The Mail Bag
How's the Public Inquiry going?
Comments (25)
The counter arguments in today's Daily Post sum up for me the difficulty anyone has in grasping the elusive truth about Destination Kirkby. We have as the topic Everton's economic impact on the Walton area.
Elstone says, "I believe that the economic value provided to the local community is a real factor. We have 200 people going in and out of the stadium every day; shopping in the local area and buying food. The reality is that we contribute and help sustain the local community.?
Then we have Walton MP Peter Kilfoyle " ?Arguments of regeneration are misleading in relation to Everton?s place in my constituency. It?s presence has arguably been an inhibiting factor in attempts to regenerate the area.
"(Liverpool) councillors have said there would be a hole left in the local (Walton) economy if Everton?s £51m turnover was relocated to Kirkby. This is comic book economics. Everton?s turnover has virtually no impact on Walton.?
They can't both be right... can they?
Paul Hardcastle, Posted 04/12/2008 at 10:13:14
Comments
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
There is no doubt that some small businesses in Walton would suffer if Everton moved to Kirkby, such as food and drink outlets, pubs and possibly taxi firms, but not much else. If Everton staying in Walton is so important to Liverpool City Council, then why did they offer potential sites in Speke and Croxteth?
All is unfair in politics my friends and take no notice of economic arguments because in one way or another the argument is really an emotional one as far as Everton and our future location is concerned. And the stadium issue is only a minor part of the overall inquiry. It is predominantly about the retail development.
As a labour voter, situated in the adjacent constituency, I will for sure be voicing my concerns. As a DK leaning supporter, I am afraid I may also be soon eating humble pie to my mates. God knows why the club have wasted more money employing the idiots they have at the inquiry.
As potless BK runs things part time (24/7) from his London office and Earl and Green sail around Europe, what else can we expect?
So I was all the more surprised to even see Elstone called as a witness, never mind for two days on the stand. Is this an opposition ploy to expose the fallacy of some of the club’s more intransigent financial arguments perhaps?
The simple fact is that (as somebody who has a lifetime’s experience of Court and Tribunal work) I can tell you that opponents to the retail development will call witnesses who can most assist them in their case. While there are opponents to the retail development itself, there are also those who have no problem with the retail development but who do have a problem with the stadium (mainly Kirkby residents and Keioc) Accordingly, a clever lawyer will seek to undermine the argument in favour of the retail development by raising the profile of the opposition to what comes with it...ie, the stadium. That is why Mr Elstone has been on the stand for 2 days, not because the stadium issue is the force majeur here, but it is a way of registering as much opposition to the redevelopment in the minds of the inquirers as possible.
By the way, I do not agree with Nick Lees (above). I think the evidence provided by Mr Elstone is at best (or worst depending on your stance) neutral but more likely positive in terms of the reasons for DK and the economics behind it.
Kilfoyle is an arrogant fool and must not be believed. He?ll run with the hare and then chase with the hound. He?s a typical MP and will never get my vote as I?ve read to much of his two-sided views over the last few years.
I find it difficult to understand where all the cash from Sky etc has gone... Don?t say on players wages because, in comparison to most clubs, our salaries are among the lowest in the Prem. Sunderland, Derby, Bolton et al have all got new (if not brilliant) stadiums and they have been in and out of the Prem, whilst we have been permanent members.
Incisive? Have you even read the transcripts? Dave Kelly quoting nursery rhymes "Southdene or Dixie Dean" and Fitzpatrick trying to ask loaded questions of Elstone and being refuted at every turn.
After today?s (Day 11) debacle, KEIOC should turn it in, to avoid further embarrassment.
Personally, I think ? purely on the evidence so far ?there is not the slightest doubt that the decision will go the Club?s way. The alternative is just too horrible to contemplate.
I agree with you but what we have to remember is that the stadium issue is not the predominant factor in the inquiry. In theory the inquiry could conclude that it was an absolutely wonderful idea for EFC to relocate to Kirkby but that the retail development would not be good for the area nor for the surrounding (and objecting) Authorities and reject it. In that case everything would fall, including DK.
