Letter in tonights Mail

joemaxi · **Posted:** Tue May 22, 2012 10:41 pm

Excellent rallying cry from fetish in the mail today. Lets hope all the Councillors are reading it. :angry-tappingfoot:

Yubep · **Joined:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:35 pm **Posts:** 25266

was it the one he wrote on here?

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37497

I hope I'm wrong, but I have a feeling we could be disappointed on this one.

Mr Ripper · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 8:51 am

Snowy wrote:

I hope I'm wrong, but I have a feeling we could be disappointed on this one.

I have the same concerns. I hope that they're unfounded but I get the feeling that there are people on the council who would rather moan about the bad things of the town than proactively seek to do anything to try and put them right.

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 9:28 am

Its not on the web site which letter was it?

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

I am uneasy about the decision as well.
However I think we need to be careful how we refer to it.
Remember we are dealing with politicians and pre empting their decision could be counter productive.
The ballot box is shut now so we have to put positive thoughts in their minds and be careful of getting their backs up.
Like always we just have to wait and see and rely on the councillors who are for the scheme to convince any doubters, with the help of the Mayor of course.
I am sure Mr drummond will be working tirelessly to make this happen and in our eagerness we could actually be counter productive. Let us trust the man.

yloop · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 9:44 am

http://www.forum.hartlepoolpost.co.uk/i ... 185.0.html

I see some have had an opinion on it already.

They simply can't see that IOR stand to make no money from selling the ground, one reason is that they would never make anywhere near what they've already invested however the other enormous reason is that the council have the first offer of a buyback.... at a price of £0.

£5m a year the club brings to the town, not to mention the community aspect. And they think we've got tunnel vision?

Yubep · **Joined:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:35 pm **Posts:** 25266

i stopped reading after i read this...

The ODEON is a monument to our picture house past, it will be criminal if the building is lost and becomes another set of sticky tape houses with a Greggs and a Ladbrokes taped onto the end of it.

the same odeon that has laid empty and left to ruin for virtually my whole lifetime?

Yubep · **Joined:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:35 pm **Posts:** 25266

Can we please have automatic bans for any members putting links up to that god awful forum?

It makes me ashamed that i share the same town as them.

yloop · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 9:59 am

Yubep wrote:

Can we please have automatic bans for any members putting links up to that god awful forum?

It makes me ashamed that i share the same town as them.

If I get banned I'm taking you with me :laugh:

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 10:02 am

I stopped reading that thread when I read this:

The ODEON is a monument to our picture house past, it will be criminal if the building is lost and becomes another set of sticky tape houses with a Greggs and a Ladbrokes taped onto the end of it. The cinema was built as a vision to entertain our nation, the pool a facility for the common man and child. This era will go down in history as the one where nobody valued anything but capitalist greed and cherished nothing but a life of fake embellishment .

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 10:03 am

sorry didnt read Pubeys post

Yubep · **Joined:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:35 pm **Posts:** 25266

what world does that guy live in if he thinks the odeon can be restored and should as a 'momument to our picture house past'

i bet he stands over the road from it n looks at it all proud

Chrissy Stevo · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 10:11 am

Surely this is good news?

Quote:

HARTLEPOOL mayor Stuart Drummond has finalised plans for his new cabinet following the recent local elections.

Mayor Drummond axed six Labour councillors from his cabinet back in February after they failed to support their own budget proposals, but delayed restructuring his team until after the elections earlier this month.

He wrote to all councillors following the elections to see if there was any interest in being part of the cabinet, but after a minimal response Mayor Drummond has appointed three independent councillors to form the new-look set up.

Long-serving Seaton Carew councillor Cath Hill will continue on the cabinet for the 11th consecutive year, while there is a return for Councillor John Lauderdale, who had a four-year spell in the role, and Councillor Paul Thompson, who also represents the Seaton ward.

Mayor Drummond said: “I wrote to all the returning and newly elected councillors asking them if they would be interested in being part of the Cabinet and I think it’s fair to say that the responses were few and far between.

“I even offered the opportunity to the largest political group to put some names forward that they could support on the Cabinet but, sadly, nothing was forthcoming.

“It has given me the opportunity to create a small but really strong team of independent councillors who do not have to worry about becoming embroiled in party politics when it comes to Cabinet business.”

Mayor Drummond added: “I believe I have an incredibly strong Cabinet for the tough year ahead and we are all really excited facing up to the challenges that lie in wait.

