I am writing with reference to the travellers that have managed to "camp" directly outside Great Binfields School. This is the third set since October last year and despite the fact that a height restriction barrier and concrete bollards have erected, they seem to be able to negotiate their way through with ease. Can someone please let me know whether the costs involved in taking these cases to court and the necessary tidying up operations after they have left, exceed the costs in erecting secure and satisfactory barriers against "travellers" being able to camp in the first place. If the court costs do, indeed, exceed the preventative measures why is the Council able to waste Council Tax payers money in this fashion?

I thought that yesterday I saw an eviction notice stating that they had until 2pm yesterday (Monday) before 'action' would be taken.  They didn't exactly seem overly concerned.

Walking past there every morning with my 2 girls isn't nice and having to walk in the road to get past them causes obvious potential problems.  I do hope that they are moved on quickly and action is taken to prevent another group coming in.

Hi Kellogs

I think that you have spoken for the majority there and agree with you entirely. I am concerned not only about the costs here but also the apparent lack of care and attention to detail shown by the planners in putting in preventative measures given this sites position right next to the school. If you feel uneasy how are the children feeling?

The girls are pretty much OK as I haven't made it look like a big deal when going past there.  They think it is odd having to go in the road to avoid caravans that are where we should be walking, but I have tried to not turn it in to an issue so they don't get nervous about it.  

Putting in some prevention should have been a real priority after the first time.  When it happened again things should have been done that day.  Now it is just getting inexcusable.  The measures, if you can call them that, are so poor that it doesn't take a lot of effort to get past them.  Having a height gate (can't remember what they are called!) is all well and good, but where they are positioned makes them meaningless.  They can't go any further forward due to the school buses so they are pretty pointless as you can just drive on the pavement.  There must be measures that can be taken to block them off.  A tree trunk is not the answer as it is relatively easy to move with a group of people.

Anyway I'm rambling now.  Lets just hope this gets sorted and sorted properly.

I cant understand why both councils (HCC & BDBC) haven't managed to get measures along Binfields Farm Lane that stops all these travellers from getting in there!

Or why the police cant just move them on as they are blocking footpaths and roadways !!

Chris, Kellogs and Maddy,
I agree, the situation is disgraceful.
The first time, it happened was a surprise, but the second time should never have happened. That we have now reached the fourth  (or is it fifth?) time is unforgivable!
It should be said in answer to Maddy that this one is truly not in the hands of the borough council as it is not borough land and by law, the borough is not in a position to formally intervene.
I also think that the police are doing all they can, given the legal restrictions that they too face.
The responsibility rests with Hampshire County Council. Ironically, even there it is not straightforward. Because the road is not yet "adopted", it is not the responsibility of the Highways Department. The county is however the landowner and the matter is therefore probably the responsibility of the Estates Department.
As most of county spending seems to be in Winchester and south thereof, the highways team in this part of the world is always short of cash and that seems to be one of the reasons that they have been so laggardly in intervening. Due to public pressure and some strong words from the likes of myself, the Highways Department is now stepping outside its brief.
I think that the message that there is likely to be something like a riot if the matter is not addressed properly this time is now truly registered.
I have been personally assured by the local Chf Highways Engineer, that sufficient embedded CONCRETE bollards will be installed as soon as practical.
If it doesn’t happen promptly, we’ll have to rapidly escalate the matter until action is taken……

As Martin already knows I am seething about this matter!

If it's not highways who are supposed to be responsible for preventative measures then lets have the appropriate person/department so that I can personally pass on my thoughts!!!
Whilst I can see that BDBC perhaps can't intervene in the eviction process even BDBC's policy shows that legal services should be making some notification to HCC about site clearance & consideration of preventative measures - it doesn't seem right that they cannot ensure preventative action is then taken by what is another public body.  

I wince everytime being 'short of cash' is offered up as part of an excuse - surely putting up a couple of bollards in a more timely fashion would have saved HCC the money spent on moving travellers on and cleaning up after them!
There certainly seems to be enough money around to 'pretty' up footpaths currently doesn't there  
Good on Highways for trying to step into the breach but then again it doesn't remove the fact that someone should have months ago!

What kind of escalation would you have in mind? - on the basis that it will probably be needed!

Of possible further interest to readers is BDBC's published guidelines on unauthorised encampments
http://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/.....uthorisedCamping.pdf
...although this is dated 2005.

Yes, I know that JoJo is seething, and I'm not far behind her!
I'm sorry JoJo that "shortage of cash' makes you wince. As it happens it is the truth. Now why that should be so for the fourth richest nation on earth, I do not know, unless it is that we are spending too much money on nonsense like Trident. Or to bring it a little closer to home, there's always the money that HCC wastes on publicity; (trying to convince the world about great deeds or intentions of dubious robustness).
As far as escalation is concerned, we should land our county councillor with a petition, engage the media more and hold a demonstration outside the school, just for starters....
By the way, I TOTALLY agree that doing the job properly in the first place – months ago – would have cost us taxpayers a lot less.

Hi Martin

I have been reading all of the entries on here with great enthusiasm but the point that I dislike the most is the final one in your last post, i.e. "By the way, I TOTALLY agree that doing the job properly in the first place – months ago – would have cost us taxpayers a lot less.".

Why do these councils have the right to waste our money in this way and then have the nerve to attempt to justify the increase in Council Tax year on year. Someone should be held responsible for their actions ultimately.

Sorry Chris, that's all down to the "democratic" process. If people who are willing to look at the fundamentals don't come forward for election, or fail to be elected when they stand, things will just grind on as they are at present (until we have a truly major disaster).
Half the time, party politicians are too busy looking over their shoulders at what their party requires of them, and the result is poor decision-making....
For anybody reading this whose interested in this problem, I would remind you that the whole borough council will be stepping down this May, so if you are interested in bringing decision-making nearer to your community, this might be a chance to nudge it in the right direction!

I quite think more people should consider standing for election however the problems with deterrents not being put in place smacks more simply of employed council bods not doing their jobs properly!

By all means opt for precautions that are cost-effective - but make sure they work.
Dont go spending money out on removing deterrents that are in place ie chalk mounds and dont spend money on bollards that are then essentially put in the wrong place.
(a monkey could see those concrete efforts wouldn't work as is)

Add in that there has now been several eviction proceedures and clean-ups done in the area there has been significant costs involved - so although there may be a 'shortage of cash' in one pot there sure seems to be some in another and it is being flagrantly wasted.

HCC has no right to waste money and this matter isn't so much to do with elected councillors as it is with council workers/departments dragging their heels (spending unnecessarily on budgets that they do have) and then undertaking to bodge the job.

But who is responsible for the general performance of council officers?
Basically the councillors, but in practice, most significantly, the Leader of the Council.

As it is the first day back to School after half term I was wondering if they were still there and was very pleased to find they had moved on.  Lets just hope they won't be back here, or anywhere else in the area, again.

I do agree, but....
I haven't seen the "improvements" yet, but by the sound of it, they might have more of a challenge now!

The improvements at the School are several concrete bollards (for lack of a better term!) across the footpaths either side of the road by the height restrictor.  There is no room for a car to get past it so it will be difficult to get through.  I am just very glad that an effort has been made.  I wouldn't like to say it will work for sure, but it is a good effort to securing the site.  Fingers crossed!