What are the expected dates on Falmer please?

[larus]

Sorry. I expect this has been done to death on here already, but I wondered when we are now realistically expecing the following :

1. Get an announcement from the Government?
2. How long after that before LDC will have to make their appeal?
3. How long would the Law Lords take before hearing the case?
3. How long would the Law Lords take before making their decision?
4. How long to get finances in place (I would hope that most of this has been done)?
5. How long to build?
6. When do we kick the first f***ing ball there?

I know some of these are hard to predict, but what would be viewed as a realistic timetable. I'm just a bit out of touch with where we are and how much longer it's likely to take. I beleive that a date of 2009/10 searson has been discussed as a realistic timetable, but I don't know if things have changed.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

2074

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

I think 2012/2013 is the earliest possible date

 

[Titanic]

I think you've missed the appeal to the European Court of Human Rights, Larus ?

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

LDC have gone on record as saying they will accept Kelly's decision but its a good shout Kelly will bottle it and ask for a 3rd PE imho. I do not believe a word those lying bastards at LDC say and I quote

12/05 - Bassford to Commin, De Vecchi's poodle

" can we get your assurances that you will ask for this appeal to be looked at at the earliest opportunity if you go ahead with it "

Commin to Bassford

" yes I can give you that assurance "

They will string it out and appeal to anyone who will give them the time of day imho

 

[brunswick]

6. Never

 

[Halftime Oranges]

can they appeal again?

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

probably to the high courts of outer mongolia

 

[The Large One]

The next deadline is February 7. That is the deadline Lewes asked for (and got) to make their representations on Prescott's letter, where originally the deadline was December 28, 2006. They needed this time to employ a transport consultant to make their case for Sheepcote. The fact that they could have done this a year ago is beside the point. Lewes may even ask for an extenstion on that - the govt are unlikely to acceed to that. They blame the govt for the delay where clearly they are at fault.

After the February 7 deadline, Ruth Kelly will write to all parties, with a copy of the various representations made, to ask for comments on them. There will probably be a period of five-six weeks for this. (The current round of comments was orginally put at five weeks - until Lewes asked for 13).

This is the important point here. It depends what Lewes DC put in their report which will determine the club's response. If Lewes put something in their report which the club feels it must challenge, then it must be put up for cross-examination - i.e. the Public Inquiry will be re-opened. Alternatively, there may be nothing the Lewes' report which the club feels it will need to challenge, and may well be covering old ground. What the government is reluctant to accept is NEW evidence.

Assuming there is no Public Inquiry, the end of this second consultation period is when Ruth Kelly makes her decision.

The government IS pissed off with Lewes' behaviour, and wants no more unnecessary delays. Lewes' official line is that they don't want to delay issues any further (at least they don't want to be SEEN to be delaying issues any further). The truth is, of course, the polar opposite - it is at the core of their strategy.

Assuming Ruth Kelly say YES again, Lewes' case for a challenge will be considerably weaker, especially as they, in theory, would have had all of their concerns dealt with. To come up with a whole new set of challenges will not go down well with anyone, and could well be dismissed out of hand. We shall see.

 

[Commander]

The next deadline is February 7. That is the deadline Lewes asked for (and got) to make their representations on Prescott's letter, where originally the deadline was December 28, 2006. They needed this time to employ a transport consultant to make their case for Sheepcote. The fact that they could have done this a year ago is beside the point. Lewes may even ask for an extenstion on that - the govt are unlikely to acceed to that. They blame the govt for the delay where clearly they ar at fault.

After the February 7 deadline, Ruth Kelly will write to all parties, with a copy of the various representations made, to ask for comments on them. There will probably be a period of five-six weeks for this. (The current round of comments was orginally put at five weeks - until Lewes asked for 13).

This is the important point here. It depends what Lewes DC put in their report which will determine the club's response. If Lewes put something in their report which the club feels it must challenge, then it must be put up for cross-examination - i.e. the Public Inquiry will be re-opened. Alternatively, there may be nothing the Lewes' report which the club feels it will need to challenge, and may well be covering old ground. What then government is reluctant to accept is NEW evidence.

Assuming there is no Public Inquiry, the end of this second consultation period is when Ruth Kelly makes her decision.

The government IS pissed off with Lewes' behaviour, and wants no more unnecessary delays. Lewes' official line is that they don't want to delay issues any further (at least they don't want to be SEEN to be delaying issues any further). The truth is, of course, the polar opposite - it is a the core of their strategy.

TLO, speaking 100% honestly, how confident, on a scale of 1 to 10, are you that we will get Falmer? Honestly.

 

[Stinkers Bridge]

I've heard July 24th 2009 mentioned.