“I’m also going to be doing something a little differently this year, and I’m currently in the process of setting up a community advisory panel which will effectively be an extension of the Cabinet, made up from a small number of people with specific areas of expertise.”

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

You can't ban people for having or expressing an opinion which you happen to disagree with.
OK you can effectively ban anyone and everyone but how does that help????

This is what I was referring to earlier..............allowing people like this HTH the opportunity to have a go at the scheme.
This so called Hartlepool forum is just itching to have a go at the scheme and turn it into a self satisfying political football. Do we have to provide them with ammunition????
Don't sink to their level or tactics.

The football club, the town council and other interested parties have got to a stage in this sorry saga that just might be successful. Fingers crossed the outcome will benefit all concerned and will therefore get a favourable result.

The best way to get people to vote against it is to have a go at them before they cast that vote.

The way forward is to wait for objections and then systematically and fairly, without embellishment, counter challenge them. Not the other way round.

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 10:18 am

I dont understand the people on there. Their main worry is IOR jumping ship and selling the ground on. If this is agreed cannot happen and HBC can have the ground back whats the problem?

I would put it to all of the council if this was any other business than Pools e.g a leisure park company such as wet and wild would they go ahead with it then? I could understand if IOR were new to Pools but 15 or so years of pumping over a million a year into the club shows their commitment.

I would say IOR have spent around £20million on Pools over the years, surely they wouldnt get that back of a development plan (even if it was possible) and the people at IOR making the business plan want sacking or their heads looking at as what business would wait nearly 15 years and loads of money to get nothing back but a bit of land on the north-east coast that lets be honest no one would want to live.

They as a company have more money that a lot of the businesses in the town combined so could buy land wherever the hell they want, but no hang on bugger Spain or the Caribbean to build houses on, I pick a couple of mile squared land in Hartlepool were we would be between brilliant facilities of a run down swimming baths, a Morrisons and next to a train track. Quick sign me up!

Mr Ripper · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 10:22 am

Chrissy Stevo wrote:

Surely this is good news?

Not necessarily, my concern is that it is quite the opposite.

As I understand (but I may be wrong) the vote is going to the full council, NOT just the cabinet. That article reads as though the largest party on the council (I.E. THE LABOUR PARTY) do not want to work with the mayor. The concern is that if they see this as the mayor's proposal / scheme then they will block vote against it as some silly political game that they're playing.

Although I would like to see the plans progress, if they don't I hope that it's for the right reasons (i.e. the council have genuine concerns about some elements of the plans) and NOT as some part of some political game that some no-mark self important halfwits associated to the local Labour group are playing.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

Chrissy Stevo wrote:

Surely this is good news?

Quote:

HARTLEPOOL mayor Stuart Drummond has finalised plans for his new cabinet following the recent local elections.

Mayor Drummond axed six Labour councillors from his cabinet back in February after they failed to support their own budget proposals, but delayed restructuring his team until after the elections earlier this month.

He wrote to all councillors following the elections to see if there was any interest in being part of the cabinet, but after a minimal response Mayor Drummond has appointed three independent councillors to form the new-look set up.

Long-serving Seaton Carew councillor Cath Hill will continue on the cabinet for the 11th consecutive year, while there is a return for Councillor John Lauderdale, who had a four-year spell in the role, and Councillor Paul Thompson, who also represents the Seaton ward.

Mayor Drummond said: “I wrote to all the returning and newly elected councillors asking them if they would be interested in being part of the Cabinet and I think it’s fair to say that the responses were few and far between.

“I even offered the opportunity to the largest political group to put some names forward that they could support on the Cabinet but, sadly, nothing was forthcoming.

“It has given me the opportunity to create a small but really strong team of independent councillors who do not have to worry about becoming embroiled in party politics when it comes to Cabinet business.”

Mayor Drummond added: “I believe I have an incredibly strong Cabinet for the tough year ahead and we are all really excited facing up to the challenges that lie in wait.

“I’m also going to be doing something a little differently this year, and I’m currently in the process of setting up a community advisory panel which will effectively be an extension of the Cabinet, made up from a small number of people with specific areas of expertise.”

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the decision as to whether the scheme goes ahead to be made by the full council and not just the cabinet.
There seems to be a reluctance by the "recognised political groups" to work with Mr Drummond, or that's how that article comes across to me.
So if they see an anti scheme vote as a vote against the mayor and cabinet, where does that leave us..............

