Andy Burnham | Manchester Mayor

[ROBSH34]

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.

You are bang on.

The other side effect of this is the moving of jobs from the freight terminal in Greater Manchester to Merseyside. This is from the elected mayor of Grester Manchester who is supposed to represent the people of Greater Manchester.

This is man who spent a fortune of our money with a county wide congestion charge that never happened and getting buses painted yellow at £7k a pop.

Don't forget our council tax bills will be dropping through our doors any day now .

 

[Bert Swift]

£300m of public money for Old Trafford

Drip by drip the truth is emerging.

Allegedly there is a £20bn shortfall in public finances. Cuts have to be made. However, a previously never mentioned scheme is now put forward as a priority and Burnham wants up to £300m (it will probably be 50% more if it happens) to shift a freight terminal in Trafford to St Helen`s. This just happened to co-incide with the land on which the freight terminal is currently located being essential to Man Utd PLC needing it to build a new ground.

Who makes this stuff up - "£7.3 billion annually for the UK economy, create 92,000 jobs nationally, more than 17,000 new homes". These are fantasy figures.

The truth is that public money is essential to help the absent, billionaire Glazers, and the billionaire Ratcliffe. Neither want nor intend to pay for the new ground. They want others to pay for that. And others to pay for the land acquisition and supporting infrastructure without which it can not happen.

All this is speculative and conceptual. Man Utd PLC club representatives were at MIPIM pitching their speculative ideas to speculators in the hope of attracting others to pay for a new stadium.. They said that their plans were “at the very early stages”.

There are no plans ! The costs are guestimates that will exceed £2b as happens with every major project. The timescales are unrealistic.

There is not sufficient land in the PLC`s ownership to build a stadium and utd.do not have the money even if they had all the land. This week Ratcliffe said that utd. would have gone bust if he had not sacked 400 staff. The same week he wants to build a new stadium !

Burnham is not daft. He is though disingenuous like many politicians. Reeves is the same. A marriage made in heaven. Throw in Coe and bingo.

The fact is that this is a huge PR and begging bowl exercise led by publicity desperate politicians who want public money to help billionaires who own a PLC by getting the public and private sectors to pay for it but not the owners of the club.

 

[jrb]

You are bang on.

The other side effect of this is the moving of jobs from the freight terminal in Greater Manchester to Merseyside. This is from the elected mayor of Grester Manchester who is supposed to represent the people of Greater Manchester.

This is man who spent a fortune of our money with a county wide congestion charge that never happened and getting buses painted yellow at £7k a pop.

Don't forget our council tax bills will be dropping through our doors any day now .

He will flip that by saying he is creating more short-term and long-term jobs via the United stadium proposal than the freight terminal has and is creating. Which is the truth. And he keeps on emphasising removing the freight train bottlenecks through the city centre that are causing delays to trains services across Gtr Manchester, the North West, and the North.

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

Has nobody started a petition yet?
100k for it.to be discussed by oh wait for it..Fucking twat face Starmer

 

[jrb]

Has nobody started a petition yet?
100k for it.to be discussed by oh wait for it..Fucking twat face Starmer

It will be filed away under discussed. This proposal is getting Government and tax payer backing for sure.

Everyone is a winner. The Labour Government(investment in the North), Andy Burnham, and most of all the Glazer’s, Scruffy Jim, and Manchester United.

 

[cheekybids]

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.

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

That question should be spammed on every article & puff piece which they write their fake justifications.

 

[cheekybids]

£300m of public money for Old Trafford

Drip by drip the truth is emerging.

Allegedly there is a £20bn shortfall in public finances. Cuts have to be made. However, a previously never mentioned scheme is now put forward as a priority and Burnham wants up to £300m (it will probably be 50% more if it happens) to shift a freight terminal in Trafford to St Helen`s. This just happened to co-incide with the land on which the freight terminal is currently located being essential to Man Utd PLC needing it to build a new ground.

Who makes this stuff up - "£7.3 billion annually for the UK economy, create 92,000 jobs nationally, more than 17,000 new homes". These are fantasy figures.

The truth is that public money is essential to help the absent, billionaire Glazers, and the billionaire Ratcliffe. Neither want nor intend to pay for the new ground. They want others to pay for that. And others to pay for the land acquisition and supporting infrastructure without which it can not happen.

