Council Accused Of 'Absurd' Ricoh Secrecy (1 Viewer)

[Astute]

No. Just stating the hypocrisy on here. Taxpayers money was the major concern when people were begging the council not to let the club have the ground. It was the major concern when ACL were being distressed. Now, despite services being cut to the bone, it matters not.

Dave Nellist was spot on.

But what you fail to mention is that the value was reduced because of the SISU plan just like Fisher said. And then he said they were not interested because of the outstanding loan.

Now I await the normal Fisher lies/truth comments.

 

---

[chiefdave]

So 2 years ago it was from reserves, 2 months ago, it was still reserves, but as the report stated, after the initial years (2 years for instance), it would switch to borrowing...

So, why can't it be simply that the initial years are up, and it was switched to borrowing in Feb?[/COLOR][/COLOR]

It could be that the initial years are up but would it not make sense for the council to say that when Reid followed up on the comments Lucas made? This really isn't a difficult question for the council to answer, either the money is from council reserves and Lucas was incorrect or the money is from borrowing and Lucas is correct. There is no reason for the council to hide behind confidentiality, I can see only one reason for refusing to answer the question and that is that Lucas has been found to be making statements that aren't factually accurate again.

I struggle to see when anyone would not want this to be known when we are talking about the leader of the council, irrespective of any link it may or may not have to the club or Ricoh. If the leader of the council is repeatedly making inaccurate statements then it seems to me either she is not up to the job or there is a deliberate campaign to mislead. In either scenario something that should be under the spotlight.

 

[rupert_bear]

.

Dave Nellist was spot on.

Do you know Dave Nellist then ? Because I do and have had dealings with him, i'll say no more other than a chancer who picks his bandwagons !

 

[Astute]

It could be that the initial years are up but would it not make sense for the council to say that when Reid followed up on the comments Lucas made? This really isn't a difficult question for the council to answer, either the money is from council reserves and Lucas was incorrect or the money is from borrowing and Lucas is correct. There is no reason for the council to hide behind confidentiality, I can see only one reason for refusing to answer the question and that is that Lucas has been found to be making statements that aren't factually accurate again.

I struggle to see when anyone would not want this to be known when we are talking about the leader of the council, irrespective of any link it may or may not have to the club or Ricoh. If the leader of the council is repeatedly making inaccurate statements then it seems to me either she is not up to the job or there is a deliberate campaign to mislead. In either scenario something that should be under the spotlight.

The only reason I would be happy with is if the CCC legal team had told them not to say anything whilst this stupid ongoing litigation continues. And all parties voted this route taken and were not split like Les Reid said.

 

[torchomatic]

Yeah, but what about the new ground?

It could be that the initial years are up but would it not make sense for the council to say that when Reid followed up on the comments Lucas made? This really isn't a difficult question for the council to answer, either the money is from council reserves and Lucas was incorrect or the money is from borrowing and Lucas is correct. There is no reason for the council to hide behind confidentiality, I can see only one reason for refusing to answer the question and that is that Lucas has been found to be making statements that aren't factually accurate again.

I struggle to see when anyone would not want this to be known when we are talking about the leader of the council, irrespective of any link it may or may not have to the club or Ricoh. If the leader of the council is repeatedly making inaccurate statements then it seems to me either she is not up to the job or there is a deliberate campaign to mislead. In either scenario something that should be under the spotlight.

 

[torchomatic]

True, but weren't they urged/encouraged to vote "yes"?

And all parties voted this route taken and were not split like Les Reid said.

 

[Astute]

True, but weren't they urged/encouraged to vote "yes"?

So Labour urged the Tories to join them and they accepted? If it was that easy this country wouldn't be in such a mess.

 

[Astute]

Yeah, but what about the new ground?

So this question is more important than anything about a new ground? No wonder Reid has never asked about it

 

[skybluetony176]

It could be that the initial years are up but would it not make sense for the council to say that when Reid followed up on the comments Lucas made? This really isn't a difficult question for the council to answer, either the money is from council reserves and Lucas was incorrect or the money is from borrowing and Lucas is correct. There is no reason for the council to hide behind confidentiality, I can see only one reason for refusing to answer the question and that is that Lucas has been found to be making statements that aren't factually accurate again.

I struggle to see when anyone would not want this to be known when we are talking about the leader of the council, irrespective of any link it may or may not have to the club or Ricoh. If the leader of the council is repeatedly making inaccurate statements then it seems to me either she is not up to the job or there is a deliberate campaign to mislead. In either scenario something that should be under the spotlight.

