Monday, December 10, 2007

New Toilets Wrecked

Kent Online reports another dismal statistic of local vandalism, that the College Walk toilets in Margate have been defaced only a day after £4,500 was spent improving them last Wednesday.

Teenagers were reportedly found smoking and drinking in the new baby changing rooms and Thanet District Council said the baby-changing mat had also been loosened from its fixing and had to be repaired.

Cllr Shirley Tomlinson, the council’s cabinet member for commercial and environment, said: “It is so disheartening when something like this happens. The council is working so hard to improve the existing facilities for local people and as soon as work has been completed it’s vandalised and used for antisocial behaviour.

“Not only is that completely unacceptable, but it also costs taxpayers dearly, because we are the ones left footing the bill for repairs.”

The damage came only 24 hours after work on the public toilets had finished last Wednesday.

Cllr Tomlinson added: “If we could cut vandalism at our public toilets, we could put the money we’re currently spending on tackling that problem, into local people’s priorities.”

Ed: Similar improvements costing £4,500 have been made to the toilets in East Pier Yard in Ramsgate but one wonders how long these will last.

Constant vandalism is costing Thanet far too much money, time and wasted resources. I noticed last week how graffiti is spreading across the bays once again and the Minnis Bay toilets have been completly defaced. It's only a matter of time before the public toilets in my own ward, Westgate, meet a similar fate, again, having only recently repaired and re-painted.

Until the courts which act as a revolving door, start imposing custodial sentences on young vandals as a shock deterrent - which they won't - the problem will continue indefinitely and you and I will carry on paying for the repairs through our council taxes!

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately the young of today no how to beat the system and they also are allowed to . They know this because as you said there is no deterrent apart from a fine or a caution and they dont care

anon again! said...

anon again!

Thanet youth at its best. Repair the Loo's again, fit in a descreet CCTV and get the SCUM. Put them in the Army (Voluntarily of course)(can't go against Human Rights) (but they're not humans, so it doesn't matter), then off to Iraq or Afghanistan for a year or two. Better than Jail, and they might learn a bit of respect.

Anonymous said...

Here Here!! We have a human right to live in a world where we don't have to tolerate this type of behavior .

Tony Beachcomber said...

Annon 12:29, vandals of today do not how to beat the system, they are to thick. It is the solicitors who represent them that do and make their living out of it.

anon again! said...

anon again!
again!

Then let the Solicitors PAY for the Damage to Public Property. Then, they might change their minds about representing the mindless!

Little Weed said...

What a load of twaddle. Why should the army have to tolerate yobs and solicitors only do a job they have been trained for like doctors and plumbers.

anon again! said...

anon again!

Oh dear, we have a supporter of mindless criminal damage (vandalism).

I hope you need a Public Loo urgently one day, and find it closed due to vandalism.

Where are you going to go?




(twit)

Anonymous said...

Did our police ever catch the young arsonists that burned down Sue's allottment hut twice or three times? They have highlighted how to scroats were apprehended via their 'tags' but do they really care about preventing it? What about a 'sting' operation? Clean up and re-paint a section that has been targeted and then sit close to it until the little b******s come back like the 'bees to honey' and then get them. The main problem we have given ourselves ,as a society, is that we think the little and not so little bs are worthy of anonymity. We really must remove this identity protection from the lawless minority of youngsters.

Anonymous said...

Defence Solicitors do what they do because they are effectively mercenaries of their trade as are Police Officers, Soldiers, and anyone who does something to earn a living. They and everyone else might not always believe what they're doing but have a professional stance to take. I have seen defence solicitors at times sit there, listen to an extrodinary story from a suspect and you can tell they don't believe a word....but they're being paid to do the job and thats what they must do, as a plummer is paid to do something, or carpenter who may not believe in the particular job they are employed on at that time but it will pay the bills. As for the youth, look at some of the parents.

Tony Beachcomber said...

