North Pembrokeshire family fight to keep roundhouse they built without permission (From Western Telegraph)

This may sound harsh but these people should be subject to severe penalties for this. Their attitude seems to be 'we got the land and money, we can do whatever we want'
It will obviously never demolished so once again those who are financially powerful can do what ever they want.

A separate point: I'm sure these people consider themselves to be 'Eco friendly' types, (Look at that staircase) however, I'm appalled at the shortsightedness and selfishness inherent in building any old house any old where then populating it with children, the biggest piece of environmental damage anyone can do is have a kid. It's the hypocrisy and verisimilitude that I find particularly galling.

Never trust a hippy- j lydon

Hyper injunctions is a self righteous git....leave these youngsters to get on with their life.....if they were 'travellers' the planning people would supply electric and water FOC!....

If they were travellers do you really think the WT would print such a sympathetic 'puff piece'?
And please don't bring your vile trolling to these comments Daryl1957l. I assume you are old enough to know better. I'm watching you, thumb poised on 'report this post'.
Go back to twitter or Facebook. That's where the trolls live. Troll.

I fully support Charlie Hague and Megan Williams application for planning permission. These houses are breath of fresh air. Why should short sighted people and bureaucracy dictate our freedom of living a debt free life, in sustainable, green low impact dwellings?
This young couple have the right idea; I know if I had the choice between one of these highly efficient, mortgage/rent free houses or a small box they expect us landless peasants to reside in, there would be no contest. Unsustainable debt ridden capitalism has brought the Western nations and people to their knees. Pembrokeshire should welcome this eco friendly affordable, low impact alternative life style. For those of you who disagree, just think, if we were not having to pay large mortgages/rents we would not need to work long hours in a job we hate. How many of us have wasted our precious lives working for the man. If this young couple succeed in their application, they will have a happy life and hopefully be free from the instigated treadmill of debt slavery. We only have to look around the world to what awaits us in the near future, if we do not change to a sustainable system of living. I do not understand why the closed minded sleeping people, try to stop alternative free thinking individuals from living the way they want. Maybe the sheep do not have the ability understand how they are being manipulated from birth to grave. We need a global system change, to be greener, sustainable, eco friendly, living by the rules nature, instead of the dictates of a corrupt usury infested global banking system. If people think I am mad for making these claims, I plead guilty. Mad as hell : )

Peter Warrender

Fundamentally I agree with you Peter.
Don't think this is the first step towards a wholesale dismantling of the capitalist system though. If the principle of 'if you own it you can do what you like' is followed to its logical conclusion then why have planning laws in the first place?

http://naturalhomes.
org/save-charlies-ho
use.htm

conspiracy wrote:
I fully support Charlie Hague and Megan Williams application for planning permission. These houses are breath of fresh air. Why should short sighted people and bureaucracy dictate our freedom of living a debt free life, in sustainable, green low impact dwellings?
This young couple have the right idea; I know if I had the choice between one of these highly efficient, mortgage/rent free houses or a small box they expect us landless peasants to reside in, there would be no contest. Unsustainable debt ridden capitalism has brought the Western nations and people to their knees. Pembrokeshire should welcome this eco friendly affordable, low impact alternative life style. For those of you who disagree, just think, if we were not having to pay large mortgages/rents we would not need to work long hours in a job we hate. How many of us have wasted our precious lives working for the man. If this young couple succeed in their application, they will have a happy life and hopefully be free from the instigated treadmill of debt slavery. We only have to look around the world to what awaits us in the near future, if we do not change to a sustainable system of living. I do not understand why the closed minded sleeping people, try to stop alternative free thinking individuals from living the way they want. Maybe the sheep do not have the ability understand how they are being manipulated from birth to grave. We need a global system change, to be greener, sustainable, eco friendly, living by the rules nature, instead of the dictates of a corrupt usury infested global banking system. If people think I am mad for making these claims, I plead guilty. Mad as hell : )

Peter Warrender

I agree with Peter in most of what he says. What bothers me is that if this house were to belong to a fellow county councillor, would they be penalised as heavily? I have no faith in this county's council.