Couldn't LR settle the "where did the money come from" question with a simple FOI? Strange that he hasn't :thinking about:

 

[fernandopartridge]

Couldn't LR settle the "where did the money come from" question with a simple FOI? Strange that he hasn't :thinking about:

Because he doesn't need to. They keep answering the questions publicly but changing their answer. Why would an FOI request be any different?

 

[torchomatic]

This is how the CT reported it:

It is understood council officers will advise councillors to vote in favour of the Wasps deal and that Ann Lucas, leader of the controlling Labour group, is also in favour of the deal. But she is likely to face double-digit opposition from some of her councillors.

So Labour urged the Tories to join them and they accepted? If it was that easy this country wouldn't be in such a mess.

 

[skybluetony176]

Because he doesn't need to. They keep answering the questions publicly but changing their answer. Why would an FOI request be any different?

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it illegal to deliberately give a wrong answer on an FOI meaning that the answer from an FOI will be the definitive answer regardless of what that answer might be. Seems to me that there's a good chance that the doubt might be more important than the answer to some people.

 

[dongonzalos]

Yeah, but what about the new ground?

Ask about both and actually do some digging about both earn your crust and the respect of both readers and fans.
Stop asking the same question over and over in various ways

 

[rupert_bear]

So Labour urged the Tories to join them and they accepted? If it was that easy this country wouldn't be in such a mess.

As far as I can remember all council meetings, dealings and votes re. Ricoh, ACL, SISU etc, etc have been unanimous, in fact John Blundell the tory leader at the council has spoken many times on local radio and been quoted in the Telegraph on this issue and consistently been in full support.

 

[chiefdave]

This is how the CT reported it:

It is understood council officers will advise councillors to vote in favour of the Wasps deal and that Ann Lucas, leader of the controlling Labour group, is also in favour of the deal. But she is likely to face double-digit opposition from some of her councillors.

Would be very interesting to know what happened behind the scenes. After this report if I recall correctly there was a meeting of the council, which was not minuted, and I believe at which Wasps had representation. After which it suddenly changed to a unanimous vote! When I've asked councillors what was discussed at that meeting the only response is 'confidential'.

 

[Covstu]

i wish someone would bring this to a head and be the end of it. If it proves that we were stitched up then thats different but it isnt going to solve anything now is it?

 

[lordsummerisle]

No it wasn't. CCC put 10m towards build costs. The 21m was the remainder of the build cost. CCC put 10m in and our football club put 800k in. And CCC never got or tried to take the 10m back. It is all down on the build cost of which I put on here a fair few times......mainly when people tried to say that CCFC paid for the land, decontamination of it or even both.

So the Council have got the stadium for £10million then? Which they still own?

Good work that I'd say.

 

[SimonGilbert]

This is how the CT reported it:

It is understood council officers will advise councillors to vote in favour of the Wasps deal and that Ann Lucas, leader of the controlling Labour group, is also in favour of the deal. But she is likely to face double-digit opposition from some of her councillors.

That was a reference to private Labour party negotiations rather than the expected outcome of the vote by the time it went to full council. That was always going to see councillors toeing party lines.

 

[chiefdave]

i wish someone would bring this to a head and be the end of it.

Totally agree, if there's nothing to hide get someone independent in to go over the whole thing and report back on how the deal was done and any area's of concern either from a legal, regulatory or moral standpoint.

If it proves that we were stitched up then thats different but it isnt going to solve anything now is it?

I suppose the dream scenario for SISU and / or the club would be the result of any investigation is that the loan gets called in and ACL struggle to refinance. At that point you would assume the lease would revert back to CCC and be available for sale to other interested parties. It may well at this point have dropped in value due to the failure of ACL to meet its commitments.

 

[lordsummerisle]

Stop asking the same question over and over in various ways

What will you do all day if you can't post on here?

 

[torchomatic]

Exactly, toeing party lines. Not the "yeah but all the councillors were totally happy" claptrap that Astute is trying to peddle.

That was a reference to private Labour party negotiations rather than the expected outcome of the vote by the time it went to full council. That was always going to see councillors toeing party lines.

 

[SimonGilbert]

Exactly, toeing party lines. Not the "yeah but all the councillors were totally happy" claptrap that Astute is trying to peddle.

There are almost always disagreements privately but, by the time issues get to a public vote, parties generally stand together. That's politics.

