somerset
New member
If todays papers are to be believed, 'Lionel' is planning for an early election, probably February 05,... what say you on how this may affect the stadium decision?.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Early Election........... trouble for Falmer Project.
- Thread starter somerset
- Start date
It could be very bad news IMO. If labour do not retain all their seats in Brighton, JP now has no political reason to give us the ground (as a rejection prior to an election would be suicidal for those MPs). On the other hand if the Lab MPs all get back he may decide to give it to us for being so nice and voting in all his friends again. Or just say no safe in the knowledge that we can't get hias guys out for 5 years. Of course were Norman Baker to lose his seat that could change a lot, and is possible as no BHAFC supporter in Lewes constituency will vote for him.
On the whole I do not think it would be good news though.
On the whole I do not think it would be good news though.
Kent Seagull
Well-known member
Perhaps Prescott will get his arse in gear and give us Falmer about a week before the election?
If he did it would certainly make a difference to my vote (not that my vote counts for much in Brighton!).
Surely the planning application would be viewed purely on planning issues rather than politics, therefore whoever is in power must let us have it!
If he did it would certainly make a difference to my vote (not that my vote counts for much in Brighton!).
Surely the planning application would be viewed purely on planning issues rather than politics, therefore whoever is in power must let us have it!
You would think it would be decided on planning issues - but in that case why has he not turned it down after the two reports?
Don't get me wrong I think Falmer is the best site by a long long way, but from the view of Prescott is advisers have said it is not and so if it were strictly a planning decision it should surely have been turned down.
This is why I fear the election coming early could be very bad news. JP won't dare to say no before the election as that will result in all the Labour MPs in the area losing their seats. But if the election has already taken place, his decision will have no immediate political ramifications as there will not be another election for five years.
On the other hand he may say yes just before which is great and ensures all the Lab MPs return. But with an election in feb this is unlikely as the enquiry doesn't reopen until then due to Lewes DC's disgraceful delaying tactics.
Don't get me wrong I think Falmer is the best site by a long long way, but from the view of Prescott is advisers have said it is not and so if it were strictly a planning decision it should surely have been turned down.
This is why I fear the election coming early could be very bad news. JP won't dare to say no before the election as that will result in all the Labour MPs in the area losing their seats. But if the election has already taken place, his decision will have no immediate political ramifications as there will not be another election for five years.
On the other hand he may say yes just before which is great and ensures all the Lab MPs return. But with an election in feb this is unlikely as the enquiry doesn't reopen until then due to Lewes DC's disgraceful delaying tactics.
¡Cereal Killer!
Whale Oil Beef Hooked
Kent Seagull said:
I heard he is not allowed to make any desicions on this a month before the general elections
The Clown of Pevensey Bay
Well-known member
Bonkersly, it might speed the Falmer decision up. Think about it: a concluded inquiry at around the same time as an early Feb election, then a decision-making process that, provided John Prescott stays in the ODPM (and given that Tony created that department just for him, he's not going to move him out of it unless Labour are voted out), could practically conclude in April.
Tony would only call a Feb election if he was very sure of winning. Otherwise he'll probably leave it until May.
Tony would only call a Feb election if he was very sure of winning. Otherwise he'll probably leave it until May.
BensGrandad
New member
Unless I have misheard it isnt the speculation that it will be called in Feruary but held early May, which will give time for a decision for us. Not much chance of Norman Baker not being re-elected more chance of Ivor Caplin being ousted.
Last edited:
John Boy
Paul McShane
Says no here- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3968827.stm
Wardy
NSC's Benefits Guru
From what I have heard it is all speculation. It is almost unheard of for a Prime Minister to chose to have an election in February. The last one to do it was Edward Heath I belive. He regreted it and I am sure that his advisors will tell him its a no no. May is possible but June is more likely since it will then coinside with the local and Euro elections.
John Boy
Paul McShane
Wardywonderland said:
The last Febuary general election was in 1974, and Edward Heath lost
The Large One
Who's Next?
I don't think that a February election will make a blind bit of difference. Even if it was a political decision, Prescott, would still want to 'protect' Brighton & Hove City Council's Labour Party (although not the majority, still the largest party). But this is not an issue - let alone the central issue.
The two reports against Falmer went flatly against certain aspects of Government policy - which is one of the reason why Prescott rejected the rejection.
Personalliy, I am not worried.
The two reports against Falmer went flatly against certain aspects of Government policy - which is one of the reason why Prescott rejected the rejection.
Personalliy, I am not worried.
Last edited:
BensGrandad
New member
What about the unthinkable and Tories winning!!!
The Large One
Who's Next?
