Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
SR wrote:about time
because they are all breaking the law and they feel justified by doing so
town and country needs to pull the approved files for those buildings
but all this and the metal scrap dealer operating illegally on the side of the highway is still allowed to continue
isnt that entire structure illegal.................
doesn that structure and nature of business pose the highest threat to commuters on the beetham highway over some house with an illegal extension............
that place should be shutdown first
SR wrote:go back in history regarding beetham estate and its original intention
SR wrote:about time
because they are all breaking the law and they feel justified by doing so
town and country needs to pull the approved files for those buildings
but all this and the metal scrap dealer operating illegally on the side of the highway is still allowed to continue
isnt that entire structure illegal.................
doesn that structure and nature of business pose the highest threat to commuters on the beetham highway over some house with an illegal extension............
that place should be shutdown first
worksux101 wrote:Yea right...most will be relocated to a housing development in a "marginal" constituency...
AbstractPoetic wrote:The Beetham and its many squatters give evidence to horrid infrastructural planning by the government.
If you do not create means for your poor citizens to afford legal housing, they will build on whatever land they can find.
Now an impromptu decision is made, will little advance notice, to destroy what little means these residents have?
Unless alternative housing is provided, the citizens have a right to protest and burn down houses if they so please.
The power lies with the people.
rodfarva wrote:Building on land that they do not own is illegal. Ignorance of that law does not exclude them from it.
rodfarva wrote:What means? They built on land that is not their own. However bad the government's timing and handling of this matter is, it does not change the ownership of said land.
rodfarva wrote:The power lies with the Government which has been entrusted with said power by the people.
AbstractPoetic wrote:rodfarva wrote:Building on land that they do not own is illegal. Ignorance of that law does not exclude them from it.
If it was in fact illegal, why has its establishment remained for so long? Why had it not been eradicated from the get?
AbstractPoetic wrote:rodfarva wrote:What means? They built on land that is not their own. However bad the government's timing and handling of this matter is, it does not change the ownership of said land.
By the government condoning the Beetham residency to be in existence for so long, where generations have been created, the land was eventually seen as and adopted as their own. They are not solely at fault here.
0awg wrote:this government only deals with things when they feel to. take for example the tint issue, people hav always have dark tint, all of a sudden they decide to crack down. there is no consistency in their actions & doings.
its partly politics too, if they get rid of those people they are loosing a large number of votes there.
the establishment is not only illegal it is proving problems to other people (crime wise).
also the beetham is a nice piece of fertile land, it will do well if used for agricultute but instead it occupied by them & our govnt dosent focus on agri.
0awg wrote:the government is not condoning them, they are just turning a blind eye to the plight of the rest of the public.
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: pugboy and 106 guests