Andy Burnham | Manchester Mayor

Has anybody asked him why the freight hasn't been moved, or no plans to be moved prior to this if it was so urgent?
 
Stockton Heath Blue said:
Warrington BC is still waiting for Peel to upgrade the swing bridges across the Manchester Ship Canal, and have been for at least 5 years. All the local authorities from Liverpool to Trafford Park should be clubbing together and refuse Peel any planning permissions until they have improved the locks and bridges.
Click to expand...

I’m curious where they are building these modules to take advantage of the ship canal….. South Carolina ?
 
cheekybids said:
I’m curious where they are building these modules to take advantage of the ship canal….. South Carolina ?
Click to expand...
That needs to be cleared up because if, as suspected, it's abroad, then there is no benefit to the north west economy.

I seem to recall when the CFA was being built the contractor had to commit that labour was to be sourced within a geographical radius of the stadium, to ensure it was built with a local workforce. Don't know if this was the case with the south stand or the current north stand development?
 
Stockton Heath Blue said:
That needs to be cleared up because if, as suspected, it's abroad, then there is no benefit to the north west economy.

I seem to recall when the CFA was being built the contractor had to commit that labour was to be sourced within a geographical radius of the stadium, to ensure it was built with a local workforce. Don't know if this was the case with the south stand or the current north stand development?
Click to expand...

Where does cotton come from these days?
 
ROBSH34 said:
If anyone has any question about how the Meccano set, removal of the freight terminal, the cost of clearing the ship canal and where exactly do the 92000 jobs come from etc etc then please do not hesitate to call Radio Manchester on a Thursday morning between 10 and 11am.
Burnham is on the Milke Sweeny programme then answering questions about what matters to the listeners.
I am sure we have enough questions to ask to keep the hour busy for the next week or so.
Click to expand...
Great idea Rob regarding call to gmr, though I would imagine that the ca!!ers are well interrogated before going to aira and as it's media City based then on this particular issue called wouldn't make it air but worth a try.
 
Again How did Manchester City benefit from significant public investment, The government opened the voting for hosting the games and Manchester Bid was chosen, I recall the Bid was based on the failed Manchester bid for the 1996/2000 Summer Olympics in which United was going to move in the stadium after the games, Also Manchester City was asked about also moving in and sharing the stadium with United by the way.

The money and plans were moved to the Commonwealth Games bid and reduced plans like the stadium holding 40.000
So Mr Burnham. Manchester had already used the Olympics bid and United as a tenant for the stadium, But when it failed United walked away leaving Manchester with a Big white elephant after the Commonwealth games

Manchester City was asked again, but had to hand over the whole of the Moss side site and platt fields site and also had to pay for the upgrades to make it into a football stadium,

It's simple and in plain black and white, Manchester City in the 20-odd years in the stadium has made Manchester City Council a load of money, then add the gigs and rugby and the COVID-19 help in building a site for a covid vacations site,
 
ancoats said:
Again How did Manchester City benefit from significant public investment, The government opened the voting for hosting the games and Manchester Bid was chosen, I recall the Bid was based on the failed Manchester bid for the 1996/2000 Summer Olympics in which United was going to move in the stadium after the games, Also Manchester City was asked about also moving in and sharing the stadium with United by the way.

The money and plans were moved to the Commonwealth Games bid and reduced plans like the stadium holding 40.000
So Mr Burnham. Manchester had already used the Olympics bid and United as a tenant for the stadium, But when it failed United walked away leaving Manchester with a Big white elephant after the Commonwealth games

Manchester City was asked again, but had to hand over the whole of the Moss side site and platt fields site and also had to pay for the upgrades to make it into a football stadium,

It's simple and in plain black and white, Manchester City in the 20-odd years in the stadium has made Manchester City Council a load of money, then add the gigs and rugby and the COVID-19 help in building a site for a covid vacations site,
Click to expand...
The covid site was also paid for by Sheikh Mansour IIRC
 
ancoats said:
Again How did Manchester City benefit from significant public investment, The government opened the voting for hosting the games and Manchester Bid was chosen, I recall the Bid was based on the failed Manchester bid for the 1996/2000 Summer Olympics in which United was going to move in the stadium after the games, Also Manchester City was asked about also moving in and sharing the stadium with United by the way.

