The whole story and the facebook campaign is about leveraging reverse snobbery to gain a result. I asked before: "Why should the fishermen's interests trump those of investors?" It is a pertinent question and it goes to the heart of the issue.
The fishermen are trying to make themselves look like the underdogs. Are they really? I note the local councillor who spoke out in support of the application has a milk run and has seen her customer base dwindle as investors buy homes in the picturesque area. Surely then she cannot be a disinterested party to the proceedings; she has an issue with these 'outsiders' (not her words, but mine) and now she is lending support in opposition to them.
Cornwell's attitude to the rest of England seems to be,
"Grockles, loathe them or ignore them, you can't like them (But you can rip them off)"
On a serious note, maybe if the agricultural industry had not progressed and got rid of excess workers there would be full employment and all the cottages would be full of rosy cheeked bucolic farm hands. I think not.
Of course then we would be at the same level of production as many other EU countries, and if we had the same committment from the Scots who run GB we'd get the same handouts as the Olive trade and Tobacco industry. Of course that would mean our politicos fighting our corner, like Mandelson, we're worse off than asix year old Werthers rep in an old folk's home, win or lose we're fcuk'ed.
Ah - the longer one lives in a particular area, the more legal rights one accumulates? Can't say I agree with that.
It is important to note that these fishermen are not being prevented from doing their jobs. They simply want to have an easier time of doing it, at the expense of other people. It would be easier on binmen to have the landfill/recycling plant nearby so they can stay in bed a little longer and get home quicker. I would be very upset if the council decided to build the landfill in front of my house.
On the flip side, these people who paid dearly for these homes whether as investors or as holiday homes, want to protect the value of their assets, at the expense of other people. Both of them have valid arguments.
How can one side claim any moral high ground here?
As I said, this whole saga is nothing more than reverse snobbery - he has more than me therefore he must be an arrsehole.
Nonsense. You said that they used their wealth to force a judicial review. Utter cobblers. You haven't proven sh*t.
Actually I'm not one of the rich, but if I was I'd buy a gaff down there and taunt the locals. F*cking fishermen. Get a proper job or 'ship' out. Like the other poster said, they weren't the slightest concerned when they sold their grossly overpriced hovels to those 'big city folks'.
The West Country. Full of backward c*nts who aren't far enough west as far as I'm concerned. Their worse than Geordies.