Kolley Kibber · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 10:30 am

I hope to God when I get to the age of the people who post on the HTH I'm not as bitter or smug as them. It's embarrassing to read at times.

PJ_Poolie · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 10:47 am

'Straight talkings' last paragraph is the most laughable.

IOR haven't real thought through plans to dissolve the club really, for a start the bottom line isn't great. They've backed to club since 1997 to the tune of £15,000,000 or so all so they can acquire then sell some land that's worth just over six hundred grand. Genius.

Mind he rightly says that money would go 'straight into their pocket'
stpid

Chrissy Stevo · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 10:50 am

derwent wrote:

Chrissy Stevo wrote:

Surely this is good news?

Quote:

HARTLEPOOL mayor Stuart Drummond has finalised plans for his new cabinet following the recent local elections.

Mayor Drummond axed six Labour councillors from his cabinet back in February after they failed to support their own budget proposals, but delayed restructuring his team until after the elections earlier this month.

He wrote to all councillors following the elections to see if there was any interest in being part of the cabinet, but after a minimal response Mayor Drummond has appointed three independent councillors to form the new-look set up.

Long-serving Seaton Carew councillor Cath Hill will continue on the cabinet for the 11th consecutive year, while there is a return for Councillor John Lauderdale, who had a four-year spell in the role, and Councillor Paul Thompson, who also represents the Seaton ward.

Mayor Drummond said: “I wrote to all the returning and newly elected councillors asking them if they would be interested in being part of the Cabinet and I think it’s fair to say that the responses were few and far between.

“I even offered the opportunity to the largest political group to put some names forward that they could support on the Cabinet but, sadly, nothing was forthcoming.

“It has given me the opportunity to create a small but really strong team of independent councillors who do not have to worry about becoming embroiled in party politics when it comes to Cabinet business.”

Mayor Drummond added: “I believe I have an incredibly strong Cabinet for the tough year ahead and we are all really excited facing up to the challenges that lie in wait.

“I’m also going to be doing something a little differently this year, and I’m currently in the process of setting up a community advisory panel which will effectively be an extension of the Cabinet, made up from a small number of people with specific areas of expertise.”

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the decision as to whether the scheme goes ahead to be made by the full council and not just the cabinet.
There seems to be a reluctance by the "recognised political groups" to work with Mr Drummond, or that's how that article comes across to me.
So if they see an anti scheme vote as a vote against the mayor and cabinet, where does that leave us..............

Seems I have got it wrong, I thought the cabinet had a bigger influence.

yloop · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 10:59 am

PJ_Poolie wrote:

'Straight talkings' last paragraph is the most laughable.

IOR haven't real thought through plans to dissolve the club really, for a start the bottom line isn't great. They've backed to club since 1997 to the tune of £15,000,000 or so all so they can acquire then sell some land that's worth just over six hundred grand. Genius.

Mind he rightly says that money would go 'straight into their pocket'
stpid

No, they're going to borrow against the land to fund their oil company! I saw Ken down the Yorkshire Bank earlier sorting out the remortgage.

I hope we don't find out about IOR needing all the money before it's too late, I mean £600k must be a lot to a company that turns over hundreds of millions a year :laugh:

PJ_Poolie · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 11:11 am

I love the misconception these condesending wankers have that one day we'll be grateful that council didn't hand over the ground as IOR obviously have some sort of other agenda than moving the club forward. Oh you were right boys I know we're in the Blue Square North now but we still have the ground. Cheers. Is that rust on the Rink End roof? I don't care, thanks guys.

IOR want to redevelop the ground and move the club up to the next level, they are already sustaining it above a level it would be naturally at. That is what these people don't understand. The council owning the ground has hampered the clubs progress and ambition for years. This being blocked will possibly put the future of the club under threat, if people who've looked after it for so long, and so well can't get anywhere who else would be interested in buying the club?

It boils down to people in 'power' having a personal or political issue with the mayor and nothing else. They can pretend to be concerned about the IOR's motives and the clubs future but if they were it's a no brainer 'yes' It's a chance for all of those people Mr Drummond made look daft by being elected in the first place and subsequently to get some payback. Petty, pathetic, and to the detriment of Hartlepool. I hope those planning to vote no are prepared for the consequences.

