-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - Licence To Stand
- Thread starter Jordinho
- Start date
Re: Northumberland Development Project
It isn't helpful.
But it won't be harmful either.
For starters, it's Lammy's tweet. Not Spurs' or Haringey's.
Secondly, the DCLG can't afford to make this decision on the basis of anything but the soundest legal consideration. Nor will they wish to delay the decision for any longer than they have to.
It isn't helpful.
But it won't be harmful either.
For starters, it's Lammy's tweet. Not Spurs' or Haringey's.
Secondly, the DCLG can't afford to make this decision on the basis of anything but the soundest legal consideration. Nor will they wish to delay the decision for any longer than they have to.
Re: Northumberland Development Project
As I said, asking "Is @Eric Pickles a Gooner?" might not be harmful. But it won't be helpful either. Why would it be?
As I said, asking "Is @Eric Pickles a Gooner?" might not be harmful. But it won't be helpful either. Why would it be?
jts1882
Dean Richards
Re: Northumberland Development Project
It does also give the impression that he is not entirely serious. Is he more interested in finding out about a project of importance to his constituency or indulging in football banter? I doubt it would make any different and I sincerely hope no minister of any party would be so petty.
Besides, Pickles doesn't seem the sporting type. I can't even see him supporting Saudi Sportswashing Machine.
It does also give the impression that he is not entirely serious. Is he more interested in finding out about a project of importance to his constituency or indulging in football banter? I doubt it would make any different and I sincerely hope no minister of any party would be so petty.
Besides, Pickles doesn't seem the sporting type. I can't even see him supporting Saudi Sportswashing Machine.
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Never been a fan of Lammy or Labour but I back him here. Been dragging on far to long and even if it is passed a reason must be given for the delay when the final decision is made.
Never been a fan of Lammy or Labour but I back him here. Been dragging on far to long and even if it is passed a reason must be given for the delay when the final decision is made.
Superhudd
Simon Davies
Re: Northumberland Development Project
this.. I want to know too... and they better not say flooding was a priority either
this.. I want to know too... and they better not say flooding was a priority either
Last edited:
nelto
Tim Sherwood
Re: Northumberland Development Project
I don't know if these things do any good and this is probably old news, but there is an e-petition up, just in case some folk haven't seen it:
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/65965
Compulsary purchase order for Tottenham Hotspur FC
Responsible department: Department for Communities and Local Government
That Mr Pickles, and his department, complete the inquiry into the compulsory purchase order of land held by Archway Sheet Metal Works as this has already been with this department since April 2013
I don't know if these things do any good and this is probably old news, but there is an e-petition up, just in case some folk haven't seen it:
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/65965
Compulsary purchase order for Tottenham Hotspur FC
Responsible department: Department for Communities and Local Government
That Mr Pickles, and his department, complete the inquiry into the compulsory purchase order of land held by Archway Sheet Metal Works as this has already been with this department since April 2013
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Who wrote that nonsense?
Of course they'll complete it. Set a ****ing time period in which you want it done.
Who wrote that nonsense?
Of course they'll complete it. Set a ****ing time period in which you want it done.
K.D.D.D.D.Soc
Paul Walsh
Re: Northumberland Development Project
No!! I always had you down as Socialist Workers member.
No!! I always had you down as Socialist Workers member.
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
Re: Northumberland Development Project
:lol:
http://www.haringeyindependent.co.uk/news/11310358._/?
So the speaker of the house is a cnut then, enough said. Maybe Lammy is right about all this.
:lol:
http://www.haringeyindependent.co.uk/news/11310358._/?
So the speaker of the house is a cnut then, enough said. Maybe Lammy is right about all this.
Superhudd
Simon Davies
Re: Northumberland Development Project
http://www.itv.com/news/london/2014...m-because-of-eric-pickles-support-of-arsenal/
http://www.itv.com/news/london/2014...m-because-of-eric-pickles-support-of-arsenal/
Spur of the moment
Frederic Kanoute
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Call me a pessimist but it's sounding ominously like Pickles wants to find a way to refuse the CPO but he has to make certain the reasons he invents can somehow be made to stand up to legal challenge.
Call me a pessimist but it's sounding ominously like Pickles wants to find a way to refuse the CPO but he has to make certain the reasons he invents can somehow be made to stand up to legal challenge.
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Quite the opposite seems more likely to me.
Because of the implications for wider regeneration in Tottenham, I'm sure that Pickles would prefer to rule in favour of Haringey / Spurs. But if he does so without the legal case having been soundly established, then he risks his decision being challenged and overturned. And if that were to happen, the delay to any regeneration would be far greater than if the job had been done properly in the first instance.
Quite the opposite seems more likely to me.
Because of the implications for wider regeneration in Tottenham, I'm sure that Pickles would prefer to rule in favour of Haringey / Spurs. But if he does so without the legal case having been soundly established, then he risks his decision being challenged and overturned. And if that were to happen, the delay to any regeneration would be far greater than if the job had been done properly in the first instance.
Spur of the moment
Frederic Kanoute
Re: Northumberland Development Project
I so hope you are utterly, utterly right and I am utterly, utterly wrong!
Finney Is Back
Luka Modric
Re: Northumberland Development Project
I'm with Jimmy here....
"I am keen to make a decision as soon as possible but I know you will want that decision to be a decision that holds up in court and therefore it is important to make sure it's robust."
