The identity of the person who made the complaint to the European Commission regarding the Olympic Stadium has been revealed. Here is the article:
http://www1.skysports.com/olympics/story/15234/7523698
My favourite bit of the article was this:
"Was my complaint the reason for pulling the plug on it? I'm not sure if that's true. I don't know all the details of the judicial review but I think it was due be decided the following week. My feeling is that they used the complaint as an excuse for pulling out in advance of the judicial review (with Spurs and Leyton Orient) as they knew they were going to lose."
So it was just a man who didn't want to see the Stadium become a white elephant. Top man, I'm sure all my fellow Spurs will tip our hats to you.
The man who saw sense
posted on 16/2/12
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 16/2/12
the best Car Boot sale in all of old London town
posted on 16/2/12
Whatever happens with the stadium, the end result will be that public money will have ended up paying for a development that will help a private company, be that West Ham, an events company or whom ever. This was known as soon as the bid for the olympics was placed.
No event like the olympics will never pay for its own way, it's just government vanity.
So the only question now is who gets the free stuff, Spurs fans (among others) don't wish to see it be West Ham that get a leg up, that's fair from their point of view and I understand it. Thing is that work from all sides, say it goes to the company that runs the O2, if I were on the board of one of their competitors I would be claiming unfair state aid aswell.
So what to do with the white elephant? Do we just let it rot, or do we just see which private bid will put the most money back in the public purse?
posted on 16/2/12
At the end of the day if the architect could see the potential failings of the stadium due to athletics use then how the hell did they still insist on it. The evidence was there for everyone to see from the start, just look at the other stadiums that incorporated a running track. It was just arrogance and ignorance from the British Athletics Association that ended up costing us all.
posted on 16/2/12
Spot on with the "collapse" fallacy.
The reality is that BOTH sides in theory would welcome EC involvement ASAP.
Because once they rule on the "state aid" , there is by definition nobody left to appeal to.
Twas a classic case of state aid.
Compounded by the shambles where Newham council were even with-holding the details of the financing from their OWN party councillors.
posted on 16/2/12
RDBD
Of course if West Ham had got/will get it it will be "state aid" as it will if any private company get it, but what else do we do? The only way out of it avoiding questions of "state aid" will be for charitable organisations to move in and all of us keep paying.