And as for the likes of Hyper-injunctions, don't hate the individuals, hate the system. I've seen a video interview with Charlie and his family and their attitude is totally opposite to your opinion that they have land and money and power. If that were the case, they wouldn't feel the need to have to build themselves a home that cost them less than £15,000 to build, as they had a baby on the way and were living in a cramped, damp caravan.

The council opposes the build because they say that it conflicts with the rural settings of the area. Are they kidding? These types of buildings blend in more with the local landscape than any cheaply constructed concrete and freeze block monstrosity that they call 'council housing'.

The whole concept of planning permission in our council is corrupt as hell and ridiculously tied up in red tape. It pays to know the right people in our council. The average citizen, however, has to endure miles and miles of red tape, bureaucracy and wasted time for anything to be done in our county.

As I said, don't hate this young family, hate the system. How would YOU feel?

Hyper-injunctions wrote:
This may sound harsh but these people should be subject to severe penalties for this. Their attitude seems to be 'we got the land and money, we can do whatever we want'
It will obviously never demolished so once again those who are financially powerful can do what ever they want.

A separate point: I'm sure these people consider themselves to be 'Eco friendly' types, (Look at that staircase) however, I'm appalled at the shortsightedness and selfishness inherent in building any old house any old where then populating it with children, the biggest piece of environmental damage anyone can do is have a kid. It's the hypocrisy and verisimilitude that I find particularly galling.

Never trust a hippy- j lydon

Never trust a man who uses words not understood by the common man.

Is that herdsman's cottage still standing near Eglwswrw?

Corporate greed, compliance and the ignorance of our supposed leaders are among the biggest threats to mankind, and rest of the natural world. Capitalism feeds on the weak, ultimately shackling its victims into serfdom.
This system is unsustainable, without debt, free of it, we would have more time and real freedom, by having the choice to work less hours, enabling us to spend more time with our family's. The taxation system, direct and indirect feeds Corporation profits, far more than it benefits the people. Truly affordable/debt free housing and the resulting life we could have, should be one of our basic human rights.

Nuclear power, Petrochemicals, Pharmaceuticals, liberally mixed with Usury, are destroying our children's
Children’s future. The world needs a new sustainable fairer system. These very affordable low impact houses could be the first step towards a modern Utopia.

Unfortunately they are a threat to the "Corporate/Banking Parasites", who are existing literally off our blood sweat and tears.

yper-injunctions says...
9:54am Sat 23 Mar 13

If they were travellers do you really think the WT would print such a sympathetic 'puff piece'?
And please don't bring your vile trolling to these comments Daryl1957l. I assume you are old enough to know better. I'm watching you, thumb poised on 'report this post'.
Go back to twitter or Facebook. That's where the trolls live. Troll.

Thanks for your feedback....very quick to judge...and threaten....I shall now, with haste, return under the bridge....

...going back on subject....with the corruption and skullduggery in the country's political and financial system so endemic.....who, in their right mind, is mad enough to play by the rules ...I really wish everyone had the bottle to say "enough"....walk on Westminster and physically throw every MP on to the street, without their credit cards and take back the country!...POWER TO THE PEOPLE( Wolfy....circa 1970's)

Do it for nothing wrote:

Hyper-injunctions wrote:
This may sound harsh but these people should be subject to severe penalties for this. Their attitude seems to be 'we got the land and money, we can do whatever we want'
It will obviously never demolished so once again those who are financially powerful can do what ever they want.

A separate point: I'm sure these people consider themselves to be 'Eco friendly' types, (Look at that staircase) however, I'm appalled at the shortsightedness and selfishness inherent in building any old house any old where then populating it with children, the biggest piece of environmental damage anyone can do is have a kid. It's the hypocrisy and verisimilitude that I find particularly galling.

Never trust a hippy- j lydon

Never trust a man who uses words not understood by the common man.

Thank you for that comment. Very insightful.

