logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Login


Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
n123  
#1 Posted : Thursday, November 03, 2016 7:47:34 AM(UTC)
n123

Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/21/2016(UTC)
Posts: 81

magista obra cheap "The former mayor announced just last year that the total cost for transforming the stadium was £272m. In reality this is £323m - a difference of more than £50m.

"Sadiq has ordered a detailed investigation into the full range of financial issues surrounding the stadium.

superfly v black uk "We remain committed to the future of the stadium as a venue for football and other sporting and cultural activities, and we are confident that London will host a fantastic World Athletics and Para Athletics Championships in 2017."

cheap hypervenom phontam When asked for reaction, West Ham chose not to comment.

The club have a 99-year lease on the venue and pay an annual rent of £2.5m, which covers nearly all their costs. They also contributed £15m towards the conversion costs, with the public purse paying the rest.

This has led to widespread criticism from politicians, supporters of other clubs and campaigners for accountable and transparent government.

In a statement sent to Press Association Sport, the chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance John O'Connell said: "For too long the details of this shabby deal were kept in secret and lacked proper scrutiny so Sadiq Khan is absolutely right to look again at the case.

cheap tiempo legend v "But instead of focusing our anger on West Ham for taking advantage of this ludicrously generous taxpayer-funded subsidy, we should instead be demanding explanations from those that signed off on this agreement and ask how they ever thought that this offered value to those of us footing the bill.

"It's now down the those in charge of the inquiry to get to the bottom of how West Ham were gifted the deal of the century while ensuring their investigation doesn't end up costing the taxpayer as much as the stadium."

Khan's investigation will cover all stadium costs but it is the retractable seating system that was installed to get football fans closer to the pitch that is causing the most alarm.

It is understood that the seats are not as "retractable" as the Greater London Authority, the Stratford venue's owner, had been led to believe and they actually take 15 days to remove or replace.

This means extra costs and delays - a major concern when the stadium's business plan depends on concerts and other events during the football off-season. Depeche Mode are scheduled to play a concert on June 3, three weeks after the football season.

London Assembly member Andrew Dismore said: "This is a staggering burden to place on taxpayers. It's only a year ago that Boris Johnson promised both full transparency and that no more public money would be spent on this project.

"Londoners must now add the stupendous costs of retracting the seating to the other numerous poor deals for the taxpayer the West Ham contract contains.

sale superfly v black "Boris even went so far as boasting about the rental income from West Ham, which at £2.5m per season can now be seen to be a drop in the ocean when compared with the cost of retracting the seats.

"Londoners will rightly want to know how they ended up bearing the costs of the former mayor's disastrous negotiations."
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.