The money and plans were moved to the Commonwealth Games bid and reduced plans like the stadium holding 40.000
So Mr Burnham. Manchester had already used the Olympics bid and United as a tenant for the stadium, But when it failed United walked away leaving Manchester with a Big white elephant after the Commonwealth games

Manchester City was asked again, but had to hand over the whole of the Moss side site and platt fields site and also had to pay for the upgrades to make it into a football stadium,

It's simple and in plain black and white, Manchester City in the 20-odd years in the stadium has made Manchester City Council a load of money, then add the gigs and rugby and the COVID-19 help in building a site for a covid vacations site,
Click to expand...
The rags were offered to be anchor tenants for the possible Olympic Games stadium and there was a suggestion that both clubs could share The rags rejected the idea and City weren't keen

The CoMS was never offered to the rags City agreed to take it over but firmly stipulated that it must be a football stadium* Arrup did a very clever design in accommodating the athletics part way through construction, leaving the North Stand unbuilt Post the games the stand was completed and 7m dug down to form the lower tier this was the status that City agreed to take over, the cost of the fitting out was bourn by the club Sport England paid the largest share the City council paid a sum some was offset by developing Maine Road for housing but they got less than budgeted for as they also had to fund the demolition

City did benefit from public money in that the cost of the stadium was funded but the lease monies have pretty much paid back The intangible benefits to the community have been far in excess of what was expected especially because of the regeneration of East Manchester beyond and able anyones wildest dreams due to the take over

The area around old trafford is no where near what East Manchester use to be like Its all a smoke screen to help the rags and Burnham always was a chancer failed MP who jumped on the devolution band wagon He did huge damage to Gtr Manchester during Covid but that's another argument

*The games would have gone ahead if City dint agree with plans for a temporary stadium but this would have led to abysmal regeneration of the district Manchester has a lot to thanks it's only football club for
 
Last edited:
Gordyola said:
The rags were offered to be anchor tenants for the possible Olympic Games stadium and there was a suggestion that both clubs could share The rags rejected the idea and City weren't keen

The CoMS was never offered to the rags City agreed to take it over but firmly stipulated that it must be a football stadium Arrup did a very clever design in accommodating the athletics part way through construction, leaving the North Stand unbuilt Post the games the stand was completed and 7m dug down to form the lower tier this was the status that City agreed to take over, the cost of the fitting out was bourn by the club Sport England paid the largest share the City council paid a sum some was offset by developing Maine Road for housing but they got less than budgeted for as they also had to fund the demolition

City did benefit from public money in that the cost of the stadium was funded but the lease monies have pretty much paid back The intangible benefits to the community have been far in excess of what was expected especially because of the regeneration of East Manchester beyond and able anyones wildest dreams due to the take over

The area around old trafford is no where near what East Manchester use to be like Its all a smoke screen to help the rags and Burnham always was a chancer failed MP who jumped on the devolution band wagon He did huge damage to Gtr Manchester during Covid but that's another argument
Click to expand...

I was saying United was offered the Olympic stadium, Plans were downgraded for the Commonwealth Games stadium
and City moved in.

City did benefit from public money in that the cost of the stadium was funded but the lease monies have pretty much paid back The intangible benefits to the community have been far in excess of what was expected especially because of the regeneration of East Manchester beyond and able anyones wildest dreams due to the take over

But Mr Manchester, Burnham thinks the redevelopment of East Manchester was down to the government and manchester city council money hahaha what a load of bollocks.

I think the city council should give Manchester City the stadium for free for what we have done for east manchester, but that's never going to happen and the scum will get what they want
 
Stockton Heath Blue said:
That needs to be cleared up because if, as suspected, it's abroad, then there is no benefit to the north west economy.

I seem to recall when the CFA was being built the contractor had to commit that labour was to be sourced within a geographical radius of the stadium, to ensure it was built with a local workforce. Don't know if this was the case with the south stand or the current north stand development?
Click to expand...
The modules for the INEOS Project One plant in Antwerp were predominantly built in Thailand, while Abu Dhabi and Philippines are also mentioned although some of the components involved are more specialised than a football stadium.

