Commons motion on Sky Blues (1 Viewer)

Forums New posts
Sub

Sub

Well-Known Member
Commons motion on Sky Blues






Submitted by WG on Tue, 09/07/2013 - 11:32

The following motion has been placed on the House of Commons order paper about the removal of Coventry City to Northampton after the Football League gave 'reluctant' approval and has been signed by 13 MPs to date. Early day motions are a way for MPs to express concern about an issue and are not usually debated.

'That this House notes the long-running dispute between Coventry City Football Club and the owners of the Ricoh Arena, Arena Coventry Ltd (ACL), over stadium rent, match-day revenues and stadium ownership; further notes that Sisu, the club's owners, have been looking at options for a new stadium; recognises that the club has been in administration after being taken to court by ACL and that the Ricoh Arena ended negotiations in May 2013; further notes the proposed sale of the club by the administrator to Otium Entertainment Group Ltd; understands that the club is considering hiring Northampton's ground for home games; expresses dismay at the possibility of Coventry City Football Club playing home games outside Coventry;

further notes that the Minister of State for Sport and Tourism said in an adjournment debate that he would be happy to intervene in this matter at a stage at which his intervention might be helpful, 12 March 2013, Official Report, column 67WH and believes that this time has come; and, given that all parties have taken up entrenched positions, calls on the Sports and Tourism Minister to convene an urgent meeting between the club, ACL, Coventry City Council, which half owns ACL, and the Football League to negotiate an interim arrangement to enable the club to remain at the Ricoh Arena until a final settlement can be reached.'

A strongly worded amendment has been tabled by Coventry MP Bob Ainsworth: 'leave out from '(ACL)' to end and add 'and condemns the decision of the Football League to allow the owners of Coventry City Football Club to play their homes games for the next three years over 30 miles away from the city in Northampton;

believes there is no viable plan or intention of the owners to return to the Coventry area and that therefore this permission is in contravention of the League’s own policy; believes rather than seeking a £1 million surety from the club obliging their return, the League should have investigated the situation as well as the background of an organisation that put itself into administration having run up many millions of debt while ensuring that it was structured in such a way that it would itself be the main creditor, and that this was a deliberate strategy developed over time to defraud its creditors;

further believes that this kind of owner brings the game of football into disrepute; and calls on the Government, if the League will not act, to draw up proposals to reform the governance of the game and prevent this kind of abuse.'.
 
Last edited:
R

rupert_bear

Well-Known Member
Lets see how this goes.
Has anyone heard or read what the FA think about all this, they are the overseers of football in this country and have power over the FL. Not heard much from them at all.
 
Mary_Mungo_Midge

Mary_Mungo_Midge

Well-Known Member
Sub said:
....the League should have investigated the situation as well as the background of an organisation that put itself into administration having run up many millions of debt while ensuring that it was structured in such a way that it would itself be the main creditor, and that this was a deliberate strategy developed over time to defraud its creditors....

...further believes that this kind of owner brings the game of football into disrepute; and calls on the Government, if the League will not act, to draw up proposals to reform the governance of the game and prevent this kind of abuse.'.
Click to expand...

I find these elements most agreeable :)
 
Sky Blues

Sky Blues

Active Member
I'm sure you're all clever enough to know this, but I'll say it just in case: Be careful how you comment on this thread. Bob Ainsworth MP is afforded a degree of legal protection in a Parliamentary motion to say what he has that you may discover does not extend to you if you were to repeat it.
 
Last edited:
B

Broken Hearted Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Sub said:
Commons motion on Sky Blues




Submitted by WG on Tue, 09/07/2013 - 11:32

The following motion has been placed on the House of Commons order paper about the removal of Coventry City to Northampton after the Football League gave 'reluctant' approval and has been signed by 13 MPs to date. Early day motions are a way for MPs to express concern about an issue and are not usually debated.

