BUMP: Politics and Stadiums in Oldham

[Harry Dowds Green Shirt]

Reading the comments of Labour leader Jim McMahon in the rarely wrong the other night got me thinking about how the politics in this town have screwed up numerous stadium proposals and not just for Latics.

 

Personally I hate Politics and believe that the people involved cause more problems than they solve. The public today also perceive Politicians as money grabbing leeches and who can blame them with the stories that have unfolded in the last 12 months.

 

It would be easy to forget due to our own hassles the way that the Rugby were promised a new stadium by the then Labour Council in exchange for selling them the Watersheddings site. The Rugby, due to their financial situation, reluctlently sold the ground to the Council and are now ............... well we all know the answer to that. It is the starting point for where we DON'T want to go.

 

Back in 1989, the first real stadium proposals developed (or not if you get the point) when it was proposed to build a new M&S and B&Q on Claytons. Councillors had to sit with 2 different hats on. Firstly as Councillors and secondly as ward Councillors. Not surprisingly, which way they voted on the various proposals as trustees seemed to depend which party Councillors were members of. Plans were afoot to provide a new stadium on what was Westwood running track and a feasibilty study was produced to look at how costs would stack up and how the scheme could be funded. The then Chief Executive of Oldham Council, Keith Coates was a mover of the scheme as he sort to bring big names to Oldham shopping and provide a state of the art stadium for the football team that under Joe Royle was starting to make people sit up and notice.

 

The vision that Coates had, unfortunately was not to be matched by the town politicians. Oldham for many years was run by Labour with the Liberals forming the opposition with the Tories virtually nowhere to be seen. As Labours majority became smaller, the grand schemes that had started to lift the town siuch as Town Square, Spindles and the 6th Form College, became harder to bring to fruition as the ruling councillors started to look more carefully at their majority rather than the benefits of proposals in front of them. The position led to a situation that has seen the town fail to make little if any progress ever since in developing a town with good shopping and sporting facilities as power has switched to the Liberals, back to Labour, then back to the Liberals and the smart money is apparently on Labour to take control again in May.

 

Every single time something positive has been on the table and been proposed by the ruling party, opposition Councillors have vehemenlty fought them and when there has been a switch in power have continued to see the proposals fall. It has applied to both parties and it is these politics that is seeing the Stadium position still rumbing on 20 years on.

 

The M&S & B&Q proposal failed due to the Politics and with a lack of Political leadership the new Stadium at Westwood fell by the wayside. A new proposal saw Coates and his officers come up with Sports Park 2000, whereby it was proposed to "Swap" the Boundary Park site wand Clayton Playing Fields around and provide a state of the art stadium as the gateway to the town, at the same time providing new and improved sporting facilities for the town. Yet again, the Liberals fought the proposals and the scheme fell away, particularly as the club was also unable to support the scheme as drawn as finance was an issue due to a lack of income generating facilities within the proposal.

 

The Liberals then took overall control of the Council and plundered through a motion to make Claytons a Town Green (much to the anger of the Charity Commission) and scuppered any future chance of a new Stadium in that location. It was 1 of a number of blunders by the Liberals who were voted out of power at the 1st opportunity 2 years later.

 

So back came labour and TTA's new proposal for re-developing Boundary Park. Whilst opposition at the original planning meeting came from both Liberal and Labour Councillors, the only Labour Councillors voting against were from the wards in the vicinity of BP. Within a month, a few Councillors had had "a good talking to" and the ever so slightly revised plans were voted through, only for the development to stall because of the delays that saw the onset of the housing market crash.