You’d expect this would be a similar scenario citing expertise which exists in these regions for modular construction, no doubt there will be some BS reason they will justify based on earlier delivery dates meaning the area benefits economically sooner and the cost saving for the club is a bonus.
 
ancoats said:
I was saying United was offered the Olympic stadium, Plans were downgraded for the Commonwealth Games stadium
and City moved in.

City did benefit from public money in that the cost of the stadium was funded but the lease monies have pretty much paid back The intangible benefits to the community have been far in excess of what was expected especially because of the regeneration of East Manchester beyond and able anyones wildest dreams due to the take over

But Mr Manchester, Burnham thinks the redevelopment of East Manchester was down to the government and manchester city council money hahaha what a load of bollocks.

I think the city council should give Manchester City the stadium for free for what we have done for east manchester, but that's never going to happen and the scum will get what they want
Click to expand...
The Olympic stadium design was similar but the actual engineering design was substantially different yes the capacity was reduced to 48K

Burnham is a prick and doesn't have a clue about anything that doesn't benefit Burnham & Co Ltd This pipe dream scheme in Trafford is perfect for his profile he will make up figures to suit his motive like the 92k jobs and the improvement to traffic flow through Piccadilly, Ive posted an analysis in the rags thread about the trains that go through
Im putting together a FoI request to his office and welcome any suggestions, currently have 38 some Ive got from here I will post them when Im ready to submit
 
At-Swim-Two-Birds said:
The FT reporting on the cost of moving the rail freight hub quote Burnham. “The current figure is between £200mn and £300mn,” he said, but added that historic proposals for resolving that rail congestion had a £1bn price tag.

When he has spent £300m he will be coming back for more taxpayers money.
Click to expand...

Can someone please tell me if I've understood this correctly? That he's prepared to drop around £300mn of public cash on a deal that has the potential to be part of a solution to ease rail congestion in and around Manchester. But it would have minimal effect on its own because it will only deliver real value if it's made part of a scheme that requires several more hundreds of millions of funding. Which, of course, is far from guaranteed in the current climate to put it mildly.

If that's true then he really needs to be answer for the choice he's making. There are so many deserving projects out there that have no chance of being funded right now, so he needs to explai9n properly why this one deserves to be picked.
 
petrusha said:
Can someone please tell me if I've understood this correctly? That he's prepared to drop around £300mn of public cash on a deal that has the potential to be part of a solution to ease rail congestion in and around Manchester. But it would have minimal effect on its own because it will only deliver real value if it's made part of a scheme that requires several more hundreds of millions of funding. Which, of course, is far from guaranteed in the current climate to put it mildly.

If that's true then he really needs to be answer for the choice he's making. There are so many deserving projects out there that have no chance of being funded right now, so he needs to explai9n properly why this one deserves to be picked.
Click to expand...
Listen to the spin. He’s a political Disc Jockey/Mix Master. And his fawning over United. Don’t be surprised if you vomit listening to what he says about Manchester United Football Club. He answers your questions. I think?

Note:

Notice he hasn’t mentioned once again how much the freight train land is going to cost to buy, to remediate, and to prepare for construction of the stadium, which will probably run in £100mill’s. Guessing, there won’t be much change left from £500,000,000.

Add first.

www.skysports.com

Man United new stadium: Mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham insists 'there will be no public money' for club's new stadium

Mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham explains that Manchester Uniteds new stadium is a huge opportunity for the city, saying it could be greater than London 2012 but insists the club are solely responsible for funding their new home.
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
 
petrusha said:
Can someone please tell me if I've understood this correctly? That he's prepared to drop around £300mn of public cash on a deal that has the potential to be part of a solution to ease rail congestion in and around Manchester. But it would have minimal effect on its own because it will only deliver real value if it's made part of a scheme that requires several more hundreds of millions of funding. Which, of course, is far from guaranteed in the current climate to put it mildly.

If that's true then he really needs to be answer for the choice he's making. There are so many deserving projects out there that have no chance of being funded right now, so he needs to explai9n properly why this one deserves to be picked.
Click to expand...
His business case for tax payer money is regeneration. With such a robust business case the only surprise is that Ratcliffe and the Glazers don't fund it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top