'That this House notes the long-running dispute between Coventry City Football Club and the owners of the Ricoh Arena, Arena Coventry Ltd (ACL), over stadium rent, match-day revenues and stadium ownership; further notes that Sisu, the club's owners, have been looking at options for a new stadium; recognises that the club has been in administration after being taken to court by ACL and that the Ricoh Arena ended negotiations in May 2013; further notes the proposed sale of the club by the administrator to Otium Entertainment Group Ltd; understands that the club is considering hiring Northampton's ground for home games; expresses dismay at the possibility of Coventry City Football Club playing home games outside Coventry;

further notes that the Minister of State for Sport and Tourism said in an adjournment debate that he would be happy to intervene in this matter at a stage at which his intervention might be helpful, 12 March 2013, Official Report, column 67WH and believes that this time has come; and, given that all parties have taken up entrenched positions, calls on the Sports and Tourism Minister to convene an urgent meeting between the club, ACL, Coventry City Council, which half owns ACL, and the Football League to negotiate an interim arrangement to enable the club to remain at the Ricoh Arena until a final settlement can be reached.'

A strongly worded amendment has been tabled by Coventry MP Bob Ainsworth: 'leave out from '(ACL)' to end and add 'and condemns the decision of the Football League to allow the owners of Coventry City Football Club to play their homes games for the next three years over 30 miles away from the city in Northampton;

believes there is no viable plan or intention of the owners to return to the Coventry area and that therefore this permission is in contravention of the League’s own policy; believes rather than seeking a £1 million surety from the club obliging their return, the League should have investigated the situation as well as the background of an organisation that put itself into administration having run up many millions of debt while ensuring that it was structured in such a way that it would itself be the main creditor, and that this was a deliberate strategy developed over time to defraud its creditors;

further believes that this kind of owner brings the game of football into disrepute; and calls on the Government, if the League will not act, to draw up proposals to reform the governance of the game and prevent this kind of abuse.'.
Click to expand...

Said before that the Football League could be the losers in this debacle:D:D:D:D:slap::claping hands::claping hands::claping hands::claping hands:
 
Sky Blue Kid

Sky Blue Kid

Well-Known Member
I spoke on the phone to the FL at approx 9-15am till 9-30am this morning, and was told that "Although the FL sympathize with the fans of CCFC. they have to go with what the administrator(Appleton) has said and have awarded the GS to Otium/SISU" I asked why? and stated that "It doesn't take a blind man" to see what SISU have/are/will do, to our football club. I also told the guy at the FL to tell his superiors to "Grow a pair" and they haven't got the power of their own convictions, when it's clear to "All and Sundry" that SISU/Otium do not pass "Right and proper persons test." I also said the FL are supposed to follow their own guidelines on "Looking after the fans first and foremost" Obviously they are not sticking to their own "Code" The conversation ended by the FL spokesman apologising for the situation but they can only do, what they can do.
Total waste of space and phonecall money imho.....That's me totally finished with SISU FC...Fuck 'Em!!!:jerkit:
 
Sub

Sub

Well-Known Member
wasnt there something where if you got a petition together with enough online signatures it had to go before the house of commons?:thinking about::thinking about: i can not rember the ins and outs of this though:(:(
 
Sky Blues

Sky Blues

Active Member
Brighton Sky Blue said:
How many MPs need to sign for it to get any significant weight behind it?
Click to expand...

An EDM is essentially a petition and unlikely to be debated in the house. Therefore, its significance is to make a point and gain a feel for the mood of other members. Beyond that, more signatures may garner more press coverage, but that's about the limit of it.
 
S

SuttonSkyBlue

New Member
That's correct (as Sky Blues says).

I tweeted Marcus Jones MP (Nun & Bed) earlier to ask him to get his Conservative colleagues behind it. He confined that he signed it earlier today.

I've also written to Hugh Robertson MP, Minister for Culture and Sport, to request that he act in accordance with the motion. I doubt it'll make any difference but at the very least he has it down on paper how devastating this is to a long standing supporter such as myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top