 

So onto today and Failsworth. The new Chief Executive, Charlie Parker and his officers have come up with another proposal. In reality the only opposition from fans is the location, with a minority preferring to be closer to the traditional home. However, once again, Politics and the chance to make gains at the forthcoming local elections has seen the local Politicians come to the for, especially wanting to be seen to be keen to support local opposition. This time, though the boot is on the other foot. Labour is in opposition and C'llr McMahon is rather vociferous in his support for his locals down in Failsworth. Isn't it strange that he wasn't this vociferous against the Boundary park proposals siting the same grounds of objection, but there again this isn't a Labour proposal and therefore there is no glory to be gained for his aprty from supporting it. whilst in opposition. This is the same C'llr who sat on the planning Committee and supported the major re-development of Boundary Park on 2 occassions despite what in all honestly was a bigger opposition voice from locals than that seen down in Failsworth.

 

Politics will, I believe, play the major role in the Stadium proposals and not the overall benefits the proposal may or not bring, which is why I have the dislike I have for Politics.

 

There could still be a sting in the tail, because, whilst the opposition Labour Councillors seem to be against the scheme, the Labour MP's are seemingly in favour. Woolas and Heyes support the proposal as I believe does Meacher and the question is will their greater Government influence on McMahon and his cohorts change the way that the labour councillors are thinking. Despite it being a long time Labour stronghold, there is a feeling that 1 or more of the 3 seats in the town could change hands at the general election on May 6th and therefore the MP's will be more concerned in ensuring that a new stadium gets the go ahead for the wider benefit of the whole town.

So, with an election only 11 weeks away, this is the time to get on to your MP's and put the pressure on. lets face it that is what locals have been doing against the club for the last 20 years. This is a one off chance as supporters of the football club to get our own back.

So I say to you this is a huge 11 weeks, get onto your Labour MP's and persude / pressure/do what you have to do to get them to ensure that the Labour Councillors support the scheme for the wider good of the town.

 

11 weeks thats all we have. Make sure you write or go to a local surgery put the pressure on and use this rare conflict between MP's and Councillors to good effect.

 

Harry

[creepy]

you forgot to log in as 'the insider'

[garcon]

God I hope Woolas loses his seat. That would make my decade.

[BRAT]

Reading the comments of Labour leader Jim McMahon in the rarely wrong the other night got me thinking about how the politics in this town have screwed up numerous stadium proposals and not just for Latics.

 

Personally I hate Politics and believe that the people involved cause more problems than they solve. The public today also perceive Politicians as money grabbing leeches and who can blame them with the stories that have unfolded in the last 12 months.

 

It would be easy to forget due to our own hassles the way that the Rugby were promised a new stadium by the then Labour Council in exchange for selling them the Watersheddings site. The Rugby, due to their financial situation, reluctlently sold the ground to the Council and are now ............... well we all know the answer to that. It is the starting point for where we DON'T want to go.

 

Back in 1989, the first real stadium proposals developed (or not if you get the point) when it was proposed to build a new M&S and B&Q on Claytons. Councillors had to sit with 2 different hats on. Firstly as Councillors and secondly as ward Councillors. Not surprisingly, which way they voted on the various proposals as trustees seemed to depend which party Councillors were members of. Plans were afoot to provide a new stadium on what was Westwood running track and a feasibilty study was produced to look at how costs would stack up and how the scheme could be funded. The then Chief Executive of Oldham Council, Keith Coates was a mover of the scheme as he sort to bring big names to Oldham shopping and provide a state of the art stadium for the football team that under Joe Royle was starting to make people sit up and notice.

 

The vision that Coates had, unfortunately was not to be matched by the town politicians. Oldham for many years was run by Labour with the Liberals forming the opposition with the Tories virtually nowhere to be seen. As Labours majority became smaller, the grand schemes that had started to lift the town siuch as Town Square, Spindles and the 6th Form College, became harder to bring to fruition as the ruling councillors started to look more carefully at their majority rather than the benefits of proposals in front of them. The position led to a situation that has seen the town fail to make little if any progress ever since in developing a town with good shopping and sporting facilities as power has switched to the Liberals, back to Labour, then back to the Liberals and the smart money is apparently on Labour to take control again in May.

