Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Want to vote Lib Dem but won't



simmo

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2008
2,787
But the ORIGINAL appliocation for Falmer had the stadium right across the LDC ?B and H border. Then the plans were changed.


If Falmer is so abhorant as LDC would have had you believed then why were Brighton and Hove council so for it?

Also when you see Jack Straw's (and others) photos and go past it, it makes you see how fcuking wrong and out of touch LDC are!:falmer:
 




burrish-gull

Active member
Mar 24, 2009
813
I agree, it probably was local party politics which meant they didn't support it - the Lewes LibDems threatened to have the B&H LibDems expelled from the party if they supported Falmer. But I don't recall Brighton & Hove LibDems actively opposing it either - hence my opinion that they were (quite pathetically) 'neutral'.

I refer you to post no. 50 on this thread, and although a limp force within the city (two councillors out of 54), they could have done and said more.

In all this, I'm not even considering for a second voting LibDem. However, some on here are casting one council's appalling behaviour as a template for how all LibDem councillors and MPs behave. I don't see how they can do that.

Don't forget that Albions support is much wider than just B and H and Lewes, I live up here on the Kent/Sussex border in Burwash and I know of plenty of not only Brighton fans but football fans in general here who hate them for what they did. The Lib Dem policy on Falmer had wider implications for Sussex as a whole and the short sightedness was mind-blowing. I've lost count of the number of people who support other clubs up here who are actively going to watch the Albion at Falmer when it opens.
 


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
Don't forget that Albions support is much wider than just B and H and Lewes, I live up here on the Kent/Sussex border in Burwash and I know of plenty of not only Brighton fans but football fans in general here who hate them for what they did. The Lib Dem policy on Falmer had wider implications for Sussex as whole lets not forget.

The LibDem policy nationally, or the LibDem policy locally?

Nationally, I don't know that they had one. Locally - well, anyone got a red hot poker...?
 




burrish-gull

Active member
Mar 24, 2009
813
The LibDem policy nationally, or the LibDem policy locally?

Nationally, I don't know that they had one. Locally - well, anyone got a red hot poker...?

Locally obviously but I think you get my point, at the end of the day they've lost a vote they would of got over something that was very personal to me but also incredibly important on a local level to alot of people. I tend to only vote on a local level anyway as nationally all these parties are pretty much the same.
 




simmo

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2008
2,787
But you're using that as a stick to beat the national LibDem party with.

And, as you have already been told, to say Norman Baker was a mouthpiece for the LibDem-led council is a complete joke.

Why not the Lib Dems have never been in power nationally I can only see how they operate locally and in my opinion, how they operated over Falmer speaks volumes.

Baker and LDC (De Vecchi) etc may not even like each other, but concerning Falmer they were as one (to me and I am sure to nearly all of us) let us just say I think we can assume that they both opposed it vehemently
 


Danny-Boy

Banned
Apr 21, 2009
5,579
The Coast
Don't forget that Albions support is much wider than just B and H and Lewes, I live up here on the Kent/Sussex border in Burwash and I know of plenty of not only Brighton fans but football fans in general here who hate them for what they did. The Lib Dem policy on Falmer had wider implications for Sussex as a whole and the short sightedness was mind-blowing. I've lost count of the number of people who support other clubs up here who are actively going to watch the Albion at Falmer when it opens.

I agree that a lot of money was ultimately wasted in opposing what in my view was always, given Labour's need to hold on to its talismanic seats in Brighton - both Lepper and Turner told the "Argus" that they would lose the next election if the Stadium wasn't given the go-ahead - a done deal, despite Prescott's bungling.

However there was and is a lot of controversy surrounding ANY major application to build in a designated National Park area. The point is until 2007 the field at Falmer was within the designated National Park, hence the LDs, Greens, Tories, and a lot of widlife and nature conservation groups opposed it.

Presumably if it had been an airport so would Brighton. Probably if one was proposed right next to Burwash so would you.

And by the way both Lepper and Turner since then decided not to defend their seats in Brighton...:rolleyes:
 


pb21

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2010
6,689
If any of you are going to base your decision of who to vote for based on the one highly insignificant matter in the grand scheme of things, i.e. Falmer stadium, then you seriously need to get out more and get some perspective! Have you not heard of the Economy (not just that which exists in Brighton), Climate Change, Wars, Education, Health...............

Admittedly this is a message board about BHFC so there is going to be so pretty dogmatic extreme view points, but seriously!

:)
 




Danny-Boy

Banned
Apr 21, 2009
5,579
The Coast
Why not the Lib Dems have never been in power nationally I can only see how they operate locally and in my opinion, how they operated over Falmer speaks volumes.

Baker and LDC (De Vecchi) etc may not even like each other, but concerning Falmer they were as one (to me and I am sure to nearly all of us) let us just say I think we can assume that they both opposed it vehemently

Yes but I think for different reasons. De Vecchi's was more personal IMHO.
 


And, as you have already been told, to say Norman Baker was a mouthpiece for the LibDem-led council is a complete joke.
Baker's BIG mistake, right from the start, was to allow himself to be a mouthpiece for Falmer Parish Council.

By the time Lewes District Council sat up and noticed the fact that there was a stadium planned just across the border, the die had been cast.

Falmer PC opposed it. Baker supported them. Therefore Lewes Lib Dems decided to support them. Therefore Baker was forced to continue supporting Falmer Parish Council.

His instinct is always to play the "I support a local parish council" card. It's what has built him his reputation as "a good constituency MP". On this occasion, he would have been better advised to see the bigger picture and realise just how many stadium supporters there were who live in his constituency who weren't impressed by his support for a tiny bunch of NIMBYs.
 