All this is speculative and conceptual. Man Utd PLC club representatives were at MIPIM pitching their speculative ideas to speculators in the hope of attracting others to pay for a new stadium.. They said that their plans were “at the very early stages”.

There are no plans ! The costs are guestimates that will exceed £2b as happens with every major project. The timescales are unrealistic.

There is not sufficient land in the PLC`s ownership to build a stadium and utd.do not have the money even if they had all the land. This week Ratcliffe said that utd. would have gone bust if he had not sacked 400 staff. The same week he wants to build a new stadium !

Burnham is not daft. He is though disingenuous like many politicians. Reeves is the same. A marriage made in heaven. Throw in Coe and bingo.

The fact is that this is a huge PR and begging bowl exercise led by publicity desperate politicians who want public money to help billionaires who own a PLC by getting the public and private sectors to pay for it but not the owners of the club.

“92k jobs nationally…… don’t you mean in the area regenerated?”

From what I can tell, no one can give any indication of an industry outside football that will be moving into OT so how can they possibly estimate how many jobs are created?

I’ve written many capex projects & I’d be petrified facing some of my old bosses if I’d come up with this buffoonery.

I think they were claiming more annual visitors than Disney World in Florida…….

 

[Oldtraffordblue1]

“92k jobs nationally…… don’t you mean in the area regenerated?”

From what I can tell, no one can give any indication of an industry outside football that will be moving into OT so how can they possibly estimate how many jobs are created?

I’ve written many capex projects & I’d be petrified facing some of my old bosses if I’d come up with this buffoonery.

I think they were claiming more annual visitors than Disney World in Florida…….

I think they are saying 5,000 of the 100,000 attending will buy a pie, to make those pies will take 200 people and so on and so on, never more apt a saying than the 92,000 is a pie in the sky figure!

 

[Gordyola]

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.

Guessing this was HS2 and the extension of Piccadilly Station

 

[trotsky]

It was really pleasing to see the redevelopment of Newcastle’s St James’ Park making the headlines. They should be demanding the same Government handouts that United get. Their cause is just the same, if anything, Newcastle is in more need than Manchester.

There’s no way the Government can afford both and there’s no way the Labour Party will alienate the votes in the North East. Hopefully this means the rags begging bowl remains empty.

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

Who makes this stuff up - "£7.3 billion annually for the UK economy, create 92,000 jobs nationally, more than 17,000 new homes". These are fantasy figures.

This is the source of the figures I believe…

The Economic Impact of Regenerating Old Trafford

Manchester United is considering several options for the development of their stadium at Old Trafford. As such, there is a need to understand the net socioeconomic benefits that could be generated by a potential new stadium at a local, regional, and national level.

www.oxfordeconomics.com

By the way, there are three authors to this. One from Belfast, one from Dublin and a junior fellow. Could be coincidence but…

 

[cheekybids]

This is the source of the figures I believe…

The Economic Impact of Regenerating Old Trafford

Manchester United is considering several options for the development of their stadium at Old Trafford. As such, there is a need to understand the net socioeconomic benefits that could be generated by a potential new stadium at a local, regional, and national level.

www.oxfordeconomics.com

By the way, there are three authors to this. One from Belfast, one from Dublin and a junior fellow. Could be coincidence but…

Do the Authors consider an option of the Rags staying at the Swamp, moving the Freight Yard & selling the land privately.

If it’s such a good deal I’m sure private investors would be falling over to get involved.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

It was really pleasing to see the redevelopment of Newcastle’s St James’ Park making the headlines. They should be demanding the same Government handouts that United get. Their cause is just the same, if anything, Newcastle is in more need than Manchester.

There’s no way the Government can afford both and there’s no way the Labour Party will alienate the votes in the North East. Hopefully this means the rags begging bowl remains empty.

They don’t like Middle East money in the Premier League but in the real world it gets stuff done. Newcastle’s owners will have the cash ready to go on what ever needs to be done to get the development completed. Same with City building an arena, a new stand and what will be on the largest hotels in Manchester when it’s done.

No appointing people like Lord Coe, no press conferences to pacify supporters, it just gets done. Compare and contrast to the rags who have a design and idea and no money to make it happen.

 

[Gordyola]

This is the source of the figures I believe…

The Economic Impact of Regenerating Old Trafford

Manchester United is considering several options for the development of their stadium at Old Trafford. As such, there is a need to understand the net socioeconomic benefits that could be generated by a potential new stadium at a local, regional, and national level.

www.oxfordeconomics.com

By the way, there are three authors to this. One from Belfast, one from Dublin and a junior fellow. Could be coincidence but…

I wonder who paid for it?