 

Every single time something positive has been on the table and been proposed by the ruling party, opposition Councillors have vehemenlty fought them and when there has been a switch in power have continued to see the proposals fall. It has applied to both parties and it is these politics that is seeing the Stadium position still rumbing on 20 years on.

 

The M&S & B&Q proposal failed due to the Politics and with a lack of Political leadership the new Stadium at Westwood fell by the wayside. A new proposal saw Coates and his officers come up with Sports Park 2000, whereby it was proposed to "Swap" the Boundary Park site wand Clayton Playing Fields around and provide a state of the art stadium as the gateway to the town, at the same time providing new and improved sporting facilities for the town. Yet again, the Liberals fought the proposals and the scheme fell away, particularly as the club was also unable to support the scheme as drawn as finance was an issue due to a lack of income generating facilities within the proposal.

 

The Liberals then took overall control of the Council and plundered through a motion to make Claytons a Town Green (much to the anger of the Charity Commission) and scuppered any future chance of a new Stadium in that location. It was 1 of a number of blunders by the Liberals who were voted out of power at the 1st opportunity 2 years later.

 

So back came labour and TTA's new proposal for re-developing Boundary Park. Whilst opposition at the original planning meeting came from both Liberal and Labour Councillors, the only Labour Councillors voting against were from the wards in the vicinity of BP. Within a month, a few Councillors had had "a good talking to" and the ever so slightly revised plans were voted through, only for the development to stall because of the delays that saw the onset of the housing market crash.

 

So onto today and Failsworth. The new Chief Executive, Charlie Parker and his officers have come up with another proposal. In reality the only opposition from fans is the location, with a minority preferring to be closer to the traditional home. However, once again, Politics and the chance to make gains at the forthcoming local elections has seen the local Politicians come to the for, especially wanting to be seen to be keen to support local opposition. This time, though the boot is on the other foot. Labour is in opposition and C'llr McMahon is rather vociferous in his support for his locals down in Failsworth. Isn't it strange that he wasn't this vociferous against the Boundary park proposals siting the same grounds of objection, but there again this isn't a Labour proposal and therefore there is no glory to be gained for his aprty from supporting it. whilst in opposition. This is the same C'llr who sat on the planning Committee and supported the major re-development of Boundary Park on 2 occassions despite what in all honestly was a bigger opposition voice from locals than that seen down in Failsworth.

 

Politics will, I believe, play the major role in the Stadium proposals and not the overall benefits the proposal may or not bring, which is why I have the dislike I have for Politics.

 

There could still be a sting in the tail, because, whilst the opposition Labour Councillors seem to be against the scheme, the Labour MP's are seemingly in favour. Woolas and Heyes support the proposal as I believe does Meacher and the question is will their greater Government influence on McMahon and his cohorts change the way that the labour councillors are thinking. Despite it being a long time Labour stronghold, there is a feeling that 1 or more of the 3 seats in the town could change hands at the general election on May 6th and therefore the MP's will be more concerned in ensuring that a new stadium gets the go ahead for the wider benefit of the whole town.

So, with an election only 11 weeks away, this is the time to get on to your MP's and put the pressure on. lets face it that is what locals have been doing against the club for the last 20 years. This is a one off chance as supporters of the football club to get our own back.

So I say to you this is a huge 11 weeks, get onto your Labour MP's and persude / pressure/do what you have to do to get them to ensure that the Labour Councillors support the scheme for the wider good of the town.

 

11 weeks thats all we have. Make sure you write or go to a local surgery put the pressure on and use this rare conflict between MP's and Councillors to good effect.

 

Harry

Please can you substantiate your claim that " only a minority of fans prefer to be closer to the traditional home"

Thankyou

[thebaron]

Please can you substantiate your claim that " only a minority of fans prefer to be closer to the traditional home"

Thankyou

 

Please be aware that not everything posted on this site is fact

Thankyou

[BRAT]

Please be aware that not everything posted on this site is fact

Thankyou

Exactly

The club spin on the recent preview of the plans was that great interest was shown by the fans when over 200 showed up to view the proposals.