Sad that you place limits on what the 'common man' (as you condescendingly refer to people) can and can't understand. I despair, I really do.

I was taught to be cautious but I think we can safely assume the chap doesn't have contacts otherwise Pembs. cc wouldn't be a heck of a lot more amenable to retrospective planning permission - Gordon Bennett Look at the attrocities getting permission and as for those "Windmills" destroying the views ........

Hyper-injunctions wrote:

Do it for nothing wrote:

Hyper-injunctions wrote:
This may sound harsh but these people should be subject to severe penalties for this. Their attitude seems to be 'we got the land and money, we can do whatever we want'
It will obviously never demolished so once again those who are financially powerful can do what ever they want.

A separate point: I'm sure these people consider themselves to be 'Eco friendly' types, (Look at that staircase) however, I'm appalled at the shortsightedness and selfishness inherent in building any old house any old where then populating it with children, the biggest piece of environmental damage anyone can do is have a kid. It's the hypocrisy and verisimilitude that I find particularly galling.

Never trust a hippy- j lydon

Never trust a man who uses words not understood by the common man.

Thank you for that comment. Very insightful.

Sad that you place limits on what the 'common man' (as you condescendingly refer to people) can and can't understand. I despair, I really do.

I was quoting the Dalai Lama so you should raise your issues with him rather than with me.

I wonder why you seem to think that trolls live on Twitter and Facebook. Do you ever frequent those places or are they beneath you? Maybe you are unable to get to grips with these new-fangled technologies. Perhaps you are unwilling to attribute your sanctimonious views to your real self rather than an alter-ego. Or is it you'd rather not air your views to the wider world who would be able to see through them for what they are? The only thing you despair at is the fact that not everyone had the aptitude or intelligence to learn big words at school.

Get down off your high horse before you are pulled down from it, kicking and screaming, by the Twitter and Facebook plebs.

For what it's worth here are my views on the subject at hand. Planning laws were thought up to protect the landed from the serfs, the rich from the poor, in order for them to protect their wealth. That this couple has had the temerity to stick two fingers up to the powers that be has shown the system up for what it is. Rotten and corrupt. Further examples of this were the former Leader of the Council's "Herdsmans cottage", the window manufacturers house in Bettws Newydd and, going further back, Bluestone. All three went ahead and are still in existence despite resistance from the people. Why? Because money talks and it helps to have friends in high places. We cannot have one rule for the wealthy and another for the less well off.

Pembrokeshire County Council should leave this couple in peace and concentrate in getting it's own house in order (see education & social care)

I have no sympathy for this couple - they obviously knew they needed planning permission for their Hippy Mansion but they decided to flaunt the rules by not applying and building it anyway.

If they'd applied and been turned down, then perhaps I'd have some compassion but when they just think they can do what they like just because they live in a field somewhere - that's what winds me up and they deserve the ruling they get.

With regard to Mayday's question as to the whether the former Leader's 2,800 sq ft "herdsman's cottage" at Eglwswrw is still standing, the last time I heard it hadn't even been built.
And that was seven years after the original grant of planning permission and despite the fact that Welsh Government guidelines require consent for such dwellings to meet a present rather than a future need.
The full story can be read at my website www.oldgrumpy.co.uk (follow the link to "Cwmbetws legal issues on my home page).
You might also like to read about the planning consent granted to the present Leader Cllr Jamie Adams.for another rather large herdsman's cottage at Keyston
(Previous columns - June 19 2007 - cottage industry)

..The first time I saw the pictures of this beautiful house, it made me feel good inside, it added to my well being, that this couple have a chance of a debt and stress free life, I wish everyone could be in the same position.

Planning regulations need reforming, they should take into account present day market conditions and be a little less dictatorial.
As long as a property is not an eye sore, and is not spoiling another person’s quality of life, diverse alternative eco friendly new homes and ways of living should be encouraged.