You do have a very good point 9:44 annon.
It just seems ridiculous that the obviously guilty are represented by someone who is duty bound to get them off the hook.
They must feel stupid, mind you the pay is good and they are not getting a pay rise of 1.9% back dated to December.

Anonymous said...

We have vandals in Government, employment, education (managers, not teachers)Health (managers, not health workers).
It makes perfect sense that vandalism should become a way of life. It's catching you know.

Ken Gregory said...

Hello,
Just a note,

We have profesional armed forces who want motivated and intelligent members not yobs, Solicitors are doing their job, as we live in a society that demands equal rights for all.

The real problem lays with us all, as Parenting is the one skill that seems to be taught no where. Until the age of 16/18 our parents should be responsible for our misdemeanours. A swift rap across the knuckles of the parents would, perhaps, result in a better world for us all. Sounds old fashioned, but perhaps it would work.

Anonymous said...

Enoch Powell summed up the "Real problem" Ken Gregory.

No matter how much harder life was, in the past, the parents had hope for a better life for their children.

That hope was lost. In the 1960s.

Anonymous said...

Tony

There are people who advocate "Zero tolerance" policing.

The idea being that you deal, in a prescribed fashion, with people at the lowest ranks of crime.

Historically prescription has only applied to the law enforcers. Rules of Evidence. Judges Rules. There is very good reason for this.

Do you remember the first prosecution for the Rachel Nickell murder ? The Judge threw it out because police, as the result of a "Profiler", targetted an individual with a "Honeytrap".

How was the Judge viewed (and reviewed) at the time ?

But now through DNA breakthrough a different man is facing the charge.

A few years ago I spoke with a Ramsgate solicitor, who specializes in criminal cases. He told me that he knew of two murderers walking the streets (presumably of Thanet) who he had successfully defended. He would never admit to not trying too hard with a defence but, he told me, the acquittals were due to the mistakes made by CID.

The lesson is that when we start to nod and wink the Pc's cases through the Magistrates Courts it is ill preparation for when the Pc progresses to DI and has not learnt his craft.

anon again! said...

anon again!

Take one slob, lazy, good for nothing, trouble making lout, put it in the Forces where it will learn discipline & respect and perhaps turn into a disciplined & respected adult.
Leave them to ROT & they will forever be breaking up Loo's and other property & will even get worse.
If their parents are incapable of controlling their lust givings, a Sargeant Major might be just the chap to get them into line.
Youth, WATCHOUT, you are headed for the Thanet scrapheap!!!

Steamhammer said...

I am not so sure that these vermin know how to beat the system or are even bright enough so to do- the bottom line is they are confident that nothing of any great note will happen to them. Fine them - it just gets added to their tab and means that they will be paying £5 a month for a bit longer. Our British army is a professional organization of which we should be proud. However, there is surely nothing to stop them making a "special regiment" to teach these morons some basic decency and act as a viable deterrent. Who will man it - even the British army has its share of "naughty boys". I take the point that solicitors are just doing their job but surely it is unethical to represent someone who they are sure is guilty unless they are entering a guilty plea for their "client", otherwise they are surely lying. There is no need to start winking through pc's cases - they could catch the vandals if it was deemed important enough by the powers that be. It is high time those powers started listening to the people who pay the money that makes the wheels turn!

Anonymous said...

I came across this quote from the journalist Melanie Phillips (concerning kent's last Chief constable David Phillips)

The horrifying point was that the police were astonished. Officers had no idea about the crime on those streets because they had so comprehensively retreated from them. Such a wholesale withdrawal demonstrably leaves them unable either to prevent or detect crime. But it also does something even worse.

It transmits the most powerful message imaginable to children that adult authority is literally absent. The disappearance of the visible manifestations of law sends a signal to children that if they terrorise a neighbourhood, no adults will challenge them.

That is why the remarks made by Kent’s Chief Constable Sir David Phillips, that community policing was an Enid Blyton fantasy, were so breathtakingly maladroit. With their withdrawal from the streets, the police have not only destroyed their own function and purpose but undermined adult authority over children in general.


Quite right.