 

The truth is that fewer than 300 (less than 10% of our real hardcore support) could be arsed to turn up to view the proposals.

[thebaron]

Exactly

The club spin on the recent preview of the plans was that great interest was shown by the fans when over 200 showed up to view the proposals.

 

The truth is that fewer than 300 (less than 10% of our real hardcore support) could be arsed to turn up to view the proposals.

 

If I put exactly before what I write can I be correct as well?

 

Exactly

Perhaps only 10% of our 'hardcore' are sad enough to go and look at tiny models of something that might not happen, will probably change and that we all saw pictures of 24 hours later?

 

Oh sorry just noticed you put 'the truth' you must be correct

 

thebaron

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

I see what you're saying, but parliamentary elections have little or nothing to do with the stadium proposals. Woolas did a decent job of button-holing councillors over the rejection of the Boundary Park redevelopment proposals, which he supported because of the key worker housing element (as I understand it). He wasn't necessarily going all out for the club itself. Meacher is incredibly silent on the matter, almost as if he doesn't care. Draw your own conclusions about that.

 

I understand that the 1989 proposals fell by the wayside because Claytons is held in trust for a specific purpose, which would be almost impossible to get around (as it should be; as it is with, say, Tandle Hill park).

 

The simple thing to do is canvass your councillors' opinions. Are they for or against Failsworth? If they're against, what do they favour? What would they support? Write to your local councillor and ask them outright, and publish the results here. Then vote accordingly.

[martjs]

Please can you substantiate your claim that " only a minority of fans prefer to be closer to the traditional home"

Thankyou

I hear you there mate.

 

" only a silent majority of fans prefer to be closer to the traditional home"

There you go "Harry" I've fixed it for you...

[garcon]

I may be wrong, but if hints some months ago about Harry's identity were true then one could be forgiven for thinking it just a little cynical of him to use this place to encourage action to support the Failsworth project when he stands to directly benefit from the residential development of the Boundary Park land.

 

If I'm mistaken I'm sure Harry will be happy to clarify.

[Lee Sinnott]

Reading the comments of Labour leader Jim McMahon in the rarely wrong the other night got me thinking about how the politics in this town have screwed up numerous stadium proposals and not just for Latics.

 

Personally I hate Politics and believe that the people involved cause more problems than they solve. The public today also perceive Politicians as money grabbing leeches and who can blame them with the stories that have unfolded in the last 12 months.

 

It would be easy to forget due to our own hassles the way that the Rugby were promised a new stadium by the then Labour Council in exchange for selling them the Watersheddings site. The Rugby, due to their financial situation, reluctlently sold the ground to the Council and are now ............... well we all know the answer to that. It is the starting point for where we DON'T want to go.

 

Back in 1989, the first real stadium proposals developed (or not if you get the point) when it was proposed to build a new M&S and B&Q on Claytons. Councillors had to sit with 2 different hats on. Firstly as Councillors and secondly as ward Councillors. Not surprisingly, which way they voted on the various proposals as trustees seemed to depend which party Councillors were members of. Plans were afoot to provide a new stadium on what was Westwood running track and a feasibilty study was produced to look at how costs would stack up and how the scheme could be funded. The then Chief Executive of Oldham Council, Keith Coates was a mover of the scheme as he sort to bring big names to Oldham shopping and provide a state of the art stadium for the football team that under Joe Royle was starting to make people sit up and notice.

