I appreciate the points being made and if the Council had the stomach for a fight then there might be some merit it them, but they quite obviously don't have any desire to take him on.
Do they have to take him on? Do the auditors take the applicants word, or do they look into things by asking the landlord or other interested parties? If they're asked, given council and government politicians have said they oppose the evictions, what do you think their answer could contain? I reckon they're obliged to point out their feelings at least. If constituents and pressure groups have made issues of the evictions, I suspect they'd need to at least make the auditor aware. I reckon if nothing else, they would 't want electors to read in a document that they're saying they support it or are doing nothing. Simply saying they're considering their options sems a likely comment. The question is, is that enough?
I wasn't smugly doing anything. Your taking the piss out of Brady, who I hold no particular brief for was pathetic. Especially when your command of English is so poor you thick ****.
I thought you knew me better than that. Multi-millionaire Labour donor evicts hundreds, maybe thousands, of local people from a community sports hall to turn it into a Category 2 Football Academy. Labour donor receives nearly half a million quid from the Premier League to help run the Academy. Labour Council owns the sports hall and has a lease that says he can't do it, yet does nothing after making a bit of noise. That will be how the world sees it if it hits the national press.
Labour donor has a word with Ed Miller Band, who has a word with local buffoons and tells them to shut the **** up.
It wouldn't surprise me if Cameron doesn't use it during the election campaign. I don't think he will, but it wouldn't surprise me.