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 11:28 am

At least that Donkey Kong on the HTH site seem to get the jist of the matter

mouldy old dough · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 11:34 am

This whole devolepment is the idea of Mr Drummond and there is the problem for certain councillors to get behind the project is siding with Mr Drummond and they will not do that. so its down to the fans to get behind the devolepment with letters and e-mails to the ward councillors.

Montpoolier · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 12:35 pm

Compo and Yupep wrote:

I stopped reading that thread when I read this:
The ODEON is a monument to our picture house past, it will be criminal if the building is lost and becomes another set of sticky tape houses with a Greggs and a Ladbrokes taped onto the end of it. The cinema was built as a vision to entertain our nation, the pool a facility for the common man and child. This era will go down in history as the one where nobody valued anything but capitalist greed and cherished nothing but a life of fake embellishment.

Jeezus, what a pretentious pile of twaddle.

born toulouse · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 12:47 pm

Positive support for the idea persuasively communicated to councillors of all political persuasions will certainly achieve more than getting into a pointless slanging match with the people on the HTH message board. I was very politically active for a long time and I saw a lot more cowardice than blatant corruption in local politics- councillors find breaking with a party line, even an unofficial one that wouldn't stand up to public scrutiny, very hard. They spend half their lives in council meetings and the other half in party meetings- in many cases the party becomes their social life and the council becomes a job. Breaking the party line puts those things at risk.

Having said that, many of them started off in politics with genuine good intentions and still have some decency in them, we aren't talking about Blair or Thatcher here. There may be axes being ground against the mayor but if IOR and the other investors make a strong case and the public seems to be backing them there should be enough councillors voting yes to see the plan come to fruition. The only thing we can do is try to influence events by providing a counter balance to any pressure the political parties might be exerting. Better to do that in the positive ways Mr Derwent and Mr Dough are suggesting rather than trading insults with a tiny number of uninfluential posters on HTH.

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 12:56 pm

I wonder if the Olympic torch will be going past this glowing monument of British Theatre

BillinghamPoolie · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 1:04 pm

Just checked route, will come along Raby Road and turn left into Middleton Road towards Marina. Missing the Odeon by a couple of hundred yards!

Spender · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 4:10 pm

Yeah, well you wouldn't want a naked flame next to the biggest potential bonfire in the North East would you?? :roll:

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37497

The thoughts of some on the HTH board are irrelevant in this instance as I suppose are ours, the decision about Pools getting the Vic back will rest solely in the hands of the majority party, that being the Labour councillors, they being the only ones with the ability to make it happen. Forget the rest, the chunterers and the optimists on all boards .... it's the councillors who will decide, nobody else.

Darth · **Joined:** Sun May 06, 2012 11:45 pm **Posts:** 10

Snowy wrote:

The thoughts of some on the HTH board are irrelevant in this instance as I suppose are ours, the decision about Pools getting the Vic back will rest solely in the hands of the majority party, that being the Labour councillors, they being the only ones with the ability to make it happen. Forget the rest, the chunterers and the optimists on all boards .... it's the councillors who will decide, nobody else.

You are of course absolutely correct Snowy. The worrying thing is that if Straight Talking (on that HTH websh*te) really is Christopher Akers-Belcher as suggested, then we are screwed.

If the Labour leader doesn't support the plan then even with all of the Tories and independents on side it won't get through. Unless of course we all make sure we fill the council chamber with supporters on the night and make them look us in the eyes when they vote.

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 4:36 pm

I am not holding my breath reading that forum and knowing that obviously it contains people in the know I think this will be worse than England World cup bid vote.

Spender · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 4:42 pm

As Snowy says, it's all up to the elected representatives. They're your representatives and whether you voted or not, the electorate created the situation.

If you want it, you have to tell them that you want it. Morning, noon and night. Otherwise they'll do what they feel like. Get in their faces and make them do it.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37497

Compo wrote:

I am not holding my breath reading that forum and knowing that obviously it contains people in the know I think this will be worse than England World cup bid vote.

Please forget about the opinions of some of the posters on that board, they are irrelevant and a distraction, you are talking about the opinions of a small group of posters who affect nothing, they are just that ... opinions and you'll always find some one to disagree with even the most reasonable of proposals.
The real centre of attention should be the councillors and no one else, you have to understand that they have the ultimate say in the matter and while all councillors can vote, the majority Labour group are the only ones who can make this happen or strangle it at birth. Forget the snipers and whiners, it's the Labour councillors, no one else, who will decide.

alienlife · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 4:53 pm

Compo wrote:

I am not holding my breath reading that forum and knowing that obviously it contains people in the know I think this will be worse than England World cup bid vote.