 

The vision that Coates had, unfortunately was not to be matched by the town politicians. Oldham for many years was run by Labour with the Liberals forming the opposition with the Tories virtually nowhere to be seen. As Labours majority became smaller, the grand schemes that had started to lift the town siuch as Town Square, Spindles and the 6th Form College, became harder to bring to fruition as the ruling councillors started to look more carefully at their majority rather than the benefits of proposals in front of them. The position led to a situation that has seen the town fail to make little if any progress ever since in developing a town with good shopping and sporting facilities as power has switched to the Liberals, back to Labour, then back to the Liberals and the smart money is apparently on Labour to take control again in May.

 

Every single time something positive has been on the table and been proposed by the ruling party, opposition Councillors have vehemenlty fought them and when there has been a switch in power have continued to see the proposals fall. It has applied to both parties and it is these politics that is seeing the Stadium position still rumbing on 20 years on.

 

The M&S & B&Q proposal failed due to the Politics and with a lack of Political leadership the new Stadium at Westwood fell by the wayside. A new proposal saw Coates and his officers come up with Sports Park 2000, whereby it was proposed to "Swap" the Boundary Park site wand Clayton Playing Fields around and provide a state of the art stadium as the gateway to the town, at the same time providing new and improved sporting facilities for the town. Yet again, the Liberals fought the proposals and the scheme fell away, particularly as the club was also unable to support the scheme as drawn as finance was an issue due to a lack of income generating facilities within the proposal.

 

The Liberals then took overall control of the Council and plundered through a motion to make Claytons a Town Green (much to the anger of the Charity Commission) and scuppered any future chance of a new Stadium in that location. It was 1 of a number of blunders by the Liberals who were voted out of power at the 1st opportunity 2 years later.

 

So back came labour and TTA's new proposal for re-developing Boundary Park. Whilst opposition at the original planning meeting came from both Liberal and Labour Councillors, the only Labour Councillors voting against were from the wards in the vicinity of BP. Within a month, a few Councillors had had "a good talking to" and the ever so slightly revised plans were voted through, only for the development to stall because of the delays that saw the onset of the housing market crash.

 

So onto today and Failsworth. The new Chief Executive, Charlie Parker and his officers have come up with another proposal. In reality the only opposition from fans is the location, with a minority preferring to be closer to the traditional home. However, once again, Politics and the chance to make gains at the forthcoming local elections has seen the local Politicians come to the for, especially wanting to be seen to be keen to support local opposition. This time, though the boot is on the other foot. Labour is in opposition and C'llr McMahon is rather vociferous in his support for his locals down in Failsworth. Isn't it strange that he wasn't this vociferous against the Boundary park proposals siting the same grounds of objection, but there again this isn't a Labour proposal and therefore there is no glory to be gained for his aprty from supporting it. whilst in opposition. This is the same C'llr who sat on the planning Committee and supported the major re-development of Boundary Park on 2 occassions despite what in all honestly was a bigger opposition voice from locals than that seen down in Failsworth.

 

Politics will, I believe, play the major role in the Stadium proposals and not the overall benefits the proposal may or not bring, which is why I have the dislike I have for Politics.

 

There could still be a sting in the tail, because, whilst the opposition Labour Councillors seem to be against the scheme, the Labour MP's are seemingly in favour. Woolas and Heyes support the proposal as I believe does Meacher and the question is will their greater Government influence on McMahon and his cohorts change the way that the labour councillors are thinking. Despite it being a long time Labour stronghold, there is a feeling that 1 or more of the 3 seats in the town could change hands at the general election on May 6th and therefore the MP's will be more concerned in ensuring that a new stadium gets the go ahead for the wider benefit of the whole town.

So, with an election only 11 weeks away, this is the time to get on to your MP's and put the pressure on. lets face it that is what locals have been doing against the club for the last 20 years. This is a one off chance as supporters of the football club to get our own back.

So I say to you this is a huge 11 weeks, get onto your Labour MP's and persude / pressure/do what you have to do to get them to ensure that the Labour Councillors support the scheme for the wider good of the town.

 

11 weeks thats all we have. Make sure you write or go to a local surgery put the pressure on and use this rare conflict between MP's and Councillors to good effect.

