£200 million a year, that really would take us to a higher level. No likelihood of the Council going bust either.
Councillor Parnaby sticking his nose in...
- Thread starter originallambrettaman
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
£200 million a year, that really would take us to a higher level. No likelihood of the Council going bust either.
All them there rich folks living in the villages can afford to, and wouldn't mind paying a bit more council tax to fund Hull City.
Some of us have read what the motion actually says. Once passed there is nothing to stop East Yorkshire Council giving us financial backing to get us to a higher level. Stephen Parnaby is an experienced Councillor and if he wanted to exclude financial support he wouldn't have written "every backing".
If indeed Hull City Football Club could qualify for all sorts of free money via a neighbouring authority just by changing the name to Hull Tigers, I'd say that was a half decent card to play during the next name change application, oh wait a minute, there isn't going to be one is there? Man of his word etc..
...and how ironic if the Circle became the East Riding County Council Stadium? Even better if ERYC bought out the SMC lock stock and barrell, kicked out Hull FC, then moved North Ferriby and Brid Town in under a new share agreement!
And some more of us have also read what it actually says (****ing smug remark) and don't give it the credence you seem to. What council authority could get away with designating its much needed financial resources to improving the playing prospects of a professional football team, whether in or out of its jurisdiction? Stephen Parnaby comes across as a man who is scurrying favour with the local wannabe despot: nowt like a bit of realistic speculation and this is nowt like . . .
The motion doesn't mention the name change, Councillor Parnaby could have included it but choose not to.
The council isn't a debating chamber. The resolutions they pass have important consequences and allow the council to act in certain ways. The only way Hull City is going to get to a higher level is by developing or buying better players. As we have seen better players cost millions, millions that will not come from snubbing Hull City Council by changing the name to Hull Tigers. Councillor Parnaby wants East Yorkshire Council to give Assem Allam, ie Hull City, every backing to achieve a higher league position. My serious question is, does that mean financial support from East Yorkshire Council to help us achieve that. The motion, if passed, allows that to happen. So is Councillor Parnaby going to ensure East Riding Council puts its money where its mouth is.
Thought Parnaby was proper City, this is a big miscalculation, why suddenly get involved now when Allam is set to lose the name change debacle and sell up? If its to do with his parochial politics over the Greater Hull commission then he needs to build bridge's not burn them. Dissapointed.
For a quite a while you have been looking for someone in favour of the name change, you may have found one. Have a listen to RH in morning.
You are taking one possible consequence of his resolution proposal and taking it to a totally ridiculous level. There is such a thing as moral support, the simple commitment and solidarity of being supportive of a principle - in this case, perhaps, simply making it known that it is their policy and belief that Mr Allem should be allowed to make the business decisions he wishes to take his business, Hull City, to a higher level - perhaps including the ability to change the name. Perhaps they have been told that local political support could influence any future name-change application, once the appeal has ran its course. The whole idea of a local authority risking the trust placed in it by making any hugely controversial investment (of any sort) is simply ridiculous. What do you believe? Do you think any sane member of that authority would risk their political and local credibility by endorsing your financial theory?
He is the leader of East Yorkshire Council. He's been a councillor for decades. If he wanted to give moral support he'd have written the motion that way. East Yorkshire Council were asked, like Hull City Council for their views on the name change by the FA before the decision.
If I was a councillor I'd want to see a motion that clearly set out what support the Council was expected to give and whether it included any financial support. Councillor Parnaby's motion puts no limit on what backing the Council can give Hull City AFC. If an 18 year old newly elected councillor had written it I would have given him or her some slack, but Councillor Parnaby is old enough, with lots of experience, to know better.
Are you on a wind-up ?
"Every backing" will not include financial support. How can a council possibly offer support when it is under pressure from central government to make cuts to local services ? It's political suicide.
No, "Every backing" is more likely to mean identifying land in the East Riding that may be suitable for building a new stadium and offering the club support in the planning process. It MAY even include a joint venture of a new stadium and retail development between club and council but only on the basis that it is an investment by the council that will generate jobs and revenue.
But anyone that thinks the ERYCC will be lending money to Hull City will be disappointed - that isn't going to happen.
If you were to write such a motion I would expect it to leave as much latitude as possible, but that is not an indication that it will lead to extreme financial involvement. Parnaby, nor a 18yr old newly elected councillor, needs to be any more specific; in fact they would be foolish if they were, as political positioning is all about wiggle-room, for as long as they can get away with it.
This. A joint venture that can show mutual, risk avoiding potential is the clear objective, but first favour must be currried and lines drawn. The FA are limited in their immediate (appeal) response, but HCC is not, nor is CTWD, or is it now a trust (not to be trusted - I hope not, but strange things happen when money and promises dominate).