Hartlepool's "Birdman": Scapegoat or Symptom of a Broader Problem in Hartlepool?
- teessidetoday
- Apr 2
- 7 min read
Updated: Apr 6
Supporters of Brian Wilkins, who was prosecuted by Hartlepool Borough Council this week believe he's the victim of yet another council 'stitch up', with the council using his Prosecution to cover its own failures in tackling Hartlepool's rat infested streets amidst a decades worth of cuts....
1st April 2025
Brian Wilkins, Hartlepool’s beloved "Birdman," stood before Teesside 'Kangaroo' Court this week and handed a £250 pound fine, along with a hefty £1,820 in court costs, a tall order for a man living on just a small pension.
His crime? Believe it or not, Feeding wildlife in public spaces—an act of compassion that Hartlepool Borough Council deemed a public nuisance due to its alleged attraction of vermin.
For years, the 76-year-old pensioner has been a fixture in the town, scattering bread and seeds to support what he calls "starving wildlife." But after a legal battle that saw him defy a Community Protection Notice (CPN) issued by Hartlepool Borough Council, Justices of the Peace at Teesside finally handed Hartlepool Borough Council its inevitable victory, hitting Wilkins in the pocket by just over two thousand pounds....
The question now reverberating through Hartlepool is whether Wilkins has been unfairly singled out as a scapegoat for Hartlepool Borough Council’s broader failures—particularly the councils inability to keep its streets clean amidst years of cutbacks—and questions being raised as to whether Wilkins case may actually be just one thread in a tapestry of what's claimed to be a persistent targeting of individuals by a local council that, in 2023, was branded as having "no public confidence."
The Birdman’s Burden
Wilkins’ story is as heart-breaking as it is contentious. A former businessman who turned to feeding birds after losing six loved ones in quick succession, he’s spent much of his pension—sometimes dicing up 30 loaves of bread daily—to sustain Hartlepool’s wildlife.
To him, it’s not just a pastime; it’s a mission driven by empathy for the creatures he believes are losing out to urban sprawl. Yet, the council saw his actions differently, arguing the food he left behind drew rats, disrupted residents’ quality of life and led to many of the animals he was supposedly 'saving' being killed by passing motorists as they flew into the road. .
After Council Officers issued a CPN against Wilkins back in 2024 and watching Wilkins persist with his work, Hartlepool Borough Council then sought to prosecute him, culminating in today’s ruling. The financial penalty for Wilkins has been steep: a fine said to have been £250 plus £1,820 in court costs, with his daughter, Paula Allison, rallying support via a GoFundMe campaign, framing her father as a "modern-day Dr. Dolittle" unfairly targeted & in some cases 'harassed' by the local council, however recent reports suggest her campaign to pay Mr Wilkins legal fees & fine has fallen far short what he's been handed down by Teesside's sleepy magistrates. .
Exaggerated Claims by HBC
Many locals agree Wilkins may have been unfairly targeted by Hartlepool Borough Council, with some arguing the council 'exaggerated' Wilkins’ impact to deflect from its own shortcomings.
Hartlepool’s streets, they say, have long been plagued by litter and pests—issues predating Wilkins’ bird-feeding crusade and exacerbated by slashed budgets for street cleaning and waste management, with senior officer pay & pensions remaining unaffected (and even increasing in some cases), as streets become strewn with litter and faeces & volunteers left having to litterpick areas seemingly 'forgotten' by the local council.
Cutbacks and Cleaning Woes
Hartlepool Borough Council is said to have faced relentless strain in terms of the cuts wielded on public services, a plight shared by many northern councils. In 2024 alone, its children’s social care budget ballooned to £46 million pounds, with private firms reportedly charging exorbitant rates—up to £12,000 a week per child, according to MP Jonathan Brash. This "slow bankruptcy," as Brash termed it, is said to have forced tough choices: cutting services, hiking council tax, and scaling back on essentials like street maintenance.
A 2023 petition by residents Tony Richardson and Peter Joyce, which garnered over 4000 signatures, accused the council of failing to even deliver on "the basics"—clean streets, regular bin collections, and adequate tip hours—despite rising taxes. The council’s own actions hint at these struggles. Public toilets in parks have been shuttered early due to vandalism, and plans to reduce CCTV monitoring hours were only scrapped in 2024 after its claimed last-minute funding suddenly emerged. Against this backdrop, pinning Hartlepool’s rat problem on Wilkins feels convenient. Paula Allison, Wilkins Daughter argued that rats have been a fixture in the town "for ages," linked more to takeaways and poor waste management than her father’s bread crumbs. If streets were cleaner and bins emptied more often, would Wilkins’ feeding even register as a nuisance?