 

[The Large One]

TLO, speaking 100% honestly, how confident, on a scale of 1 to 10, are you that we will get Falmer? Honestly.

Honestly, and speaking BEFORE Lewes' transport consultant's report (who may yet pull a magical rabbit out the hat - but it's unlikely), I would rate my confidence at NINE.

I have seen or heard nothing that appears to make the government want to change its mind. I have seen nothing in Lewes' case which will make the government change its mind. The government only accepts Lewes' case on one issue, and that is being dealt with. Having said that, I am not privvy to all the information, of course, I am merely going on what we have been told, and what I have found out.

The ONE out of ten is because, one, I am not 100% sure of Ruth Kelly's personal politics nor her department's politics on this issue (although, despite Lewes' protests, the case was made for it to fall in line with government policy), and two, purely because it hasn't been given yet.

 

[larus]

The next deadline is February 7. That is the deadline Lewes asked for (and got) to make their representations on Prescott's letter, where originally the deadline was December 28, 2006. They needed this time to employ a transport consultant to make their case for Sheepcote. The fact that they could have done this a year ago is beside the point. Lewes may even ask for an extenstion on that - the govt are unlikely to acceed to that. They blame the govt for the delay where clearly they are at fault.

After the February 7 deadline, Ruth Kelly will write to all parties, with a copy of the various representations made, to ask for comments on them. There will probably be a period of five-six weeks for this. (The current round of comments was orginally put at five weeks - until Lewes asked for 13).

This is the important point here. It depends what Lewes DC put in their report which will determine the club's response. If Lewes put something in their report which the club feels it must challenge, then it must be put up for cross-examination - i.e. the Public Inquiry will be re-opened. Alternatively, there may be nothing the Lewes' report which the club feels it will need to challenge, and may well be covering old ground. What the government is reluctant to accept is NEW evidence.

Assuming there is no Public Inquiry, the end of this second consultation period is when Ruth Kelly makes her decision.

The government IS pissed off with Lewes' behaviour, and wants no more unnecessary delays. Lewes' official line is that they don't want to delay issues any further (at least they don't want to be SEEN to be delaying issues any further). The truth is, of course, the polar opposite - it is at the core of their strategy.

Assuming Ruth Kelly say YES again, Lewes' case for a challenge will be considerably weaker, especially as they, in theory, would have had all of their concerns dealt with. To come up with a whole new set of challenges will not go down well with anyone, and could well be dismissed out of hand. We shall see.

Thanks TLO.

 

[larus]

I think you've missed the appeal to the European Court of Human Rights, Larus ?

 

[Commander]

Honestly, and speaking BEFORE Lewes' transport consultant's report (who may yet pull a magical rabbit out the hat - but it's unlikely), I would rate my confidence at NINE.

I have seen or heard nothing that appears to make the government want to change its mind. I have seen nothing in Lewes' case which will make the government change its mind. The government only accepts Lewes' case on one issue, and that is being dealt with. Having said that, I am not privvy to all the information, of course, I am merely going on what we have been told, and what I have found out.

The ONE out of ten is because, one, I am not 100% sure of Ruth Kelly's personal politics nor her department's politics on this issue (although, despite Lewes' protests, the case was made for it to fall in line with government policy), and two, purely because it hasn't been given yet.

OK, that's pretty much what I thought you'd say. Cheers.

 

[The Large One]

OK, that's pretty much what I thought you'd say. Cheers.

It might be what you thought I'd say, but do you go along with it? Is it what you think?

 

[Icy Gull]

You might as well ask how long is a piece of string, once you get beyond question 2

 

[Commander]

It might be what you thought I'd say, but do you go along with it? Is it what you think?

I think that you know more about it than I do, but from what I do know and what I can work out, I would pretty much go along with that. However I would rate my confidence at about a 7, mainly because it seems like the whole world are conspiring together to make sure it doesn't happen.

 

[The Oldman]

It might be what you thought I'd say, but do you go along with it? Is it what you think?

LO. Think you are spot on except I think the chance of it being no to Falmer goes up if there is a new PI. Unfortunately, I think that is likely. Lewes would be delighted if its Kelly who calls for a new Inquiry and as you well know Consultants have a habit of finding facts to support the views of their client. So, if Lewes put up a transport report that says Sheepcote can be served by public transport and other sustainable methods of getting there surely the Club and Brighton Council will have to contest this? Kelly then will have to order a new PI to have everything aired. You are then in the hands of another Inspector who may not be as disposed to Falmer as the last Inspector.

 

[Commander]

If in the higly unlikely event LDC prove that we can build it at Sheepcote, what do we do then, build it there? I know the club say Falmer is the only site, but if this were to happen, is it a possibility, however faint?