Shocking.
So, as he continues to slag Goodison, check your FACTS about worse grounds. As for Kilfoyle, he has lost 3 votes out of our house and hopefully a lot more come the next election. So hopefully Everton have a job lined up for him.
You?d have heard that ?Fitzpatrick? managed to get the CEO to admit that Everton haven?t actually got a penny towards the estimated £78M contribution at the moment and the CEO avoiding confirming the simple arithmetic that tells you there?s a shortfall of, well £78M actually, with the only possible scenario being equity funding, meaning a possible rights issue, which it isn?t as it was previously established that the board have failed to invest any money whatsoever, or the sale of the club with the new owners providing perhaps £40M.
You?d have heard ?Fitzpatrick? ask the CEO how 4,000 of our season ticket holders, relating to the new 53% of seats that are now officially classed as obstructed, have apparently and unknowingly paid for seats with obstructed views, and question the deployment of the Tesco tactic of running down the current facility to enhance the new one after which, the CEO then had to admit, when presented with the evidence, that the same hospitality facilities, are in fact award winning facilities having recently collected a best hospitality award and a certificate of achievement.
You?d have heard that, contrary to what the club promotes, new football stadia, backed up by statistics from Deloittes, simply don?t deliver the revenues that are being promoted by the club, and you?d have heard that the experts hadn?t explained that the relocation would take Everton further away from its city centre than any other club in the Premier League. You?d have heard lots of other questions asked, as did Trevor Skempton and Dave Kelly, that were designed to aid KEIOC?s case when they take the stand next year, when they deliver their comprehensive proof of evidence.
The attempt by members of KEIOC, present throughout the inquiry, to deliver their point of view in the glare of a public arena and under the scrutiny of QCs and a Government inspector is both extremely stressful and difficult and to be honest we?d prefer not to be there.
At the end of the day, we?re not professionals, we don?t claim to be, we?re simply a collection of Evertonians who, in the absence of any other dissenting voice, are attempting to deliver the opinion Evertonians against the relocation of the club hold. KEIOC are a host of unpaid volunteers who have worked tirelessly for a cause that we rightly or wrongly believe in.
As expected, Robert Elstone, Chris Potts and David Keirle all gave competent and professional performances; the CEO had the good grace and class to come over and congratulate the KEIOC team on their efforts as we did his. There are many issues to be covered by this inquiry before it concludes, no doubt we?ll cross swords with Everton?s team again but we?ll continue to endeavour to do this as professionally as we can.
Steve, perhaps you?d like to contact KEIOC through its website so that you can offer your invaluable insight into cross-examination techniques before we make any further mistakes?
Cheers
My dear Colin, I failed to see you win one single point against our stand-in CEO.
But don?t take it so personally, I?m sure you tried your best.
Where I was at the time of your delivery, is irrelevent. The fact you failed to make an impact, is.
And as for your remarks regarding being the voice of dissenting Evertonians, that's fair enough. You don't speak for me, or the majority of Evertonians who want to see our club progress above all other considerations ? including the club's proximity to my local.
Cheers.
As for the inquiry, I?ve been surprised just how much time has been spent discussing our part in the scheme. I suppose from the EFC / Tesco perspective, they have to build up EFC?s role in the scheme, as it?s our place within it that has resulted in the whole thing being called in, because without us, the retail ?enabler? wouldn?t have to be the size it is.
I can?t help but feel that this is all a bit of a ?sideshow? to the main event though, as ultimately the decision to pass or bin this scheme will boil down to a relatively straightforward political decision IMO. That being so, does this project?s regeneration benefits to the Kirkby area outweigh the negative impact it may have on the surrounding districts' economies? Knowing a bit about Regional Development politics, I would suggest that it?ll have to be proven without doubt to be detrimental to the region as a whole, before they?ll bin a potential £400M private sector investment, in a deprived area, that has been seeking regeneration on this scale for virtually a generation. The current economic climate makes that decision even more weighted in favour of passing it, in my view.
Totally clueless!!!
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
1 Posted 04/12/2008 at 14:46:38
Report abuse