and I'm not far off bankruptcy. Yes taking squatters to court could - in theory - take as little as two weeks, though that's unlikely, you forget that it cost a fortune in legal fees and they get theirs free, paid for by ME. Mine aren't free and could tip me over the edge in to bankruptcy. You just don't get it. You view the world through rose tinted spectacles. Landlords are not all multi-millionaires with a hate for human life. Some, no, many of us are relying on that months rent to pay the mortgage and if we miss that, or their is a major work that needs doing, or we get a squat situation and need to pay legal fees, we go bust. The WE are homeless. I've got a child to support.