Prescott will have had report for two months..............

[London Irish]

...tomorrow. The longer this drags on, the more optimistic I get. If Prescott was rubber-stamping a refusal, commonsense would suggest we would have had it by now. If there is a lot of work being put in by the ODPM, it seems to suggest that he might indeed be overturning the almost-certainly negative inspectors' report and his department are having to spend time virtually writing a new one. Who knows, but in one way I hope this drags on and on and on..........

 

[Bobby's Gull]

It's getting to a point, where I can't wait. The longer it goes on the more pessimistic I get. They won't want trouble if it is a no - so therefore they'll tell us after the season finishes.

If only I had a crystal ball...

 

[Falmer Dream]

...tomorrow. The longer this drags on, the more optimistic I get. If Prescott was rubber-stamping a refusal, commonsense would suggest we would have had it by now. If there is a lot of work being put in by the ODPM, it seems to suggest that he might indeed be overturning the almost-certainly negative inspectors' report and his department are having to spend time virtually writing a new one. Who knows, but in one way I hope this drags on and on and on..........

I'm pretty sure you are correct. The longer it goes on, the more confident I am of a Yes. Though if he would like to get a move on and give us a Yes now, it would save a lot of people a lot of worry.

 

[albiongirl]

Two months!! It seems like a life time already.

 

[El Presidente]

Two months is bad, two months is good? Sounds like a poll is needed to solve this!

 

[berkshire seagull]

Yeah but that report only went in about 3 week ago although i didn't even know that had to happen.

We all know nothing in this country is ever done at a good speed.

 

[Sea]

i remember back in the day they said it would be announced before christmas and this is months after that! it seems like its been going on for ages now, will be a relief when its all over one way or another!

 

[berkshire seagull]

Yeah and i remember the day we was supposed to be in our new ground about now.

 

[fosters headband]

Am I right in thinking the Labour party conference is to be held in Brighton this year.
My god wont they take some stick down here if he does turn it down.
We could start booking all the hotel rooms in the town now lol

 

[berkshire seagull]

You can start with the grand hotel then

 

[perth seagull]

I'm getting sick of waiting, is there any time limit or can he take as long as he wants before he makes the decision?

 

[The Large One]

Talking to a friend yesterday. One of his other friends works for the Planning Inspectorate. Got a couple of small insights.

You have to go on a two-year training course to become an inspector. Once you have qualified, you get the pick of which inquiries you chair. In this case, both Hoile and Collyer would have volunteered/chosen to do these inquiries.

Now I don't think I was getting all of what my friend was saying - he was talking in very broad terms. However, what he did say was if the ODPM takes a look at Hoile's report, and manages to address all of Hoile's concerns - sorry, lies - there would not be a reason for turning it down. What really got me was the subtle innuendo that the friend in the Planning Inspectorate had seen Collyer's report, and that it was positive for the stadium. But I could have been wrong.

The question which Norman Baker raised in the House of Commons last week, and the reply which was given by Keith Hill on behalf of the ODPM stated that the ODPM will not only take into consideration the report of the Stadium Inquiry, but will take into consideration ALL material evidence. And I believe that means the online petition, the flowers of support etc, the letters and emails etc.

Of course, this the may well mean nothing as Prescott does have the right to ignore the findings.

My guess is - and I have NO evidence to back this up - is that Collyer's and Hoile's reports are contradictory, and the ODPM is sifting through the information. Of course, civil servants will work in their time at their own pace, without too much of a care for the consequences.

 

[Yorkie]

The question which Norman Baker raised in the House of Commons last week, and the reply which was given by Keith Hill on behalf of the ODPM stated that the ODPM will not only take into consideration the report of the Stadium Inquiry, but will take into consideration ALL material evidence. And I believe that means the online petition, the flowers of support etc, the letters and emails etc.

My guess is - and I have NO evidence to back this up - is that Collyer's and Hoile's reports are contradictory, and the ODPM is sifting through the information.

The letter sent from my MP from Keith Hill also states exactly the same thing.

My guess is exactly the same as yours.

 

[Kent Seagull]

Why the rush? I can remember talk in the late 70's about moving to Waterhall within three years!

A few weeks won't make much difference after all this time.

 

[Beach Hut]

The longer the better I reckon - no a flat refusal.

In the meantime gives us all a great cause to follow (apart from the obvious BHAFC)

 

[The Large One]

Yeah, but it's not as though we've WANTED to go through this torment.

 

[portslade seagull]

mind you the longer it drags out the nearer to
retirement i come and hopefully the cheaper the ticket gets.

 

[chips and gravy]

I think it's still in the bottom of his in tray. We can't draw any conclusions over the length of time it is taking in my opinion

 

[perseus]

Large One: didn't you ask him how long it is expected to take?

From what I have been able to find out it is going to take a year, so February 2005 was always more likely than February 2004.

I think we wopuld be lucky if the result is announced by the time of Labour Party Conference on 26 September 2004. And the Labour Party might be unlucky of it isn't.

Falmer Sweep
http://www.northstandchat.biz/showt...15313&perpage=40&highlight=sweep&pagenumber=3