Sunday, July 04, 2010

Bum And Bummer

Phwoar! I see Ramsgate's prude-defying hairdresser Marcello has, er, turned the other cheek!

If you recall, the top tonseurist caused a nationwide stir recently with a controversial erection featuring his lovely Cuban wife's booby bits. Now he's flipped her over and chucked up her backside!

The new look is featured in today's Daily Star Sunday (click on pic for full story). It's bound to get the old duffers at our beloved council all hot under the collar again!


Peter Checksfield said...

That showed 'em! Certainly more artistic than an old nutter walking around Margate beach!

Richard Eastcliff said...

Oh come on Peter. Don't be so hard on yourself!

DrM. said...

I wrote before that the content of the poster is quite irrelevant in this example. It's simply a matter of planning legislation.

If you or I or anyone else wishes to promote a business with a fixed sign mounted on a premises then planning permission is required and particularly so if it lies in a conservation area where stricter display rules apply.

Council officers are quite happy to advise on such matters but lets not allow a good story to get in the way of the less exciting facts of planning legislation.

Peter Checksfield said...

Haha, I asked for that!

What's your personal opinion on this Dr M, or aren't you allowed to (publicly) have one now?

Richard Eastcliff said...

He's probably gone to tug one off now Pedro. At least that doesn't require planning permission!

Strange how the council gets worked up about a businessman needing planning permission to promote his business by putting up a perfectly tasteful banner, yet is prepared to butter up its own backside to support an airport which has never even had planning permission.

Anonymous said...

And what about all those businesses displaying signs in Harbour Parade and elsewhere, will they get a visit from TDC? What residents want from the council is an even hand.

ascu75 aka Don said...

Richard that,s unfair after all it is a nice airport, its just you wish it was somewhere else. I liked the last comment in the star article.

DrM I agree with you it is a planning issue but I find it strange that the council enforce this one above the hundreds we have to put up with everyday that do actually erode our quality of life and cost the council money the longer they are ignored. The council has to be seen as fair to all but it is usually not at all.

Richard Eastcliff said...

Don, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of a council that picks and chooses what it wants to enforce. Same way as you are, in fact!

Michael Child said...

On the one hand here in Ramsgate we have planning permission for a residential development that will contain over 1,000 people 4 metres from a 22 metre high unsupported chalk cliff, built on a high risk flood zone, without a flood risk assessment.

This is fine though, because the council have followed the regulations.

Then we have small businesses trying to survive on the edge of the town centre, theoretically a conservation zone, though in practice due to the way that the social housing there has been used for people dumping and the way the licensing laws have been applied, not perhaps so very jolly.

Major council owned listed buildings in the town rotting away, disused one a royal residence with netting on it to stop bits of it falling on people.

What wee need here in Ramsgate from the council is a little more application of common sense and a little less working to rule.

Peter Checksfield said...

Common sense is asking for far too much Michael.

Anonymous said...

anon again!
Priorities, it's all a case of priorities. TDC, are continuing to have these in the (as usual) wrong bloody order.
Instead of blabbering about some bloody sign.... get on with some planning for our High Streets you load of cretins.
(it must be the heat)

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know if there is planning permission for the following ?

1) The chairs and tables on the pavement outside of the Custom House.

2) The gates at the top and bottom of the steps that go from Harbour Parade to Madera Walk, between 64 Harbour Parade and The Oak Hotel.

Anonymous said...

Dr. M. says:
"If you or I or anyone else wishes to promote a business with a fixed sign mounted on a premises then planning permission is required...."

So when I go down to the harbour and I see various advertisements tied to the railings they've all had planning permission, have they?

In my experience, TDC is selective about its enforcement of planning legislation. If they don't like the poster they make you take it down, threatening legal action against you if you fail to comply. With posters they like they simply turn a blind eye.

ascu75 aka Don said...

Richard Richard I was being naughty it was meant Tongue in Cheek, not quiet to the crack.

