torchomatic
Well-Known Member
LEs Reid? YEah, I get you. Jim Brown? Geoff Mann? Really, do they have an "agenda"?
OPen Letter Asking For Public Inquiry Over Wasps Deal (8 Viewers)
- Thread starter torchomatic
- Start date
lewys33
Well-Known Member
Yes I agree with you, and I also agree with other comments made (NW and duffer have made a fair few good ones). I do think that there should be an inquiry, but it just seems to be a bit of a pointless exercise in that I genuinely think all we would achieve is a few resignations whilst we are left still picking up the pieces. You only have to look at current affairs to see nothing will be done (HSBC .... Jack Straw etc). The system is fucked. As my trading friend said recently "The game is bent from the top down".
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Even if it was just "a few resignations" then it will have achieved something. If Lucas, Reeves or whoever have stitched us up then they should be held to account. Substitute CCC for SISU and this forum would have crashed by now.
Yes I agree with you, and I also agree with other comments made (NW and duffer have made a fair few good ones). I do think that there should be an inquiry, but it just seems to be a bit of a pointless exercise in that I genuinely think all we would achieve is a few resignations whilst we are left still picking up the pieces. You only have to look at current affairs to see nothing will be done (HSBC .... Jack Straw etc). The system is fucked. As my trading friend said recently "The game is bent from the top down".
lewys33
Well-Known Member
Resignations would not be enough for me. With SISU you could swap it though couldn't you .........
Arguable that there should be an inquiry in to the admin process. Both seem worthy to me. Realistically though nothing of any substance would change.
albatross
Well-Known Member
I agree its not easy but even OSB58 when looking at the accounts indicated that ACL was not being promoted as much as it should be with a passive approach. The new Regime at ACL have appointed an events specialist to push this so they are not taking it lightly.
The Ricoh is far more accessible than Villa Park and more convenient for parking and with a railway station will tick all the boxes and will attract not just concerts but exhibitions as well.
I am simply making a point that there is now a focus on this so why the negative point of view? Of course all businesses have risks and can be both successful or fail; depending upon the product and how it is sold.
All I want to add, if these self appointed spokesmen and "professionals" want an enquiry, they should put their money on the table and pay for themselves and that includes CCC legal cost, why should a single penny of tax payers hard earned money be wasted on what will just be a pissing match...
Why would there be legal costs? It's not a court case, it's an enquiry.
You are kidding?
no organisation is going into an inquiry without representation. Who do you think will be presenting the questions to CCC, FRED BLOGGS from down the road, nope it will be some shyster on £2500 a day, they won't be in a rush to do it in a couple of days.
then there will be administrative costs incurred in preparing documentation, staff costs and expenses for the witnesses.
But nevermind, the council have plenty of money so that's not a problem at all is it.
Last edited:
Nick
Administrator
Yes I agree with you, and I also agree with other comments made (NW and duffer have made a fair few good ones). I do think that there should be an inquiry, but it just seems to be a bit of a pointless exercise in that I genuinely think all we would achieve is a few resignations whilst we are left still picking up the pieces. You only have to look at current affairs to see nothing will be done (HSBC .... Jack Straw etc). The system is fucked. As my trading friend said recently "The game is bent from the top down".
Although if Tim Fisher and Steve Waggot do midget throwing in the board room, that would take them up in my estimations!
It's still not a court case.
No, the city doesn't have plenty of money (it's not the councils money, you know), but the council have created this situation and should not be allowed to hide behind a standard auditor report prepared by the same auditor who was involved in the sales process.
tisza
Well-Known Member
there'd be more support for an inquiry into SISU's ownership & management.
the comparison is unfair in that SISU being a private company isn't held to the same standards of openness as the council.
as for the morality arguments etc. haven't SISU already been found by the courts to have deliberately distress ACL?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
But that makes and Inquiry all the more important. SISU are a hedge fund and do what the fuck they want as we have seen. The Council do not have that luxury. And yes, SISU were trying to distress ACL. Similarly CCC have made sure that the city's football club NEVER get a slice of their home ground for at least 250 years. I want to know the details of how the deal came about and when. I would have thought because of the impact the decision has had on our football club - a new stadium seeming our only option - then every fan of the club would want to know the details.
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
How do you think Labovitch came on the scene?
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
Hypothetically speaking of course (but is a scenario that has a good chance of happening), if public money is used for this (and not used on the things it was designated for) and the outcome is that there has been no wrongdoing and everything has been done to the letter of the law, will you be comfortable with the fact that public money has been wasted.
If others want this full enquiry, why can't they (and people like you) pay for it, then if there is found to be wrongdoing, actions can be taken. At least then if all is ok from a CCC point of view then public money is not wasted.
While I completely agree about the calculations about income to the economy to be devastatingly flawed, it seems to me like your post is meant to in some way refute what I wrote and it doesn't do that in the slightest, your response has no relevance whatsoever to what I wrote.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Why don't one of the people who signed the bottom of the letter start an e-petition such as the fix football one that KCIC started? I don't remember the numbers but once it reaches a certain number the Goverment has to acknowledge it. Seems to me that would at least promote a reaction from the council.
You build a hypothesis on two 'if's' - that alone shows the outcome is uncertain. This justify the use of resources to remove the uncertainty.
