Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In Sign Up
Text:  A  A  A
The Mail Bag

Councils have selfish agenda

Comments (17)

WTF are the neigboring coucils around Knowlsey complaining about, regarding a major retail investment in Kirkby? Is it the football stadium they are worried about? Or is it the fact that businesses in their own back yards may suffer as a consequence?

When it comes down to it, they only really care about what effects them as councilers. Businesses going down the pan within their borders is bad for politics. It will effect their re-election! It appears that they don't give a toss about the unemployed in Kirkby, or that people, their customers, have a choice when it comes to where they go shopping.

The truth is that other councils around Knowlsey have their own selfish agenda when it comes to what happens in Kirkby.
Brian Baker, Aldershot     Posted 08/05/2008 at 14:48:28

back Return to the Mail Bag


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

Michael Kenrick
And you're surprised!?! Just follow the Money Trail... It always leads to enlightenment!
Tim Keen
1   Posted 08/05/2008 at 17:08:06

Report abuse

The councils have every right to complain and should do.

A few years ago it was agreed which towns would be major retail destinations and which would be smaller with just local facilities.

Kirkby was one of the towns nominated (by Knowsley) as a town not suitable as a destination.

As a consequence of this the likes of Grovesnor invested billions of pounds in redeveloping Liverpool City centre and several small projects in places like Southport are underway.

For Tesco to come along and say they are going to build a massive shopping centre in Kirkby is obviously going to annoy the councils who are underway with following the guidelines agreed on a few years back.

The councils are only doing what we as citizens elect them to do.
Michael Hunt
2   Posted 08/05/2008 at 17:14:37

Report abuse

More investment in the area, more choice for merseysiders, more competition for the huge enterprises that generate profits aplenty....all good.
Self interested politician nimby s ....all bad.
Alan Codd
3   Posted 08/05/2008 at 18:30:11

Report abuse

What exactly is LCC agenda?
They seem to bend over backwards to accomodate the red shite but at the same time seem to think that "well we dont want Everton to go but......... let's throw them over here out the way"
They would have allowed the shite to demolish St georges hall if they so wished it.
So although Im no advocate of Bill Kenwright or the Kirkby deal, this Council can go fuck itself.
Keith Glazzard
4   Posted 08/05/2008 at 18:42:08

Report abuse

Never having lived in the City of Liverpool I have no interest (through paying tax or voting) in what its elected representatives do, and hardly any knowledge to speak of. But I have wondered what goes on. Thank you Alan Codd for expressing what I would probably say myself if I was qualified to do so.
Tom Hughes
5   Posted 08/05/2008 at 19:20:40

Report abuse

Is that the same Council that offered them the Kings Dock on a plate for just £30m outlay from the club to deliver a real state of the art stadium in a world class location, just to be let down last minute? Is that the same Council who offered to set up a complete planning group to deliver the Loop site alongwith Bestway despite having the busiest planning office outside London? Is that the same Council who’s heads of both leading parties and head of Planning Dept are all Everton Season Ticket holders?

Plus I think perhaps you may need to decide which council your gripe is with, seeing as ALL neighbouring authorities have or are formulating objections...... Is it really possible that they could all be wrong? I suggest you read the ever changing planning application, the relevant legislation and about the legitimate developments in all these areas that are either already funded or even built if you want to find the root of the councils’ genuine grievances.
James Baker
6   Posted 08/05/2008 at 19:54:54

Report abuse

Heard that Tescos are downscaling the retail even more than the Echos reported 25%. If they do and no one is objecting to the stadium anyway then all the objections will be invalidated except maybe CABES, because crap will still be crap. This isnt over by a long chalk.
Tom Hughes
7   Posted 08/05/2008 at 20:02:56

Report abuse

The fact that the required retail area was expanded dramatically for the planning application, and that now even with the reduction its still larger than the original outline scheme which itself also violated the legislation shows what they’re playing at. A simple strategy of making it look like they have conceded, when they’re actually still after their original deal. They need it to facilitate enabling. Tesco Terry may even be doing it to justify any Stadium outlay from Tesco since he knows we can’t meet the shortfall.

Salesmanship from the king of salesmen. We got the hardsell during the vote, now we’re getting the flexible "ok then, I’ll tell you what I’ll do just for you."
Paul Harris
8   Posted 08/05/2008 at 20:28:19

Report abuse

I agree Tom, in fact I wouldnt be surprised if Terry Tesco is personally handling negotiations right now, probably in 24/7 conference call with planners, lcc and fat Keiko et al, he’ll try and see how far he can push the local authorities before they say "yay ok!!!!", one thing he definately wont want is a call-in because the 100% conclusive outcome of that will be "less retail", why waste a full year finding that out when you can sort it out now?
Dean Sinnott
9   Posted 08/05/2008 at 20:43:57

Report abuse

Who’d be surprised if it eventually "slipped out" that Tesco was to be our new naming rights partners for a UK record breaking deal? I wouldnt.
Bob Fletcher
10   Posted 08/05/2008 at 23:12:54

Report abuse

Tim Keen you say "the councils are only doing what we elected them to do". For exactly that reason Knowsley residents and especially Kirkby voters have just returned a Labour council who support the development.
Tom Hughes
11   Posted 08/05/2008 at 23:49:17