Please produce a report that shows the benefits of developing the stadium, we use you as you have Oxford in your title which implies association to the world renown university
A report that takes a lot of assumptions and multiplies them by more assumptions to get the outcome that's required by those funding the report

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

I wonder who paid for it?

Please produce a report that shows the benefits of developing the stadium, we use you as you have Oxford in your title which implies association to the world renown university
A report that takes a lot of assumptions and multiplies them by more assumptions to get the outcome that's required by those funding the report

The rags commissioned it. I just hope that the council’s figures they quote haven’t come from this. They are claiming 46k jobs and £4.2bn to the local economy.

 

[M12Blue]

They don’t like Middle East money in the Premier League but in the real world it gets stuff done. Newcastle’s owners will have the cash ready to go on what ever needs to be done to get the development completed. Same with City building an arena, a new stand and what will be on the largest hotels in Manchester when it’s done.

No appointing people like Lord Coe, no press conferences to pacify supporters, it just gets done. Compare and contrast to the rags who have a design and idea and no money to make it happen.

What needs to be done when on the scrounge, be bending over with pants down soon enough

 

[mexico1970]

This is the source of the figures I believe…

The Economic Impact of Regenerating Old Trafford

Manchester United is considering several options for the development of their stadium at Old Trafford. As such, there is a need to understand the net socioeconomic benefits that could be generated by a potential new stadium at a local, regional, and national level.

www.oxfordeconomics.com

By the way, there are three authors to this. One from Belfast, one from Dublin and a junior fellow. Could be coincidence but…

Could you imagine not having a pot to piss in and then have the nerve to ask for something that you could never afford because of some misplaced sense of entitlement?

It's like giving food to a food bank and they refuse wanting vouchers to eat at Gordon Ramsey s instead.

 

[Citi-leaks]

Reading through many of the comments on here, it seems that people are getting confused with the redevelopment of Old Trafford the area, and Old Trafford the stadium.

The government are not putting a penny into the building of a new stadium. They are putting in the transport infrastructure to serve 4000 new homes.

Freightliner, the owners of the freight terminal, have been in negotiations to move to a purpose built terminal in St Helens since 2022. With the backing of Manchester and Liverpool City Councils.

The proposed move, which has been confirmed by Freightliner, could offer significant benefits to the modern rail freight and logistics sectors. Not least, the new site, at Parkside East, would, at a stroke, radically reduce the pressure on key infrastructure in Manchester.

It may well relieve the chronic congestion in the notorious ‘Castlefield Corridor’, a two-track section through a heavily urbanised part of central Manchester. The tracks are frequently overloaded with a mixture of freight and passenger traffic.

Purpose built and freeport location​

Speaking to a regional media source, Freightliner confirmed that it had taken an interest in land at Parkside East, with a view to establishing new intermodal facilities there. Freightliner, one of the UK’s largest rail freight operators, is reportedly operating its Old Trafford base at full capacity, moving up to twenty trains a day.

The new site at Parkside East would allow Freightliner to handle many more services. The site’s strategic location, nearby the expanding Liverpool docks, and within a designated freeport, makes the transfer an attractive proposition. Negations could well be centred on the ‘transfer fee’ paid by the football club.

For the logistics sector, the potential relocation offers improved efficiency in goods movement. Parkside East, where Freightliner reportedly is planning over 230,000 square metres of rail terminal space, is well-placed to accommodate future growth in freight volumes, for both domestic and international trade.

The relocation would also open up capacity on the Liverpool-Manchester rail line, currently constrained by freight traffic, allowing for expanded passenger services and easing congestion through Warrington, a choke point on the West Coast Main Line, Europe’s busiest mixed traffic railway.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I would reword question 5...

Agree. Should be a comma between vested and conflict.

 

[Corky]

I wonder who paid for it?

Please produce a report that shows the benefits of developing the stadium, we use you as you have Oxford in your title which implies association to the world renown university
A report that takes a lot of assumptions and multiplies them by more assumptions to get the outcome that's required by those funding the report

Oxford Economics were paid by AGMA for GM Economic Forecasting Model 20 years ago, there is a long standing association.

This sort of data modelling is more of an art than a science and you can make the figures say what you want, a lot is down to the assumptions.