Fat chance.
BensGrandad
New member
Remember the Boy Scouts motto ' Be prepared' they hate us more than Norman Baker does.
Wardy
NSC's Benefits Guru
The big question is how will people vote in Brighton should the election come before a decision?
The Large One
Who's Next?
BensGrandad said:
As unpopular on certain issues as Blair is, Labour will not lose 180 seats - and certainly not to an infighting bunch of nutters such as the Tory Party. Losing (or gaining) 180 seats has (a) never come remotely close to happening before, and (b) is the stuff of collapsed governments, economy in chaos, rampant disorder and rioting on the streets.
The LibDems may or may not make gains - but they would be mainly at the Tories' expense.
David Lepper will probably win his seat - he has a fairly comfortable majority for the Tories to overturn. Des Turner and Ivor Caplin are different matters. They are considered 'marginal' - Tory target with majorities of just over 3,000.
People voting in Brighton Kemp Town and Hove (or Hove & Portslade as Caplin is trying to persuade the powers to change its name to) constituencies may not view Falmer as the primary concern when choosing who to vote for. I do suspect, however, that Labour may make an extra effort in Hove, mainly because Caplin is a government minister.
I reckon Labour will win with a majority of 60-70 seats, largely maintaining the status quo in terms of government ministers - including Prescott.
not the best of news but never mind we will still get the ground
As someone said above, Blair will go for election when he thinks he is most likely of winning. I am worried as well because unless it is a politically sensitive decision which can benefit Labour, which Falmer isn't, it could possibly be left on the back burner. If an Election is held in February, I would have serious concerns that this could happen.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
I'm with the Large One on this. It won't make any difference.
We can easily exaggerate the extent to which this issue plays in the mind of the politicians.
Ivor Caplin is a defence minister, He supports Falmer. If you were to ask Prescott whether there was a particular issue that makes a difference to Ivor's re-electability, I'm pretty certain he would answer "Iraq".
Des Turner and David Lepper are also pro-Falmer. But, in Labour terms, they are also fairly off-message. Blair and Prescott know that Labour will lose seats at the next election. They are probably not too bothered about whether some of the lost seats are in Brighton.
What matters about Brighton to New Labour is the performance of the City Council. The government likes to see its pet projects piloted by a few co-operative councils. Brighton & Hove are one of them. They deliver a good transport policy that the government approves of. They get involved in Social Exclusion initiatives. They are signed up to all the right anti-social behaviour projects.
These things matter to Prescott. When his planning inspectors deliver him reports that contribute nothing to the New Labour vision, he judges them against the criteria that really matter to him. Who am I rewarding by my decision? Who will be upset by it?
I think that's what's happening with our application. Prescott WANTS to reward one of his favourite councils. But (as we said at the time the Inquiry was re-opened), he knows that he has to avoid this being challenged in the Courts. So the Inquiry drags on. It will take however long it takes, but the answer will still be favourable.
The timing of the general election is nothing to do with any of this. It was Norman Baker who dreamt up that story. Let's not fall for it. Baker is wrong about the planning issues that are involved. He's wrong about Prescott's thinking as well.
Keep the faith!
We can easily exaggerate the extent to which this issue plays in the mind of the politicians.
Ivor Caplin is a defence minister, He supports Falmer. If you were to ask Prescott whether there was a particular issue that makes a difference to Ivor's re-electability, I'm pretty certain he would answer "Iraq".
Des Turner and David Lepper are also pro-Falmer. But, in Labour terms, they are also fairly off-message. Blair and Prescott know that Labour will lose seats at the next election. They are probably not too bothered about whether some of the lost seats are in Brighton.
What matters about Brighton to New Labour is the performance of the City Council. The government likes to see its pet projects piloted by a few co-operative councils. Brighton & Hove are one of them. They deliver a good transport policy that the government approves of. They get involved in Social Exclusion initiatives. They are signed up to all the right anti-social behaviour projects.
These things matter to Prescott. When his planning inspectors deliver him reports that contribute nothing to the New Labour vision, he judges them against the criteria that really matter to him. Who am I rewarding by my decision? Who will be upset by it?
I think that's what's happening with our application. Prescott WANTS to reward one of his favourite councils. But (as we said at the time the Inquiry was re-opened), he knows that he has to avoid this being challenged in the Courts. So the Inquiry drags on. It will take however long it takes, but the answer will still be favourable.
The timing of the general election is nothing to do with any of this. It was Norman Baker who dreamt up that story. Let's not fall for it. Baker is wrong about the planning issues that are involved. He's wrong about Prescott's thinking as well.
Keep the faith!