Sounds like the decision that Lammy wants.
I'm with Jimmy here....
"I am keen to make a decision as soon as possible but I know you will want that decision to be a decision that holds up in court and therefore it is important to make sure it's robust."
Sounds like the decision that Lammy wants.
Spur of the moment
Frederic Kanoute
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Good spot. Even so he could just be playing with words. :-#
Good spot. Even so he could just be playing with words. :-#
Denmark Spur
Edgar Davids
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Tottenham could play home games at Ipswich or Brighton while new stadium is being built - as Spurs rule out White Hart Lane stay
Published: 02 July 2014
Tottenham are reluctantly reaching the conclusion they will be unable to play at White Hart Lane during the final season before their planned move to a new ground.
Spurs hope to be in their new £400million, 56,000-seat stadium in time for the start of the 2017-18 campaign and their first choice had been to continue at White Hart Lane during the previous season, even against a backdrop of heavy building work on the new arena.
But Standard Sport understands the club’s hierarchy are starting to believe such a project might be too difficult to realise. As a consequence, Spurs are looking at alternative venues for ‘home’ matches during the 2016-17 season.
Standard Sport revealed in April that Wembley, as well as the Olympic Stadium and stadiummk, the home of Milton Keynes Dons, were under consideration. It is now thought Ipswich’s Portman Road ground and The Amex, home of Brighton, are on the list of possibilities although these plans are at an early stage.
Were Tottenham to play home fixtures at Wembley, it is likely the top tier of the 90,000-seat national stadium would not be used, reducing the capacity closer to 50,000. That is thought to be Spurs’ first choice, although the high cost of playing at Wembley could force Spurs into their Plan B, involving playing ‘home’ games at Wembley and some of the other grounds mentioned earlier.
Season-ticket holders who would be reluctant to travel to ‘home’ games could be granted a ‘sabbatical’, which would release them from financial obligations during the season on the road. Such discussions have barely left the ground, however, because there are still plenty of hurdles to clear.
The necessary funds to finance the new stadium are said to be in place but Spurs are growing frustrated at the length of time it is taking to learn whether they will be granted a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) by Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.
Spurs have been waiting 15 months for a decision they thought would take three months. A CPO would enable them to resolve a dispute with Archway Sheet Metal, a family-run business close to White Hart Lane, and would give the club control of the land they need.
Some sources claim Archway is demanding £25million to be relocated, although nobody at the company would confirm this when contacted by Standard Sport.
Even if Spurs were granted the CPO, it is possible Archway could appeal against the decision, which would make it more unlikely that the club would be in their new ground at the start of the 2017-18 campaign. There has been hostility towards Archway on social media from sections of the Spurs support.
Peter Josif, the co-owner of Archway, said: “We are doing what we feel is right and we feel we have a legal case. We want Tottenham to prosper as well but this is not about a company just sitting back and being an obstacle.”
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/tot...rs-rule-out-white-hart-lane-stay-9578497.html
Tottenham could play home games at Ipswich or Brighton while new stadium is being built - as Spurs rule out White Hart Lane stay
Published: 02 July 2014
Tottenham are reluctantly reaching the conclusion they will be unable to play at White Hart Lane during the final season before their planned move to a new ground.
Spurs hope to be in their new £400million, 56,000-seat stadium in time for the start of the 2017-18 campaign and their first choice had been to continue at White Hart Lane during the previous season, even against a backdrop of heavy building work on the new arena.
But Standard Sport understands the club’s hierarchy are starting to believe such a project might be too difficult to realise. As a consequence, Spurs are looking at alternative venues for ‘home’ matches during the 2016-17 season.
Standard Sport revealed in April that Wembley, as well as the Olympic Stadium and stadiummk, the home of Milton Keynes Dons, were under consideration. It is now thought Ipswich’s Portman Road ground and The Amex, home of Brighton, are on the list of possibilities although these plans are at an early stage.
Were Tottenham to play home fixtures at Wembley, it is likely the top tier of the 90,000-seat national stadium would not be used, reducing the capacity closer to 50,000. That is thought to be Spurs’ first choice, although the high cost of playing at Wembley could force Spurs into their Plan B, involving playing ‘home’ games at Wembley and some of the other grounds mentioned earlier.
Season-ticket holders who would be reluctant to travel to ‘home’ games could be granted a ‘sabbatical’, which would release them from financial obligations during the season on the road. Such discussions have barely left the ground, however, because there are still plenty of hurdles to clear.
The necessary funds to finance the new stadium are said to be in place but Spurs are growing frustrated at the length of time it is taking to learn whether they will be granted a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) by Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.
Spurs have been waiting 15 months for a decision they thought would take three months. A CPO would enable them to resolve a dispute with Archway Sheet Metal, a family-run business close to White Hart Lane, and would give the club control of the land they need.
Some sources claim Archway is demanding £25million to be relocated, although nobody at the company would confirm this when contacted by Standard Sport.
Even if Spurs were granted the CPO, it is possible Archway could appeal against the decision, which would make it more unlikely that the club would be in their new ground at the start of the 2017-18 campaign. There has been hostility towards Archway on social media from sections of the Spurs support.
Peter Josif, the co-owner of Archway, said: “We are doing what we feel is right and we feel we have a legal case. We want Tottenham to prosper as well but this is not about a company just sitting back and being an obstacle.”
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/tot...rs-rule-out-white-hart-lane-stay-9578497.html