Peterborough Panthers 2023

[arnieg]

36 minutes ago, OldNutter said:

A little bit of info for the future.

When the two applications consultation closes, the two plans will almost certainly come back to the PCC to move on to the next step.  There will be a meeting of the Planning and Environment Protection Committee.  As outsiders, many of us will not be able to contribute to the discussions and we will have to rely on local supporters who live within the PCC wards.  The details of who is on that committee are shown here: https://democracy.peterborough.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=117

The councillors shown there are the ones you will need to "lobby" with your comments before that meeting.  I dare say, based on previous performances, the fact that the plans are going to committee might well not be made very obvious, so you may have to keep your ears to the ground.  Unfortunately, the only councillor (Julie Stevenson) to put their head above the parapet to talk to the papers so far is not on the committee, but she might be someone who can help from the sidelines.

The whole thing will be a fight and the opponents will have all the rules at their fingertips,  but being wrong is a distinct disadvantage for them so beating them is certainly possible.

 

Any councillor who expresses an opinion would automatically be barred from involvement in determining the application. Most councillors will have little engagement with the detail until the agenda for the meeting is published a week before the planning meeting at which it is considered. A key factor will be the tenor of the report to the meeting and its recommendations. 

[Mimmo]

2 hours ago, SPEEDY69 said:

Still low though, given the fanbase speedway has.  Look how much coverage Wolves have had and Coventry still have, being driven by committed volunteers.  I am not in Peterborough or nearby so don't see what local coverage is like but surely the BSPL could promote objections/activity.

As far as I'm aware, but of course maybe wrong, but I don't think the BSPL get involved, unless a promoter asks them to. 

[SPEEDY69]

2 minutes ago, Mimmo said:

As far as I'm aware, but of course maybe wrong, but I don't think the BSPL get involved, unless a promoter asks them to. 

But why not - surely it's a direct impact on their business?  Just because they don't, doesn't mean they shouldn't !

[Sir Sidney]

Just now, SPEEDY69 said:

But why not - surely it's a direct impact on their business?  Just because they don't, doesn't mean they shouldn't !

I asked the SCB. They will only get involved if requested  - and at the point I asked them no one had. 

 

Sounds bonkers to me, especially where the current owner has apparently just accepted closure

[Flappy]

Why isn't buster on record putting his weight behind the support 

[cinderfella]

3 minutes ago, Flappy said:

Why isn't buster on record putting his weight behind the support 

Maybe because he wants nothing to do with Peterborough and to concentrate on KL? 

Though maybe after last night's result he'll realise he has the makings of a team worthy of challenging for honours next season and suddenly develop an interest? 

[Crump99]

1 hour ago, OldNutter said:

A little bit of info for the future.

When the two applications consultation closes, the two plans will almost certainly come back to the PCC to move on to the next step.  There will be a meeting of the Planning and Environment Protection Committee.  As outsiders, many of us will not be able to contribute to the discussions and we will have to rely on local supporters who live within the PCC wards.  The details of who is on that committee are shown here: https://democracy.peterborough.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=117

The councillors shown there are the ones you will need to "lobby" with your comments before that meeting.  I dare say, based on previous performances, the fact that the plans are going to committee might well not be made very obvious, so you may have to keep your ears to the ground.  Unfortunately, the only councillor (Julie Stevenson) to put their head above the parapet to talk to the papers so far is not on the committee, but she might be someone who can help from the sidelines.

The whole thing will be a fight and the opponents will have all the rules at their fingertips,  but being wrong is a distinct disadvantage for them so beating them is certainly possible.

 

Julie Stevenson is on our side although publically slightly fence sitting at the moment or it's being made to look that way which is a touch disappointing none the less, if that's how it needs to be though then so be it. My local councillor is on the planning committee, is known to me and we get on fine, but the response I got from a cc'd e-mail was (slightly reworded but the message is accurate) "as a member of the planning committee I need to keep away from this" - from speaking to him before, I think that the correct course is to politely lobby (e-mail) those local councillors and ask them to make your views known to the planning committee. Not forgetting to also register an objection on the planning portal and referencing that in your email.

Locals could also e-mail the MP the ward (the ward covering the East of England Showground) who is Shailesh Vara, also Paul Bristow as the the loss of the site and Peterborough Speedway is a city issue so no reason for him to get away unscathed, he took the photo op at the start of the season  https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/sport/other-sport/major-boost-for-peterborough-panthers-as-potential-new-promotion-team-is-announced-alongside-increased-financial-support-3994378

Edited September 8, 2023 by Crump99

[SPEEDY69]

23 minutes ago, Sir Sidney said:

I asked the SCB. They will only get involved if requested  - and at the point I asked them no one had. 

 

Sounds bonkers to me, especially where the current owner has apparently just accepted closure

Yes exactly!  Although aren't the SCB different from the BSPL? But equally they don't appear to be doing anything either - if they can't be bothered, why should we?

[Crump99]

23 minutes ago, Flappy said:

Why isn't buster on record putting his weight behind the support 

Whilst still running you have to nice to AEPG, even at this late stage.

[Crump99]

2 minutes ago, SPEEDY69 said:

Yes exactly!  Although aren't the SCB different from the BSPL? But equally they don't appear to be doing anything either - if they can't be bothered, why should we?

Because you're a speedway supporter with your own pride. Just because a load of clowns don't know what they are doing it doesn't mean that you have to follow their lead.

[Mimmo]

31 minutes ago, Sir Sidney said:

I asked the SCB. They will only get involved if requested  - and at the point I asked them no one had. 