 

[torchomatic]

Yep, they stand together but rarely all agree.

There are almost always disagreements privately but, by the time issues get to a public vote, parties generally stand together. That's politics.

 

[chiefdave]

In my opinion when we're talking about something like selling ACL to Wasps it should be a free vote. The political system is this country is a shambles, if anyone watched Inside the Commons you were left wondering how the hell anything ever gets done. The majority of the time people don't even know what they're voting for!

 

[Noggin]

Yep, they stand together but rarely all agree.

The fact the conservatives sided with labour though when politically it would almost certainly have been best to do the opposite really strongly suggests that there was nothing untoward and that the council really did feel they were doing what was best for the city.

 

[torchomatic]

True, "Feeling" and "doing" are totally different though. I think long-term it can only do damage, particularly if the football club does end up miles outside the City.

The fact the conservatives sided with labour though when politically it would almost certainly have been best to do the opposite really strongly suggests that there was nothing untoward and that the council really did feel they were doing what was best for the city.

 

[torchomatic]

Yes, I saw that series. Fascinating and scary at the same time.

In my opinion when we're talking about something like selling ACL to Wasps it should be a free vote. The political system is this country is a shambles, if anyone watched Inside the Commons you were left wondering how the hell anything ever gets done. The majority of the time people don't even know what they're voting for!

 

[Noggin]

In my opinion when we're talking about something like selling ACL to Wasps it should be a free vote. The political system is this country is a shambles, if anyone watched Inside the Commons you were left wondering how the hell anything ever gets done. The majority of the time people don't even know what they're voting for!

yes politics is an utter disgrace though at least we aren't America where it's an order of magnitude worse. However the childish need to get one up on each other at every opportunity really shows that actually in this case they were doing what they thought was best otherwise we'd have seen all the conservatives on their soap boxes and they would have all voted against.

 

[tisza]

I suppose the dream scenario for SISU and / or the club would be the result of any investigation is that the loan gets called in and ACL struggle to refinance. At that point you would assume the lease would revert back to CCC and be available for sale to other interested parties. It may well at this point have dropped in value due to the failure of ACL to meet its commitments.[/QUOTE]1. an inquiry isn't going to have the power to have the loan called in.
2. does anyone see a scenario where the football club owns ACL rather than a SISU subsidiary?
3. with a 250 year lease, improved income streams particularly new TV revenues a commercial loan probably wouldn't be so hard to arrange. weren't Yorkshire bank were prepared to revisit the loan terms - just weren't prepared to write off some of the loan?

 

[Noggin]

True, "Feeling" and "doing" are totally different though. I think long-term it can only do damage, particularly if the football club does end up miles outside the City.

Yes they are and I'm certainly not saying what the council have done was right, I don't know and as a Coventry City fan I was extremely disappointed by it, however that really isn't what the discussion is about, if they all did what they thought was best with the information they had (and the conservatives voting for very strongly suggests thats the case) then they haven't done anything wrong at all.

 

[Thenose]

I suppose the dream scenario for SISU and / or the club would be the result of any investigation is that the loan gets called in and ACL struggle to refinance. At that point you would assume the lease would revert back to CCC and be available for sale to other interested parties. It may well at this point have dropped in value due to the failure of ACL to meet its commitments.

It is a dream. Nothing is going to change the deal, WASPs are not going to be forced to hand it back.

 

[chiefdave]

It is a dream. Nothing is going to change the deal, WASPs are not going to be forced to hand it back.

It would be a very unusual loan agreement if there was no mechanism for CCC calling in the loan if required.

 

[Thenose]

It would be a very unusual loan agreement if there was no mechanism for CCC calling in the loan if required.

Agreed, but no amount of JR, or PI are going to force that to occur

 

[Astute]

This is how the CT reported it:

It is understood council officers will advise councillors to vote in favour of the Wasps deal and that Ann Lucas, leader of the controlling Labour group, is also in favour of the deal. But she is likely to face double-digit opposition from some of her councillors.

An unbiased piece there. Was it done by Les Reid?

 

[Intheknow]

It would be a very unusual loan agreement if there was no mechanism for CCC calling in the loan if required.

There must be two different angles to this.

Sisu's JR claim is that the loan is state aid and have asked for a ruling that it be repaid as a matter of public law.

The loan itself would presumably be on commercial terms which would mean CCC could only call it in if ACL breached the terms?

But then what do I know.