Report abuse

Actually Bob, 1st 4 kirkby (anti-stadium), and the lib dems (also anti stadium) combined got more votes than Labour (in effect the anti-vote was split)....... and that result is despite 1st for Kirkby only being in existence for 4 weeks, with the local residents bombarded with pro-tesco dvds and literature (sound familiar), and they were also campaigning against a party that could normally field a red rosette on a cuddly toy and expect to win comfortably such is their traditional dominance. OR, you might ask: what relevance is there to a vote for seats representative of just 3% of Merseyside’s population when the councils representing the other 90+% are objecting, as are W.Lancs...... But to be honest IMO the anti-council gripe which ever way you’re coming from it is an irrelevance..... and has been used as a smokescreen for long enough. Anyone can access the planning applications records at the planning office. They are comprehensive.... and there are none from the club regards any other site or regarding expanding GP’s footprint. The rest that has been happening recently as regards objections is just the application of planning legislation that we all knew about months ago. Tesco just built that margin into their leaked planning application, and subtracted it when they got the response they expected.
Tommy Gibbons
12   Posted 09/05/2008 at 01:19:32

Report abuse

Not that old Kings Dock shite again, Tom H?!
What part of ?the council offered the site to Liverpool FC first? don?t you understand? The £30m is also a red herring for two reasons.. firstly, would you believe the council would really let us have the Kings Dock for that amount? and secondly, we had even less money then than we do now ergo we ended up selling the family jewels at the time (Rooney)..

LCC offered Kings Dock as an afterthought, not as a genuine concerted effort to help EFC, they also allowed Lfc to build on Stanley Park whilst intimating to Everton they had no chance of allowing anybody to build on the park due in no small part to the covenant. This LCC, the council who have blocked redevelpoment at Goodison for years but then miraculously state they MAY be able to help..(note the maybe, not they can!) when EFC mention they?re about to move out of their council area.. the same LCC who contrived with Bestway over the Loop fiasco! .. think about Tom H and all you no voters... Why the hell would the board cconsider moving from Goodison Park if they hadn?t been blocked at every turn by the council?!! Don?t you find it absolutely disgraceful that LCC, Sefton etc want to stifle the growth of Everton FC?...

Maybe you should start to challenge what's going on at Stanley Park instead of railing against Everton FC for trying to better itself...

Brian Baker
13   Posted 09/05/2008 at 08:46:16

Report abuse

Good post Tommy G.

Now that is a good idea! Start objecting to the Shite building on ?Greenspace?. Where?s Swampy when we need him?
Neil Adderley
14   Posted 09/05/2008 at 10:03:44

Report abuse

Tommy Gibbons - Can you point me in the direction of Bill Kenwright’s scathing attack on ’LCC’ for ’allowing’ LFC to relocate to Stanley Park. Maybe a demand by the chairman to know why exactly why LFC were given ’preferential treatment’ despite EFC’s earlier enquiry.

I can’t seem to find anything - no article - no interview - not one solitary quote.
Tom Hughes
15   Posted 09/05/2008 at 10:48:44

Report abuse

Tommy G,
Unfortunately there is NOTHING accurate in your posting.....

"The £30m is also a red herring for two reasons.. firstly, would you believe the council would really let us have the Kings Dock for that amount?"

That is the amount that has ALWAYS been reported. That is the amount that BK himself stated during the AGM preceding the KD vote, and this is minuted, as he was asked directly about it.

"they also allowed Lfc to build on Stanley Park whilst intimating to Everton they had no chance of allowing anybody to build on the park due in no small part to the covenant. This LCC, the council who have blocked redevelpoment at Goodison for years "

"Intimating" is a good word, conveniently fuzzy in this context though. Where is your proof..... where is the planning application or even formal enquiry about us building a stadium on Stanley Park or extending GP? Everything is listed in the records. I’ve had reason to peruse these on a few occasions I can even give you the planning officer’s name. The one’s your after don’t exist..... the club doesn’t even claim they do, yet you persist with the urban myths. Why? BTW, there are 1 or 2 vaguely connected docs in there, but nothing nearly as fantastic as your "intimating".

"the same LCC who contrived with Bestway over the Loop fiasco!"

The Loop fiasco? The one backed by leading stadium design company HOK and the city planning department that grew out of work done by renowned Evertonian Architect Trevor Skempton? This was not an LCC and Bestway collusion, the club were notified of it months before anyone else was involved..... and they chose to ignore it. It even appeared on this website.

"Maybe you should start to challenge what’s going on at Stanley Park instead of railing against Everton FC for trying to better itself..."

Why would I? I am not significantly affected nor concerned by LFC’s plans. I will be by Tesco’s, and throughout these threads I have attempted to state why and how. Meanwhile, you are ranting on about irrelevant non-issues using inaccurate conjecture that bares little or no relation to the real issues.

But while we’re all handing out advice, you perhaps might first want to ask the club why what you voted for no longer exists, then ask yourself how you continue to justify the unjustifiable despite this....... I know, it’s all because of that naughty LCC! Are they after you for council tax or something?
Iain Latchford
16   Posted 09/05/2008 at 13:29:47

Report abuse

Well said Tom !! That shut him up !!

See you on Sunday !
Jay Harris
17   Posted 09/05/2008 at 14:01:01

Report abuse

Well said Tom.

As far as I understand it LCC organised grants totalling about £95 million for KD and the rest was made up of "enabling" commercial development. Everton?s only contribution was £30 million for a truly world class stadium in a world class location. As I understand it, BK had assured LCC that EFC had the £30 mill "ringfenced" and it was a great embarrassment for them to have got a lot of EEC funding and put 2 years work in to be lied to by BK.

A lot of the council then stated they would have nothing more to do with the man after such a fiasco.

Ring any bells?

© ToffeeWeb

We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.