Critics suggest the council has latched onto an easy target—a solitary, vulnerable elderly man—rather than tackling systemic issues requiring real investment, something many locals have come out to claim is a regular occurrence by a local council that's rapidly losing both confidence by its locals & businesses alike...
A Pattern of Persistent 'Even Sadistic' Targeting?
Wilkins’ ordeal isn’t said to be an isolated incident either. Hartlepool residents have increasingly voiced their frustration over what they perceive as the council’s 'sadistic' habit of bullying & harassing individuals, whilst letting broader problems fester.
In 2023, a petition titled "Public Vote of No Confidence in Hartlepool Borough Council" gained traction, spearheaded by Richardson and Joyce. It accused Hartlepool Borough Council of stripping services to the bone despite rising revenues & senior officer pay, leaving departments understaffed and residents underserved. The petition aimed for 3,500 signatures—5% of the electorate—to trigger a referendum on joining a neighbouring authority, reflecting deep disillusionment, only for the petition, whilst reaching its target to be 'ignored' by the local council, shunning with it what many claim to be democracy at its most basic level....
Locals have shared tales of their own run-ins with the poorly managed local council, with even journalists critical of the local council finding themselves the brunt of the organisations harassment campaign & in some cases even the subject of police investigations from claims made by council officers. More recently, social media and community forums have buzzed with claims of overzealous enforcement—fines for trivial infractions, disputes over garden waste charges, and aggressive pursuit of council tax arrears against vulnerable adults. One resident, speaking anonymously to a Local Newspaper in 2023, lamented, “They’re quick to chase you for your council tax money but can’t pick up the rubbish on your street.”
Another local, supporting Wilkins, “The people of Hartlepool back you in this,” suggesting a groundswell of resentment toward the council.
The 2023 "no confidence" declaration wasn’t just rhetoric; it crystallised a sense that Hartlepool Borough Council was more adept at policing individuals rather than governing effectively. Wilkins’ case fits this narrative perfectly: a man whose daily act of kindness became a lightning rod for a council eager to flex its authority in a bid to mask its inability to address messier, more costlier challenges in the local community.
Scapegoat or Nuisance? The Debate Rages On
So, is Brian Wilkins a scapegoat? The evidence is certainly compelling.
Hartlepool’s pest problem predates his bird-feeding, and the council’s own data—1,960 empty homes in 2023, many vacant for over two years—points to neglected areas which are ripe for vermin.
Cutbacks have undeniably strained street cleaning, with local campaigners like Peter Joyce arguing that £445,000 spent on the derelict Shades building could’ve been better used on sanitation. Targeting Wilkins, a visible yet eccentric figure, offers a quick win for the Extremist Leaning local council —a way to signal action without the heavy lifting of any systemic reform. Yet, the council has its defenders. Complaints from local residents, businesses like Camerons Brewery, and Park Towers’ management weren’t fabricated; they reflect genuine frustration with the mess Wilkins left behind. The CPN wasn’t a knee-jerk reaction either, but a response to repeated warnings that he ignored. In a town strapped for cash, spending thousands on legal fees to stop one man might seem disproportionate—but it’s also a signal that anti-social behaviour, however well-intentioned, can't be tolerated.
The Bigger Picture
Brian Wilkins’ fine and his £1,820 court bill close a chapter, but the story doesn’t end here.
His case exposes fault lines in Hartlepool: a council stretched thin, services cut, senior officer wages rising & a community just fed up of a local council that's seemingly becoming more 'hostile' towards its own people....
If Wilkins is a scapegoat, it’s because he’s been singled out as an easy mark, in a town where bigger fixes—cleaner streets, better services—feel out of reach. If he’s not, then the council’s victory is pyrrhic, alienating residents who see Wilkins as a symbol of resistance against an Extremist undemocratic dictatorship that almost all of Hartlepool have now lost faith in.
As Paula’s fundraiser grows and locals rally around "The Birdman," Hartlepool Borough Council might find that fining one man doesn’t actually silence the chorus of discontent in Hartlepool, you have to remember, In 2023, they were declared an authority of "no public confidence."
Just two years on, in 2025, Brian Wilkins’ saga suggests very little has changed of not gotten worse—and the targeting of individuals using 'lawfare' may now only deepen that divide & locals hostility towards an institution that many claim has gone rogue !.