All builds that fall outside of traditional build should get a license permitting the owner to reside there. Once the property has proved it is fit for purpose, planning permission should not be withheld. These properties would be a band A council tax, use less energy, and cheap to maintain. In this time of austerity, I believe they are a true way forward for those who desire greater control on the way they live their life, financially and ethically. Obviously they are not for everyone, but this is not a reason to prohibit people who wish to live this way. We should break away from the idea that we all have to live on bland estates, in little concrete/brick boxes loaded in debt.

Who in their right mind would not want to reside economically, on a small piece of land, with the capability to grow a good amount of our own food?
..

It seems that if anyone disagrees with what the council do they are hailed as some all avenging freedom fighter in these comments.
I make a comment how certain groups of people seem to pick and choose what laws and regulations they wish to observe and I get called self righteous or whatever it was you bunch of trolls said.

I stand by my original point that these people are making claims towards Eco friendly living yet are intent on populating the world with kids. A child may be a bundle of joy for you, but for the rest of us, it's another matter.
Self sufficiency I hear you say? Did you make those fancy hi fi speakers yourself?
Hypocrites.

Leaving aside personal insults, whichever side you take in this affair, without following the rule of law in relation to this or any other aspect of County Council regulation we have chaos leading to anarchy. Like all local authorities, PCC has published planning criteria against which all plans are initially judged and in compliance with which the planing officer will recommend a decision. It is open to the Planning committee to accept or reject that advice and to give their reasons if they do not accept it . Full Council will then look at or it may be referred to WAG if it is far out of line with published policy. Not a perfect system but it generally serves us well.
In this particular case, even though the couple deliberately did not seek consent before building, if they do apply thefact that is already built will be ignored and it will be treated like any other new application.

Dave speaks sense here.

I would doubt if there would be such sympathy for these people if the home wasn't so aesthetically pleasing, even if the claims toward self sufficiency and eco-living were the same.
Try and add an extension to your house in town and see if your assertions of personal freedom get as much coverage as this pair have managed to orchestrate.

Dave Edwards wrote:
Leaving aside personal insults, whichever side you take in this affair, without following the rule of law in relation to this or any other aspect of County Council regulation we have chaos leading to anarchy. Like all local authorities, PCC has published planning criteria against which all plans are initially judged and in compliance with which the planing officer will recommend a decision. It is open to the Planning committee to accept or reject that advice and to give their reasons if they do not accept it . Full Council will then look at or it may be referred to WAG if it is far out of line with published policy. Not a perfect system but it generally serves us well.
In this particular case, even though the couple deliberately did not seek consent before building, if they do apply thefact that is already built will be ignored and it will be treated like any other new application.

I am glad you have such faith in the hotbed of doublespeak, obfuscation, incompetence (and worse) that is Pembrokeshire County Council Dave.

The only reason they have got away with it for so long is that a significant portion of Pembrokeshire is employed directly or indirectly by them and to speak out would put their livelihood at jeopardy.

I knew I had seen them somewhere before :) http://livinginthefu
ture.org/index.php/4
5
Wasn't this place built before there was any actual planning criteria for this kind of building? I remember the sort of things that the planning said had to be put into some of the lammas project homes when the inspector came round...

Sorry you broke the law and thats a fact. It will have to come down,If it dos'nt then we will all have one. or maybe we could start to live in caves again.Good try though.

Dave Edwards wrote:
Leaving aside personal insults, whichever side you take in this affair, without following the rule of law in relation to this or any other aspect of County Council regulation we have chaos leading to anarchy. Like all local authorities, PCC has published planning criteria against which all plans are initially judged and in compliance with which the planing officer will recommend a decision. It is open to the Planning committee to accept or reject that advice and to give their reasons if they do not accept it . Full Council will then look at or it may be referred to WAG if it is far out of line with published policy. Not a perfect system but it generally serves us well.
In this particular case, even though the couple deliberately did not seek consent before building, if they do apply thefact that is already built will be ignored and it will be treated like any other new application.

You seem to be using 'anarchy' in a negative way.....check out the link.

http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Anarchy