Several of the
protestors against Tottenham Hotspur’s proposal to play additional full-capacity matches at Wembley say they have lost faith in Brent Council following the verdict.
Spurs have been granted permission to play an additional 22 "home" matches using a full-capacity Wembley Stadium next season, meaning they could play at least 27 league and cup matches in front of 90,000
people.
Councillors voted 6-1 in favour of the club’s application with zero abstentions at the conclusion of a heated meeting in north-west London on Thursday night.
Wembley Stadium’s head of operations, Chris Bryant, also suggested that should Spurs require further matches to be played at full-capacity, they may be able do so depending on scheduling.
Spurs have been granted permission to play an additional 22 "home" matches using a full-capacity Wembley Stadium next season, meaning they could play at least 27 league and cup matches in front of 90,000
people.
Councillors voted 6-1 in favour of the club’s application with zero abstentions at the conclusion of a heated meeting in north-west London on Thursday night.
Wembley Stadium’s head of operations, Chris Bryant, also suggested that should Spurs require further matches to be played at full-capacity, they may be able do so depending on scheduling.
 |
| Spurs are heading back to Wembley (photo source: @SpursOfficial) |
Prior to Thursday, Brent Council had received
164 representations concerning the plan – 156 against and one
neutral.
At the meeting, around ten objectors and councillors voiced their disagreement with Tottenham’s proposals. A crowd of approximately 50 people cheered them on, often booing and heckling arguments in favour of the club’s plans.
Throughout the evening, several objectors and members of the public became visibly distressed.
One of them, Denise Cheong, spoke on behalf of Wembley Champions, a residents’ group, and says that the council are failing the locals.
“It’s very difficult to have any faith in the planning system in Brent Council if this sort of situation occurs on more than one occasion," she said after the verdict.
“They need to ideally address that in some way, shape or form. It’s not for Wembley Champions to inform residents about everything, that’s exhausting.
“There are elderly people who every weekend have to clean up their gardens and areas, who’s going to speak up for them?
“The duty of care that the council has for Brent residents to safeguard their quality of life is what this is about – have they protected residents and businesses this evening?”
At the meeting, around ten objectors and councillors voiced their disagreement with Tottenham’s proposals. A crowd of approximately 50 people cheered them on, often booing and heckling arguments in favour of the club’s plans.
Throughout the evening, several objectors and members of the public became visibly distressed.
One of them, Denise Cheong, spoke on behalf of Wembley Champions, a residents’ group, and says that the council are failing the locals.
“It’s very difficult to have any faith in the planning system in Brent Council if this sort of situation occurs on more than one occasion," she said after the verdict.
“They need to ideally address that in some way, shape or form. It’s not for Wembley Champions to inform residents about everything, that’s exhausting.
“There are elderly people who every weekend have to clean up their gardens and areas, who’s going to speak up for them?
“The duty of care that the council has for Brent residents to safeguard their quality of life is what this is about – have they protected residents and businesses this evening?”
 |
| Tottenham and Millwall fans clashed following their FA Cup tie at White Hart Lane (photo source: Daily Mirror) |
Cheong admitted she was surprised at how many
councillors voted in favour of the proposals.
“I don’t know how everyone came to their decisions," she added.
“What is unclear is how having read all the documentation, having read the supplementary report and having heard all of our comments, they said they were unable to make a decision at one point, so then how did
they make that decision?”
Cheong had been getting up at 4:30am for the past three weeks reviewing several reports to prepare for the decision.
She went on to say how scary it was having to hold the councillors to account.
“A key point is that the legal representative told them that they could not defer, then one of our resident team challenged them with a copy of the constitution which sets out how the council operates, how decisions are made and the procedures which are followed to ensure that decision making is efficient, transparent and accountable to local people.
"That is what this is supposed to be – a planning application decided using Planning Law and following our Brent Constitution.
“It was only at that point that they came back and said they can defer.
“Alarm bells are ringing, what if we didn't stand up for the little people? What if we didn’t challenge them? Who would challenge them? How long would this keep going on?"
Cheong was critical of the council website, which she said crashed whenever someone tried to submit a comment about the issue.
“Only after Wembley Champions contacted the usual Chair of the Planning Committee to ask for assistance were we little people given an email address specifically assigned to this application.
“In this instance, Head of Planning, Transport and Licencing. Before that we just had a website that was frequently down and a recorded voicemail message.”
Councillors suggested that a successful spell at the national stadium for Tottenham could set a precedent for future teams, such as Chelsea who could use Wembley for three seasons from 2018-19, and Wembley Champions are worried for the impact this could have on Brent citizens.
“I don’t know how everyone came to their decisions," she added.
“What is unclear is how having read all the documentation, having read the supplementary report and having heard all of our comments, they said they were unable to make a decision at one point, so then how did
they make that decision?”
Cheong had been getting up at 4:30am for the past three weeks reviewing several reports to prepare for the decision.
She went on to say how scary it was having to hold the councillors to account.
“A key point is that the legal representative told them that they could not defer, then one of our resident team challenged them with a copy of the constitution which sets out how the council operates, how decisions are made and the procedures which are followed to ensure that decision making is efficient, transparent and accountable to local people.
"That is what this is supposed to be – a planning application decided using Planning Law and following our Brent Constitution.
“It was only at that point that they came back and said they can defer.
“Alarm bells are ringing, what if we didn't stand up for the little people? What if we didn’t challenge them? Who would challenge them? How long would this keep going on?"
Cheong was critical of the council website, which she said crashed whenever someone tried to submit a comment about the issue.
“Only after Wembley Champions contacted the usual Chair of the Planning Committee to ask for assistance were we little people given an email address specifically assigned to this application.
“In this instance, Head of Planning, Transport and Licencing. Before that we just had a website that was frequently down and a recorded voicemail message.”
Councillors suggested that a successful spell at the national stadium for Tottenham could set a precedent for future teams, such as Chelsea who could use Wembley for three seasons from 2018-19, and Wembley Champions are worried for the impact this could have on Brent citizens.
 |
| Chelsea may also wish to use Wembley as a temporary home in the future (photo source: Evening Standard) |
Murtuza Khaqu, who was also against the
proposals, says that the council must ensure Tottenham act on their word
to help the Brent community.
“The council have done what they’ve done, and so we look forward. It’s now their responsibility to make sure they get the best out of this deal, they need to hold Spurs to account.”
“The council have done what they’ve done, and so we look forward. It’s now their responsibility to make sure they get the best out of this deal, they need to hold Spurs to account.”
CRYING WOMAN
ReplyDeleteSHE CAME FROM BRENT
SHE TRIED TO SEND SPURS OFF TO KENT
NINETY THOUSAND ON THE TRAINS
AS CRYING WOMAN CRIES AGAIN
This has made my day, brilliant
DeleteWembley Champions seek a better quality of life for all Wembley and Brent residents. Why did the planning committee not defer the decision? Why did 6 of them (including the chair) who voted in favour of 22 Extra Uncapped Full Capacity 90000 Event Days, not abstain from voting if they were as unsure as they appeared to be? We little people will likely never find out the answer to those questions.
ReplyDelete