I agree All of us can find thing the council chooses to ignore. Maybe you could take it upon yourself to publish a few on here, you know like a spotters board for the council inspectors, to show them what to look out for.After all a great big sign in a conservation area was a bit obvious unlike people block paving their front gardens and driving over the path to get there car off the road, or never putting the wheelie bin on the drive and leaving them to block the path so people have to walk in the roads to get round them. But a sign showing a semi clad bird is a bit much for your side of the Island. Over here no one would have batted an eyelid.

puffinman said...

I notice "Head Hypocrite" (Moores) puts in tuppence worth of crap, then buggers off, as usual.

Anonymous said...

Point well made Puffinman - the (skid) mark of the spin "doctor". Last time he minced in and made the same point, a couple of us said, ok, but what about prioritisation on the part of TDC. Never heard from him again on the point. He's probably at home trying to dig up another relative to tell us all about - he's done his grandparents who were music hall entertainers, or some such, and the latest is his uncle, an aviation author. Such connections. I think he should be on "Who do you think you are?" - now that'd be an eye-opener.

Anonymous said...


Just around the corner, on Grove Road, a house of multiple occupancy had a huge pile of bagged and loose rubbish left out for rats, seagulls and foxes to take a bite from over the past hot few weeks. When I called into the council, the response has been - " ...we've had problems with this house for a number of years, have difficulty enforcing things with the owners..." etc etc, excuses excuses. I was even asked to get the owners name from Land Registry at my own expense to speed things up as it takes TDC ages to find out such information.

Do the council have no powers to enforce basic hygene on people? Or is the process just too difficult verses waving planning permission in front of a business owner?

Peter Checksfield said...

Talking of "hygene" (or "hygiene"), has anyone else noticed the portaloos that have been placed on selected seafront promenades? There's a couple in Westgate, & a couple more in Minnis Bay, & both locations have closed / sealed proper toilets nearby. Not exactly classy looking, but I guess better than nothing.

Are there new portaloos in other Thanet locations? Have TDC been told that they MUST supply more toilet facilities?

Anonymous said...

"Just around the corner, on Grove Road, a house of multiple occupancy had a huge pile of bagged and loose rubbish left out for rats, seagulls and foxes to take a bite from over the past hot few weeks."

Indeed. A regular occurrence. But who are the Councillors for this area and what are they doing about it? In my opinion, Councillors deserve some heavy criticism. There are over 50 of them and if they bothered walking around the towns they are supposed to represent they would see what I see; filth neglect and poor workmanship.

We pay the binmen to collect the rubbish, not to spread it along the road.

We pay the street cleaners to clean the streets, not to sit around on the street corner drinking cider.

We pay highways to repair our roads, not to cordon off the streets and then, disappear for weeks on end.

We pay for policemen to prevent crime, not to sit in the station waiting for crime to happen.

We pay silly salaries to town planners who don't plan anything, they just sit around waiting for people to submit plans to them.

I could go on....

Peter Checksfield said...

To be fair, street cleaners can only clean where they're told to, which is usually just the most visible spots. For example Margate main sands is (quite rightly) kept very clean & tidy, but walk a few minutes further to round the back of The Lido & you'll see that it hasn't been cleaned in a very long time (& those couple of roads / slopes down to the beach from Palm Bay Avenue are even worse, piled high with years of dog's crap & rusting beer cans!). So whoever's in charge needs to investigate & send cleaners to a few of the less obvious spots instead of wasting time harassing local businessmen with harmless posters (& I wonder what Dr M really does think of this, I'm guessing he's not going to tell us though!).

Lucy Mail said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lucy Mail said...

Had Marcello approached Simon Moores with a wad of notes, the Doc would've happily tugged his wife's tits and arse off, all over town.

I rather thought that it was common knowledge that this is the protocol favoured by TDC councillors!

Anonymous said...

Having said all that, the streets are probably cleaner than QEQM especially Cheerful Sparrows ward.

Didn't the cleaning contractor at QEQM resort to using workers placed by NACRO. Workers who kipped down in waiting rooms for their nightshifts ?

How many dustmen are employed on NMW through agencies ? Men with records for burglary able to note the houses with hand rails at the doors where vulnerable people live ?

The first step to improve things is employ Poles.