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
Why not the Lib Dems have never been in power nationally I can only see how they operate locally and in my opinion, how they operated over Falmer speaks volumes.

Baker and LDC (De Vecchi) etc may not even like each other, but concerning Falmer they were as one (to me and I am sure to nearly all of us) let us just say I think we can assume that they both opposed it vehemently

Does that mean you would give the same consideration to say, the Tories on Westminster City Council during the 1980s, or Labour in Doncaster?
 






simmo

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2008
2,787
If any of you are going to base your decision of who to vote for based on the one highly insignificant matter in the grand scheme of things, i.e. Falmer stadium, then you seriously need to get out more and get some perspective! Have you not heard of the Economy (not just that which exists in Brighton), Climate Change, Wars, Education, Health...............

Admittedly this is a message board about BHFC so there is going to be so pretty dogmatic extreme view points, but seriously!

:)

When you realise that nothing ever changes whichever party you vote for and that all politicians are in it for their own gain, you will realise that matters such as a few Liberal Democratic Councillers for petty reasons, stopping me and thousands of other poeple watching my football club in a decent stadium is important.
 


Danny-Boy

Banned
Apr 21, 2009
5,579
The Coast
Baker's BIG mistake, right from the start, was to allow himself to be a mouthpiece for Falmer Parish Council.

By the time Lewes District Council sat up and noticed the fact that there was a stadium planned just across the border, the die had been cast.

Falmer PC opposed it. Baker supported them. Therefore Lewes Lib Dems decided to support them. Therefore Baker was forced to continue supporting Falmer Parish Council.

His instinct is always to play the "I support a local parish council" card. It's what has built him his reputation as "a good constituency MP". On this occasion, he would have been better advised to see the bigger picture and realise just how many stadium supporters there were who live in his constituency and weren't impressed by his support for a tiny bunch of NIMBYs.

But as I said Lord B the ORIGINAL plan was to build the stadium ACROSS the border, i.e. partly on LDC land. Then realising that LDC would never give planning permission for the stadium but couldn't oppose the carpark, they shifterd the site west.
 




simmo

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2008
2,787
Does that mean you would give the same consideration to say, the Tories on Westminster City Council during the 1980s, or Labour in Doncaster?

What is your point? I have already said if it was a Labour or Conservative council that had done what LDC did I would never vote for either of them again.
 


But as I said Lord B the ORIGINAL plan was to build the stadium ACROSS the border, i.e. partly on LDC land. Then realising that LDC would never give planning permission for the stadium but couldn't oppose the carpark, they shifterd the site west.
Not so.

The original planning applications submitted to the City Council were for TWO sites - Village Way North and Village Way South. Even the City Council planners were lukewarm about Village Way South. It was the discussion with the City Council about the issues that led to the plans being modified and what we have now - a stadium plan that proved to be capable of getting all the way through the planning process.

LDC's opposition was only a minor factor. The Club was advised - correctly - that this would eventually be overcome. The problem was that NOBODY predicted how stubborn and anti-democratic LDC would turn out to be.
 


pb21

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2010
6,689
When you realise that nothing ever changes whichever party you vote for and that all politicians are in it for their own gain, you will realise that matters such as a few Liberal Democratic Councillers for petty reasons, stopping me and thousands of other poeple watching my football club in a decent stadium is important.

I see you point and you’re probably true to a certain extent regarding things remaining the same. We will continue to live in a ‘democratically’ run capitalist based society and all that it entails, both positive and negative. However I do believe that the main ideological differences between the parties, however minimal these days, will create differences in the long run. It’s just not easy to see and there is nothing to compare it too if it were different.

So yeah if you really believe that it doesn’t matter on who wins cause nothing changes, except for local decisions regarding football stadiums, then vote based on that reason. At least you seem to have given it some thought. I just get the impression most haven’t.
 


The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
What is your point? I have already said if it was a Labour or Conservative council that had done what LDC did I would never vote for either of them again.

I'm saying that the Conservatives indulged in some pretty appalling gerry-mandering in Westminster in order to win votes. Big scandal at the time.

Labour in Doncaster effectively bankrupted the council through appalling corruption and mis-management.

My point is, all parties can and do very occasionally play fast and loose with their powerbase.
 




simmo

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2008
2,787
I see you point and you’re probably true to a certain extent regarding things remaining the same. We will continue to live in a ‘democratically’ run capitalist based society and all that it entails, both positive and negative. However I do believe that the main ideological differences between the parties, however minimal these days, will create differences in the long run. It’s just not easy to see and there is nothing to compare it too if it were different.

So yeah if you really believe that it doesn’t matter on who wins cause nothing changes, except for local decisions regarding football stadiums, then vote based on that reason. At least you seem to have given it some thought. I just get the impression most haven’t.

It is not the fact that they opposed the stadium I am sure some Lab and Cons did too, the stadium itself is not the truly big issue because after all we won in the end. It was how LDC acted that matters (the use of council tax money, the endless appeals, the locking of the doors, the legal threats over the photograph etc.)
 


simmo

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2008
2,787
I'm saying that the Conservatives indulged in some pretty appalling gerry-mandering in Westminster in order to win votes. Big scandal at the time.

Labour in Doncaster effectively bankrupted the council through appalling corruption and mis-management.

My point is, all parties can and do very occasionally play fast and loose with their powerbase.

I know all political parties probably all around the world have things like this going on, it is naive to think they don't. If I lived in Doncaster I would probably never vote Labour again if I lived in Westminster I would probably never vote Tory again but I don't and neither of these things directly effected me, wheras Liberal Democrat Lewes District Council's actions did.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here