They are no more in the know than others who take an active interest in things that go on in the town.

Spender · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 4:57 pm

The key point is that you have to get the focus away from the club and onto the area. It's not about the club, it's about a large piece of long-term derelict land, close to the town centre, on the edge of which is a football ground.

Yubep · **Joined:** Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:35 pm **Posts:** 25266

It's not derelict mr spender it's a glowing monument of British theatre

Spender · **Posted:** Wed May 23, 2012 7:25 pm

That's on the other edge. Mr Codyakker's place excepted, it's a shite pit. Has been for yonks.

Compo · **Posted:** Thu May 24, 2012 10:02 am

That MK1 on that forum is a idiot and just wants to paint footy fans in a bad light. If Pools were Millwall / Leeds fair enough but in the 22 years i have supported Pools I can think of only a handfull of times things have went bad and usually small scale due to a few idiots.

Pools fans are loved all over the country when we travel and always have good banter with the home fans, so obviously he doesnt know his arse from his elbow.

Tax Paying Poolie · **Joined:** Sat Aug 19, 2006 8:18 am **Posts:** 9053

Chip Fireball wrote:

A truly horrible site, like Kolley says, full of sad, bitter, old codgers, moaning about absolutely everything.

What about HTH?

chessington · **Posted:** Thu May 24, 2012 8:15 pm

apologies if this is a stupid question but why can't the MP get involved if the vote will come down to labour councillors

parmo · **Posted:** Thu May 24, 2012 8:52 pm

exactly - he is the top dog and ultimately he has the most influence. He seems to have very little to say on this subject

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37497

chessington wrote:

apologies if this is a stupid question but why can't the MP get involved if the vote will come down to labour councillors

He's just another party member, I wouldn't expect too much.

mouldy old dough · **Posted:** Thu May 24, 2012 10:00 pm

E-mail Ian wright and tell him the millhouse project is a great idea and he should be supporting it i have,

halfmanhalfbanana · **Posted:** Thu May 24, 2012 10:04 pm

mouldy old dough wrote:

E-mail Ian wright and tell him the millhouse project is a great idea and he should be supporting it i have,

I've emailed my 3 ward councillors (2 labour and 1 independent) and Iain Wright and asked them if they support the plan and the transfer of the ground specifically.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37497

What I find depressing about the whole business is while clubs around the country are being positively supported by their local councils, we have this apparent complete indifference to the club from our council. It's as though they find the club irrelevant, even embarrassing, the time taken to address this problem of the ground sale is indicative of this.
I believe this is a watershed in the club's relationship with IOR, let's see how it turns out.

ElvisC · **Joined:** Mon Aug 15, 2011 9:55 am **Posts:** 4504

Snowy wrote:

What I find depressing about the whole business is while clubs around the country are being positively supported by their local councils, we have this apparent complete indifference to the club from our council. It's as though they find the club irrelevant, even embarrassing, the time taken to address this problem of the ground sale is indicative of this.
I believe this is a watershed in the club's relationship with IOR, let's see how it turns out.

I work in York for chunks of most weeks and the buzz around that place at the moment is incredible. Of course, THEIR council voted 10 to 4 in favour of a new Community Stadium...

The Fat Man · **Joined:** Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:03 pm **Posts:** 2107

Tax Paying Poolie wrote:

Chip Fireball wrote:

A truly horrible site, like Kolley says, full of sad, bitter, old codgers, moaning about absolutely everything.

What about HTH?

Where's the 'like' button?

mouldy old dough · **Posted:** Fri May 25, 2012 1:42 pm

ElvisC wrote:

Snowy wrote:

What I find depressing about the whole business is while clubs around the country are being positively supported by their local councils, we have this apparent complete indifference to the club from our council. It's as though they find the club irrelevant, even embarrassing, the time taken to address this problem of the ground sale is indicative of this.
I believe this is a watershed in the club's relationship with IOR, let's see how it turns out.

I work in York for chunks of most weeks and the buzz around that place at the moment is incredible. Of course, THEIR council voted 10 to 4 in favour of a new Community Stadium...

will that be owened by the council or private.

Letter in tonights Mail

Gadgies online