 

Harry

 

You forgot to say "Cheers."

 

[garcon]

You forgot to say "Cheers."

Did you really have to quote the entire fecking post to say that?

 

 

 

Cheers

 

garcon

 

 

[Lee Sinnott]

Did you really have to quote the entire fecking post to say that?

 

 

 

Cheers

 

garcon

 

 

 

Probably not, but what's done is done.

 

Please accept my apologies.

 

Cheers,

 

Lee

[singe]

Probably not, but what's done is done.

 

Please accept my apologies.

 

Cheers,

 

Lee Harry

Corrected.

 

Cheers,

Lee

 

[steveoafc]

At the end of the day all politicians urinate in the same vessel, they will side with whoever benefits their own personal needs and not those which could benefit the whole community.

 

That is all.

[RoytonBlueLad]

I may be wrong, but if hints some months ago about Harry's identity were true then one could be forgiven for thinking it just a little cynical of him to use this place to encourage action to support the Failsworth project when he stands to directly benefit from the residential development of the Boundary Park land.

 

If I'm mistaken I'm sure Harry will be happy to clarify.

 

Better than I could have put it.

[real]

If I put exactly before what I write can I be correct as well?

 

Exactly

Perhaps only 10% of our 'hardcore' are sad enough to go and look at tiny models of something that might not happen, will probably change and that we all saw pictures of 24 hours later?

 

Oh sorry just noticed you put 'the truth' you must be correct

 

thebaron

 

 

Fans at the ground looking at plans; Fans on here voting on polls.

 

All consistently point towards more suppport towards f/w than opposition.

 

Does anyone have any ACTUAL evidence to the contrary? Saying that only 10% looked at the plans/vote on here doesn't rally work - if so many people were so opposed, surely they'd have gone to BP and made an "anti" comment or registered on here and voted "no" or done something in the chron, in the streets or whatever?

[peanuts]

maybe its time for someone to stand up and get them selves elected on a facilitys for oldham ticket may not get elected but may just give these idiots a bloody enough nose for them to sit up and take notice ?

give people somwhere else to put there protest vote other than the BNP ?

didnt charlton fans do something similar in there attempts to get back to the vally ?and wernt they successfull in the end ?

put someone up in each ward in this town on this ticket get together with the rugby to form aparty and maybe they will have to take note ?

something for the trust to look at ?

councillor chaddy owl ?if it worked for hangust the monkey it could work for him !

 

or will apathy rule as ever in this town !

[footy68]

Cheers

 

Harry

 

Labour Candidate,

Oldham West

 

[Lookers_Carl]

If you want to get your emails in

 

http://www.michaelmeacher.info/weblog/

 

 

[beag_teeets]

We all know that it is the time to put our squabbles to one side and fight the fight against the common enemy, the people's front of Judea.

[Stitch_KTF]

I may be wrong, but if hints some months ago about Harry's identity were true then one could be forgiven for thinking it just a little cynical of him to use this place to encourage action to support the Failsworth project when he stands to directly benefit from the residential development of the Boundary Park land.

 

If I'm mistaken I'm sure Harry will be happy to clarify.

 

Don't tell me that Harry is something to do with Holroy Homes/Developments....

 

[Matt]

I may be wrong, but if hints some months ago about Harry's identity were true then one could be forgiven for thinking it just a little cynical of him to use this place to encourage action to support the Failsworth project when he stands to directly benefit from the residential development of the Boundary Park land.

 

If I'm mistaken I'm sure Harry will be happy to clarify.

 

Well this is an interesting turn of events.

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

Well this is an interesting turn of events.

 

And it's gone awful quiet on the Harry front too. Will he confirm or deny?

[Stitch_KTF]

And it's gone awful quiet on the Harry front too. Will he confirm or deny?

 

I recall him skipping, or missing, a question of a similar vein a while back.