Do none of you trust Lord Bracknell?

[The Great Cornholio]

Woah, woah, woah!

Am I reading that right? "Until he has received and considered the report of the second Inspector"? Is that Collyers report? He's had that for months! Collyer totally rejects Falmer so i'm really confused now.

The second Inspector is the one who will sit on the reconvened Inquiry. Does anyone know if this is standard practice or if it is Prescott's way of slapping Collyer in the face?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Sorry to disrupt the 'We love Lord B' party

Even I was getting bored.

1) How long will the re-opened Inquiry take?

A couple of weeks in the Autumn, I reckon.

2) Who will have to fund this ?

Everybody pays their own costs. Which means a significant outlay by the Albion for lawyers and consultants' time

3) Will this impact the playing budget?

Dick Knight has told the FFA team that Mark McGhee knows what his playing budget is for the coming season. There are no plans to cut it.

4) We cannot be completely sure that all the other sites will be dismissed (although I agree it's likely they will)

The other sites have already been dismissed by the City Council, on perfectly sound planning grounds. In the extemely unlikely event of one of them getting re-instated as a result of the Public Inquiry, then the City Council would be bound to take the view that they had no choice but to agree, because an appeal against refusal would be bound to succeed. Outcome - we get a stadium.

5) Even if all other sites are dismissed, does that necessarily mean that Falmer will be given the green light

It would be very perverse of Prescott to refuse. The fact that he has identified the site issue as the ONLY outstanding matter to be resolved, means that he has accepted the rest of the Club's case for developing a stadium in the AONB at Falmer. The only obstacle to a final YES is that planning law requires him to be fully satisfied that there is no suitable alternative available.

Not even Lord B is sure of this, he could only state his opinion (which is fair enough).

And that's how it stays, of course. What more can I say? That I'll pay for the stadium?

 

[Perry's Tracksuit Bottoms]

"no you can't have Falmer because Sheepcote seems viable on all counts" rather than simply "no".

 

[Ex Shelton Seagull]

Bloody hell! If he's read Collyers report and he STILL hasn't said NO then that must mean he wants us to succeed!

 

[Virgo's Haircut]

I trust Lord Bracknell with my life!

Except when I get a ride in the yellow peril

 

[Hiney]

To be serious for a moment, all the posters on this board have, from time to time, been guilty of the odd wind-up, pisstake, gratuitous slaughtering or general flaming of other posters.

This has never been the case with Lord B and any discussion on Falmer.

He always presents an articulate and sensible outlook on the situation and has never shied away from giving bad news as and when it happens.

Why, therefore, would he start now? If he says it is good news, then it's good news.

I think the problem is that most of us expected either a definate YES (cue wild celebratory scenes of unrestrained marvellousness), or a definate NO (cue tears of frustration and sadness and 'let's torch Prescott's house').

The reality is that we have a Nearly/Probably YES which just delays the full-on celebration.

We are nearly there guys and in 3/4 months time, we can really start to plan the opening fixture.

 

[Brovion]

The only think that worries me is that we've had two Civil Servant Inspectors with strong NIMBY tendencies submitting two reports. Both have said 'NO' to Falmer. What's to stop a third one from saying the same thing? Something like:

"Yes, Falmer has better transport links but Sheepcote is less environmentally damaging. It used to be a rubbish tip and as football is a rubbish support followed by rubbish people you all hould feel at home. I know it will cost 'a bit' more to devlop, but it my opinion it won't be a huge amount and anyway that's the club's problem. I recommend Sheepcote."

 

[larus]

Even I was getting bored.

A couple of weeks in the Autumn, I reckon.

Everybody pays their own costs. Which means a significant outlay by the Albion for lawyers and consultants' time

Dick Knight has told the FFA team that Mark McGhee knows what his playing budget is for the coming season. There are no plans to cut it.

The other sites have already been dismissed by the City Council, on perfectly sound planning grounds. In the extemely unlikely event of one of them getting re-instated as a result of the Public Inquiry, then the City Council would be bound to take the view that they had no choice but to agree, because an appeal against refusal would be bound to succeed. Outcome - we get a stadium.

It would be very perverse of Prescott to refuse. The fact that he has identified the site issue as the ONLY outstanding matter to be resolved, means that he has accepted the rest of the Club's case for developing a stadium in the AONB at Falmer. The only obstacle to a final YES is that planning law requires him to be fully satisfied that there is no suitable alternative available.


And that's how it stays, of course. What more can I say? That I'll pay for the stadium?

I've always said that LB chap was a good egg.

 

[Yorkie]

The only think that worries me is that we've had two Civil Servant Inspectors with strong NIMBY tendencies submitting two reports. Both have said 'NO' to Falmer. What's to stop a third one from saying the same thing? Something like:

"Yes, Falmer has better transport links but Sheepcote is less environmentally damaging. It used to be a rubbish tip and as football is a rubbish support followed by rubbish people you all hould feel at home. I know it will cost 'a bit' more to devlop, but it my opinion it won't be a huge amount and anyway that's the club's problem. I recommend Sheepcote."

Apart from the unexploded wartime munitions that are there of course

 

[NMH]

quoteriginally posted by NMH
Some people have trouble trusting anyone with a beard, so it's quite understandable that there will be some who look sideways at Lord Bracknell

don't you have a beard?

I shaved it off pronto, when people in Los Angeles, from all over the world, kept saying "I wouldn't trust you an inch, you look like that shifty bearded Lord Bracknell person"

 

[Stuart Munday]

Sorry for being negative but what happens if Waterhall for instance is deemed to be a better prospect (which it isnt) do we then start again

 

[Yorkie]

I trust Lord Bracknell with my life!

Except when I get a ride in the yellow peril

You as well?

Yes I trust Lord B

 

[Halftime Oranges]

Seagulls yes falmer we'll be there soon we should be happy

 

[Scoffers]

Even I was getting bored.

A couple of weeks in the Autumn, I reckon.

Everybody pays their own costs. Which means a significant outlay by the Albion for lawyers and consultants' time

Dick Knight has told the FFA team that Mark McGhee knows what his playing budget is for the coming season. There are no plans to cut it.

The other sites have already been dismissed by the City Council, on perfectly sound planning grounds. In the extemely unlikely event of one of them getting re-instated as a result of the Public Inquiry, then the City Council would be bound to take the view that they had no choice but to agree, because an appeal against refusal would be bound to succeed. Outcome - we get a stadium.

It would be very perverse of Prescott to refuse. The fact that he has identified the site issue as the ONLY outstanding matter to be resolved, means that he has accepted the rest of the Club's case for developing a stadium in the AONB at Falmer. The only obstacle to a final YES is that planning law requires him to be fully satisfied that there is no suitable alternative available.


And that's how it stays, of course. What more can I say? That I'll pay for the stadium?

Thanks for responding Lord B

I guess my basic area of concern is that I don't trust politicians, local or otherwise (sad I know). The saying that 'a week in politics is a long time' comes to mind. The Stadium is dear to my heart as it is for most supporters, but I have this nagging feeling that Prescott could forclose or do something "perverse" as you mentioned. Who knows what goes on in the corridors of power that could yet change the course of events?

 

[Dover]

Trust Lord Bracknell. Bloody right I do! Man of reason and class.


He and Roz have made me change my point of view a couple of time, with a few other posters, who know who they are.