Please Register to access the whole of the site and to post on the forums.
Discussion in 'The New Stadium' started by fozzi44, Nov 4, 2008.
I believe 5 runs would be awarded to the affected side...
If necessary we could just buy the company and keep it running to serve our stadium, after that no doubt Daniel will sell it on for a profit.
Extremely interesting article about Haringey council/Labour/Lendlease from award winning journalist Aditya Chakrabortty.
Looks good for THFC, perhaps not so for existing tenants and small businesses. Well worth a read.
Act of God innit
Its actually good for the area destroyed and left to rot by successive governments since the end of the war. There will be regeneration, which is badly needed. It could be any developer but its driven by the football club, which we should be immensely proud of.
I dont like the article or writer at all. He's so politically biased that he can't see the wood from the trees. If it was up to him the area would be stuck in the rut its been in for half a century.
Bet £5 that after the riots he was calling for investment in the area.
That estate "bulldozed" by HDV is that the one in which the residents had a vote and pretty well unanimously voted to bulldoze the estate? Those residents that HDV will chuck out of their homes, are they the ones that voted pretty well unanimously to leave their homes to be able to reurn to better ones as they are built?
There is a definitive fundamental difference between chucking people out of their homes then bulldozing their estate and having a consultation exercise and a democratic vote among those residents to ask what they wanted to be done and following their decision.That article is typical of a lazy journalist who has come into the situation half way through without even bothering to research the facts and who just takes what he wants from it to suit himself, another way of putting it is that it's a pack of lies.
I don’t know the detail on the HDV, but it hasn’t been unknown in these sorts of projects for people to be promised replacement social housing only for those promised houses to vanish later on in the project when the bulldozers have already rolled in. There’s all sorts of murky shit going on here.
Those votes by the residents are always advisory. If residents voted to not have the estate bulldozed, I doubt anyone would listen. Its an empty vote essentially. They will do what they want.
On what evidence is it possible to suggest that these residents won't be given new homes? You may think there have been other cases but in this instance there is no reason to believe that will happen and to therefore suggest murky business based on articles like the guardian one and the lies of those that object to it is wrong.
The other options were refurbishment but the residents rejected them and made it clear they wanted the estate demolished, it is what they want, what is so hard to understand about that? God forbid residents should actually have a say in their lives, far better they are told what they want by self serving power mongers pretending they have their best interests at heart.
If the estate isn't demolished and new homes built for the residents then where is the democracy in that and where is the benefit to the residents in that? If you know the estate you will understand why the people there want it demolished, still what do they know far better to do as they're told by the revolutionary new force for democracy, sorry but I'm not falling for it.
As someone who’s currently on the wrong end of a council trying to demolish homes and using taxpayers cash to wallop the existing residents in the courts (my dad), don’t underestimate the power of property developers and the evil shit they are getting up to all over London. We have been described as ‘basically homeless’ and ‘like cardboard box shanty town residents’ in the high court by the council QC. As much as I want the stadium to go as smooth as possible, there will be people getting very very rich who have no interest in the stadium whatsoever and are using the opportunity as a land grab. In particular, Lendlease have a track record of screwing people.
Let’s not be naive, these are not spurs fans trying to get rich off public sell offs. This is exactly why groups like momentum have sprung up, the only way to make any money in the UK is in property. I’m not even against gentrification per se, but if people are being preyed on then I can’t support it. And I have many years of court appearances which drive my conviction.
Exactly. The best thing Momentum could do if they get in at the council elections is lock in Lendlease into delivering all the social housing they are knocking down, with massive financial penalties if they don’t. That’s the only way the people in Haringay won’t get swept under the carpet and shipped out in the years to come.
Do a quick Google search on Lendlease (even their name makes them sound decidedly sketchy) and you’ll see they have a poor record of building
If you did that, I'd set up a donation page immediately. I'd be shocked if word of mouth didn't get you a few grand overnight to compensate you for your sacrifice.
All I was pointing out was that the results of the vote are advisory. Please don't shoot me.
Have you not noticed anything that’s been going on in London the last decade or longer? Lendlease have a history of having absolutely no interest in building social housing, so I think it’s only rational to be hugely dubious of such a scheme.
Unfortunately it’s already happened and contracts signed, much like the PPP deals of the last Labour government, a public disgrace costing us all a fortune for the simple benefit of allowing a private company to run public services in a more dynamic way. As is often the way, public announcements are usually made after deals are signed
I've just done some searches as you suggest but I can't find anything detrimental on them just details of their various projects.
My understanding of the work is that the homes on the site will be the major priority on the site not just a responsibility to provide an element of social housing, it's up to the council to police that.
My problem with the guardian article is that it was using terms like chucking people out of their homes and bulldozing their estate which is a statement that it is against their will which was not at all the case, it was sensationalist nonsense or more simply, lies.
I guess only time will tell whether promises are delivered on. My nose instinctively tells me this is a stitch up though. I sincerely hope I’m wrong.
Separate names with a comma.