Don't you think some of the councillors who was 'whipped' to vote in favour now wonder if they really were given all - and correct - information?
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
So what you're saying is that Sisu/Otium can do what the fuck they like because they are a hedge fund, yet the Council have to be under absolute scrutiny for every decision they make. Every time you or anybody else thinks that something untoward has happened, then we should be having enquiries for it all. Yes, the deal should be looked at but I also think that all the shit Sisu have pulled needs to be looked at too. Nice to know you don't think the same, else why wouldn't you be calling for it too?
Also, shouldn't you have said that Sisu and CCC have made sure that the City's football club MAY never get a slice of their home ground. I say MAY as we never know what is around the corner, Sisu and CCC have taught us that.
What really makes me laugh about you is that you positioned yourself as balanced and looking at it from both side but you never do, with the posts you write and the articles you put up.
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
Yes I do wonder and that is why I have no objections to it being looked at, just I don't think public money should be used because people (some of which have an agenda) ask for it. However, any chance of you answering the question I asked, or will you continue on your politician like swerve?
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Has anyone connected to the open letter actually thought to ask their local councillor this either directly or by letter? Or have they just gone straight to open letter?
Absolutely, it's not fair, but it's how it is.
A lot oppose sisu using NOPM as an instrument - but it's not like you can use NOPM if you're unhappy with the council. That's not fair either, but that's just how it is.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
We dont get the chance to vote SISU or their employees out either like we do with councils and councillors. Luckily for SISU. Unfortuantly for CCFC voting with your feet is the only real way you can have your feelings registered.
Do you want to pay for it, I dont...
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
Chance of answering the question I asked? I answered yours.
I am sure everyone engaging in the debate has his own agenda. One reason the fan base is so divided is that it includes people employed - or have relations to - one of the involved parties. CCFC, SISU, CCC, ACL and Higgs. That doesn't make their opinions invalid or wrong, but it does set the scene for some heavy bitching.
I did. I said resources used to remove the uncertainty is justified - so not a waste no matter the result.
But is it just the cost of an enquiry - or is it the cost to find out if the public interests has been served and protected?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I'm not one of those connected to the letter but I have, via my father as I'm not a local resident anymore, asked questions. Everything comes back as confidential, even things that couldn't possibly be covered by any confidentiality agreement with Wasps.
CCC know there are people who have doubts over the whole process, why not come out and give answers instead of hiding behind confidentiality?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
No, I'm not. I'm saying SISU get away with it as they are not a public body and don't use taxpayers money. . Sad, but true. the Council cannot get away with it because they ARE a public body and use public money.
I've never said we should have an enquiry about absolutely everything, but on such a massive decision as this, then yes there should be.
I'll ignore your usual "lack of balance" dig because your a poster with a "lack of balance" yourself.
I've never said we should have an enquiry about absolutely everything, but on such a massive decision as this, then yes there should be.
I'll ignore your usual "lack of balance" dig because your a poster with a "lack of balance" yourself.
duffer
Well-Known Member
Exactly that. There's no reason this has to be massively expensive, what you're looking for is a neutral arbiter with access to the documents and people involved. It's the sort of thing that the Local Govt Ombudsman does all of the time for individual complainants, and that service doesn't seem to be breaking democracy with its cost.
We've got every right, as taxpayers, to know that our money is being properly spent, and that elected officials and officers are operating in an open and honest way and in our best interests. If the council isn't prepared to genuinely open these decisions to proper scrutiny, then an indepent inquiry seems to be the only option.
JimmyHillsbeard
Well-Known Member
Yep. We've all repeatedly been told that information is "commerically sensistive". This used to refer to an economic impact report on the cost of the Club relocating to Northampton but that was suddenly possible on the benefits of Wasps moving into the Ricoh. Every - and I do mean every- critical decision has been taken behind closed doors with the open part of the meeting seeing a string of councillors (from both main political parties) saying they had been confidentially briefed and the case was strong. We now know that at least part of that briefing was inaccurate but the council leader has said that she acted in good faith. I have no reason to doubt that but there does seem a case to answer, at least to reassure the public that decisons are *now* being taken based on better quality information.
It seems to me that a large number of councillors have been incredibly incurious about the whole matter and might have failed to ask the proper questions about the veracity of information they were fed (the effects of the Olympics and rent from the Isle of Capri artifically inflating certain year's value might have been better explored for instance). A public enquiry, rather than a routine report from the club's appointed auditors would give the council the chance to be exonerated.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
You could equally say it's a Godsend for the Council that they're allowed to act cloak and dagger with the city's heritage with relatively little outcry... because of SISU.
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
Ignore it all you want pal, I never hid behind anything and always have said Sisu are mainly to blame, either through their actions or inaction. I've got the balls to say it, you obviously haven't got the bollocks to say that you lean the other way, so be it.
I see you still don't want Sisu looked at then?
lewys33
Well-Known Member
This is still a really tough one for me. I think there should be an inquiry. The outcome of that is what concerns me. If it turns out people have been very naughty, and the end result is certain people just going to resign and then everyone has a cup of tea then I don't see the point. If there is any wrong doing I want proper justice. That is the reason why I don't think it is worth it IMO.
JimmyHillsbeard
Well-Known Member
Exactly!