|
DMR
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 13:29:26 » |
|
Dear Mr Tomlinson
Don't mind Reg he hates everyone
Lots of love DMR x
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
 Offline
Posts: 36334
|
|
« Reply #31 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 13:32:40 » |
|
If you could be anybody in the world, past or present, who would you be and why?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Iffy's Onion Bhaji
petulant
Offline
Posts: 15863
|
|
« Reply #32 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 13:34:22 » |
|
Bill Gates Why? coz he has 31 billion simple as that
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #33 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 13:36:20 » |
|
Dear Mr Tomlinson
Don't mind Reg he hates everyone
Lots of love DMR x Not everyone......just mongs, tards, Tories and scummers. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JTomlinson
|
|
« Reply #34 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 13:42:25 » |
|
Thanks Reg!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
sonicyouth
Offline
Posts: 22352
|
|
« Reply #35 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 13:44:56 » |
|
Is this some sort of wind up? If not, are you slightly in love with yourself?
Also if anyone has any questions for a tight arsed half scotsman feel free to ask away! Can I borrow a fiver? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JTomlinson
|
|
« Reply #36 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 13:48:28 » |
|
The club cannot make it work financially without something from the Council, who are the land owner.....whilst aware that SBC is limited by central government legislation, there has to be some room for creativity, as Swansea and Hull have shown......have any discussions of this type taken place?
I think we already know that Central and Walcot councillors will object to this scheme, are the Tory group prepared to stand up to them, or will that be too risky to your majority?
1 - The one difference that the Council has been able to make so far is that it would consider allowing certain facilities to be moved away from the site (cricket pitch etc), which as the 'land owner', is helpful. (This is relying on STFC being able to provide alternative, suitable facilities elsewhere) In the past this would not have even been considered, hence why this potential redevelopment was able to be given a fresh run. This actually is a serious issue. Not only does the Council have to say it is okay (and as the Lead Member for Recreation, I am supportive of it), but Sport England have to authorise any move. (God knows why they have the final say?!), and they have some very strict rules regarding potential relocation. This is one major hoop the club must deal with, but we (Council), have been working hard to help them do this. 2 - I am not sure that is the case, the 4 Labour Cllrs in question have raised concerns, but those concerns may be addressed, or they may be made to support the scheme if their group overall supported. (As was the case with the original Council motion, when one of them condemned it in the paper, then voted for it the following night!) The Trust is busily trying to meet the new Labour Group Leader to see what their latest thoughts / concerns on the scheme. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #37 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 13:50:17 » |
|
Thanks Reg! Think nothing of it.....if you prove yourself to be a latter day Joseph Chamberlain, I could always change my mind. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #38 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 13:57:59 » |
|
1 - The one difference that the Council has been able to make so far is that it would consider allowing certain facilities to be moved away from the site (cricket pitch etc), which as the 'land owner', is helpful. (This is relying on STFC being able to provide alternative, suitable facilities elsewhere) In the past this would not have even been considered, hence why this potential redevelopment was able to be given a fresh run.
This actually is a serious issue. Not only does the Council have to say it is okay (and as the Lead Member for Recreation, I am supportive of it), but Sport England have to authorise any move. (God knows why they have the final say?!), and they have some very strict rules regarding potential relocation. This is one major hoop the club must deal with, but we (Council), have been working hard to help them do this. So you're saying that the extent of the Council's help is as a facilitator that it will allow the movement of the cricket and athletics, but only if STFC pays for the new facilities......SBC will have no financial input into what are currently their facilities? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JTomlinson
|
|
« Reply #39 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 14:06:58 » |
|
Our main role is as a facilitator, yes, in the sense we are not looking to build a Council owned facility.
In a basic sense, the club/developer would be expected to replace the facilities with a like for like elsewhere, and the Council would then look to further enhance them with Council money.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #40 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 14:55:18 » |
|
Our main role is as a facilitator, yes, in the sense we are not looking to build a Council owned facility.
In a basic sense, the club/developer would be expected to replace the facilities with a like for like elsewhere, and the Council would then look to further enhance them with Council money. So this would have to be on Council owned land....are the Council expecting to sell this land or can it be swopped ie the developer buys the existing cricket and athletics for housing and then upgrades the facilities to present standard elsewhere? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
|
« Reply #41 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 14:57:09 » |
|
JT what's your favourite cheese? Do you enjoy Port and Stilton nights?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JTomlinson
|
|
« Reply #42 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 15:10:35 » |
|
Our main role is as a facilitator, yes, in the sense we are not looking to build a Council owned facility.
In a basic sense, the club/developer would be expected to replace the facilities with a like for like elsewhere, and the Council would then look to further enhance them with Council money. So this would have to be on Council owned land....are the Council expecting to sell this land or can it be swopped ie the developer buys the existing cricket and athletics for housing and then upgrades the facilities to present standard elsewhere? That I don't know - sorry. We are waiting for the options to be brought forward, will have to get back to you on that one. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JTomlinson
|
|
« Reply #43 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 15:11:00 » |
|
JT what's your favourite cheese? Do you enjoy Port and Stilton nights? Somerset Brie - and no, yuck. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Piemonte
|
|
« Reply #44 on: Wednesday, May 18, 2005, 15:17:44 » |
|
Our main role is as a facilitator, yes, in the sense we are not looking to build a Council owned facility.
In a basic sense, the club/developer would be expected to replace the facilities with a like for like elsewhere, and the Council would then look to further enhance them with Council money. It amazes me that there would be oposition from council members. The athletics track is pretty much just that: a track with a few sand pits. its a pretty poor facility for a town of Swindon's size. The Crictet gound could be more problematic as at least the cricket club has the pavillion. It seems that other members of the council (not JT) are being very short sighted in their views. Swindon does not have enough leisure facilities as it is, so the creation and/or updating of facilities ON COUNCIL OWNED LAND should be welcomed. It seems sadly like many have a small town attitude, and refuse to see the potential benefits that sucessful football club can offer the town. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
