Talk

Advanced search

To think this is the most stupid f*ing thing I have ever heard...

(43 Posts)
ChukkyPig Fri 05-Sep-08 22:36:33

Click away now if you don't want to hear a London 2012 rant - but this has made my blood boil.

They are going to build a multi-million pound stadium for track and field in (I think) east london. Regenerating a poor area and (I thought) leaving a legacy for local people school children etc to have a top class venue to run around in and have a go at sports and train new people etc etc

But apparently the plan is that the stadium will not be cost effective after the olympics.

So they want to tear down the multi-million track and field stadium, sell the land to a football club, who will then build another stadium for their team.

AIBU to think that this is a pile of shite. And what happened to the olympics leaving facilities for the public? Ha. Plus the government get loads of cash from selling off prime development land that they wouldn't have been able to sell before.

angry angry angry

hester Fri 05-Sep-08 22:38:01

Will we (London taxpayers) get back some of the money we paid for it, then?

stripeymama Fri 05-Sep-08 22:39:16

That is really Rather Stupid.

In fact the whole thing is a bit of a pile of steaming shite, no?

Mamazon Fri 05-Sep-08 22:39:57

i heard this today as well.
aparantly all londoners are having to pay £33 per year in their council tax to fund this project.

It is a disgrace and a huge waste of public money

handlemecarefully Fri 05-Sep-08 22:40:19

Is that really the case??? shock

ChukkyPig Fri 05-Sep-08 22:40:49

Well hester I would frigging well hope so but what do you think?

I'm not the sort of person who usually says "oohh it makes me sick" but...

VeniVidiVickiQV Fri 05-Sep-08 22:42:03

Am near-ish to the olympic site. I'm sick of the whole debacle tbh.

I wish they'd quietly get on with it. I wish the press would stop fanning the hot air that is pointless gossip. I wish I wasnt subsidising it so heavily.

MarsLady Fri 05-Sep-08 22:42:40

Such a waste!

ChukkyPig Fri 05-Sep-08 22:46:14

It was on london tonight just now and here on bbc:

link

Although having read the article it seems some damage limitation is in place and they are quickly backtracking on the demolishing option.

On the news just now though that wasn't how they played it.

For it even to be an option is still frigging ridiculous though, surely?

stripeymama Fri 05-Sep-08 22:46:41

As if the financial costs were not enough... imagine being forced out of your home just for two weeks of sport.

ChukkyPig Fri 05-Sep-08 22:48:49

VVVQV the bit I don't get is that if manchester or leeds had won it, they wouldn't have expected the people living there to pay for it would they? And yet londoners are expected to cough up.

I thought that they should have had a lottery with 500,000 tickets and entered everyone in london into it. At least that would have included the people paying. I can't imagine that anyone I know will be going along. Everone will be at work for a start.

FAQ Fri 05-Sep-08 22:50:03

this is news - that was part of the plans from the start - I remember reading about it when we won the bid years ago!!

Where did they eventually get moved to I wonder stripeymama - <<<notes the article is 2yrs old and they had to move by April last year>>>>

VeniVidiVickiQV Fri 05-Sep-08 22:52:28

The traffic systems wont be able to cope either.

Mayor Ken trampled teh expansion of the A406 between bounds green and edmonton. There are all those houses that tfl bought and are now stood derelict and rotting (whilst many families wait for homes).

The traffic is going to be dreadfull for a few weeks. It's shite as it is.

hf128219 Fri 05-Sep-08 22:54:08

I thought this had been common knowledge for ages? hmm

LittleBella Fri 05-Sep-08 22:58:36

I don't think it sounds stupid.

I think it sounds corrupt. Someone will benefit from this, and it won't be the majority of Londoners.

ChukkyPig Fri 05-Sep-08 22:59:47

I'm sure the travellers/gypsies will have been given reasonable alternative sites as it's not worth the difficulty and bad press not to.

It's interesting how the people cling to the idea of a caravan and the travelling ideal but are in fact settled in one place with kids in school etc and don't actually want to move - I know of some groups of travellers who have been housed and are very happy with going into a more mainstream way of life - maybe in the end some people went into conventional housing.

stripeymama Fri 05-Sep-08 23:01:44

I'm not sure FAQ.

The last I read about it, they were being moved to a site that was surrounded by four main roads and took up part of a play area. That'll make them popular eh?

The judge in the court case ruled that - given the benefits of the Olympics - the compulsory purchase order was a "proportionate" interference with travellers' human rights to a home and family life.

I suppose this stadium was one of these 'benefits'.

ChukkyPig Fri 05-Sep-08 23:09:13

hf I usually watch local news, eye local papers and generally don't bury my head in the sand.

This is the first I've heard of a plan to tear one stadium down just to build another. Which is clearly nuts.

if it was common knowledge i think there would have been a bit of an outcry by now. Even if it was just an english-style one involving strongly worded letters to the papers.

FAQ Fri 05-Sep-08 23:13:41

Chukky - it was definitely announced in the plans when it was announced - gosh that must be what 4yrs ago now I think (tries to work out when it was - DS1 was at nursery - he's just gone into Yr3....)

ChukkyPig Fri 05-Sep-08 23:17:38

I remember them saying that the stadium might be used afterwards by a football team.

I don't remember them saying they were going to pull the whole thing down and build a different one!

nancy75 Fri 05-Sep-08 23:27:32

from what i remember the original plan was to sell the stadium on to a big london football team, however part of the deal was that the althletics tracks had to be kept in place around the outside of the pitch. despite various teams being linked with the stadium the majour issue they all had was the tracks being kept as it would mean the fans being so far away from the pitch and now it seems that none of the teams want to take it on.

ChukkyPig Fri 05-Sep-08 23:30:10

So nancy you also don't recall them saying that they would tear the entire stadium down and replace it with another one? That is the nutso part as far as I'm concerned.

FAQ am I wrong? I'm sure that if that had been publicised at the time a lot of people would have had a lot to say about it.

ChukkyPig Fri 05-Sep-08 23:33:13

And really can the UK not afford to have one public track and field stadium for the whole of london?

They're taking the piss.

FAQ Fri 05-Sep-08 23:33:39

so they sell it - they (buyers) demolish it - build a new stadium........or they demolish and then sell the land - either way (if it actually happens) I should imagine they'd get a damn good price for the land - a site with infrastructure already in place, in London.....nice little packet there......

nancy75 Fri 05-Sep-08 23:33:55

no, i doubt that they said that originally, as they are not actually saying it now, just read the link and its says what i remember, they want a football team to take it on but keep the track.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now