 

Sounds bonkers to me, especially where the current owner has apparently just accepted closure

Am I right in thinking that it has to be the club promoter, and no one else, that requests helps from the BSPL, which would make sense.
Peterborough don't have a promoter, as Carl Johnson walked away from the club, even though he's still named as promoter in the club programme.
I also thought rightly or wrongly, that a club couldn't run a meeting(s) without a promoter.  A promoter can't promote at two tracks in the same league, so that would rule Buster and Dale (Allitt) out, as they're both registered promoters at King's Lynn.

So who actually is running the club?  

[SPEEDY69]

6 minutes ago, Crump99 said:

Because you're a speedway supporter with your own pride. Just because a load of clowns don't know what they are doing it doesn't mean that you have to follow their lead.

Although I agree it is the job of leaders to do just that.

[Sir Sidney]

33 minutes ago, SPEEDY69 said:

Yes exactly!  Although aren't the SCB different from the BSPL? But equally they don't appear to be doing anything either - if they can't be bothered, why should we?

We should be bothered precisely because they are not.

Personally I think the time has come for someone or some organisation to come forward and co-ordinate the response, be that a prospective new owner, the supporters club or someone with an existing relationship with the club. Whoever that may be should then contact SCB and / or BSPL to request assistance.  

I'd have thought the Save Coventry group could also offer help and advice.

This may of course all be happening in the background

[Sir Sidney]

29 minutes ago, Mimmo said:

Am I right in thinking that it has to be the club promoter, and no one else, that requests helps from the BSPL, which would make sense.
Peterborough don't have a promoter, as Carl Johnson walked away from the club, even though he's still named as promoter in the club programme.
I also thought rightly or wrongly, that a club couldn't run a meeting(s) without a promoter.  A promoter can't promote at two tracks in the same league, so that would rule Buster and Dale (Allitt) out, as they're both registered promoters at King's Lynn.

So who actually is running the club?  

I don't know about the BSPL,  but I would have thought anyone could ask. The worst they can say is no. 

The current owner clearly isn't going to do anything 

[Mick Bratley]

1 hour ago, Falcon1983 said:

Question - what details do you leave when you object? can you do it privately or do you have to provide address and contact details?

You have to leave your details but they won’t publish your name. Have a look through the objections placed you will get the gist.

[OldNutter]

45 minutes ago, Crump99 said:

"as a member of the planning committee I need to keep away from this" - from speaking to him before, I think that the correct course is to politely lobby (e-mail) those local councillors and ask them to make your views known to the planning committee. Not forgetting to also register an objection on the planning portal and referencing that in your email.

Locals could also e-mail the MP the ward (the ward covering the East of England Showground) who is Shailesh Vara, also Paul Bristow as the the loss of the site and Peterborough Speedway is a city issue so no reason for him to get away unscathed, he took the photo op at the start of the season  https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/sport/other-sport/major-boost-for-peterborough-panthers-as-potential-new-promotion-team-is-announced-alongside-increased-financial-support-3994378

Your councillor is spot-on.  He is not allowed to get involved at all in any actual two-way discussion because that might leave him open to claims of being "pre-disposed" for or against the application.  Having said that receiving emails putting your case is classed as lobbying, so a polite email as suggested would be fine.  That was one of the things I was referring to by saying the system is solidly behind the developers in these cases.  As a lay person, I find it grossly immoral that the developers can do what they want and talk  to anyone, but we cannot discuss a proposal with our elected representative so that he/she knows the other side of the discussion from people he/she represents and who know the local effects of these plans.  But the law is the law and nobody said it has to be fair.  That said, Julie is not bound by that rule because she will not have a vote for or against it when it comes to committee.

 

 

 

 

 

[Method]

Even if the planning is flat out rejected, AEPG don't have to renew the lease for the Speedway... 

Surely as custodians of the showground and with permission from AEPG they can simply agree between them that they don't want the speedway there anymore, not renew the lease and demo the facilities?

The speedway has always rented the facilities and Surely no one is obliged to provide them indefinitely.

This has been on the cards for as long as I can remember going, so Surely if Peterborough speedway was ever going to live on past the inevitable development of the showground, it would have done so by now.

[Crump99]

10 minutes ago, OldNutter said:

Your councillor is spot-on.  He is not allowed to get involved at all in any actual two-way discussion because that might leave him open to claims of being "pre-disposed" for or against the application.  Having said that receiving emails putting your case is classed as lobbying, so a polite email as suggested would be fine.  That was one of the things I was referring to by saying the system is solidly behind the developers in these cases.  As a lay person, I find it grossly immoral that the developers can do what they want and talk  to anyone, but we cannot discuss a proposal with our elected representative so that he/she knows the other side of the discussion from people he/she represents and who know the local effects of these plans.  But the law is the law and nobody said it has to be fair.  That said, Julie is not bound by that rule because she will not have a vote for or against it when it comes to committee.

That so true. Allegedly AEPG have give PCC their reasoning for not needing to honour LP36 & LP30. I don't think that paper is in the public domain but if anyone can point to it then then would be helpful.

And then Butterfield is quoted in the local press as saying “We are working with the Speedway fans and owners but we understand the disappointment that the speedway is moving from Peterborough.”

On what basis does he make such a claim when their planning application has yet to be approved? It's not going anywhere at the moment and even less so if PCC do their job. All sounds a bit dodgy?

[noaksey]

1 hour ago, Crump99 said:

Whilst still running you have to nice to AEPG, even at this late stage.

Yes it's the same at Wolves 

[arnieg]

1 hour ago, SPEEDY69 said:

Yes exactly!  Although aren't the SCB different from the BSPL? But equally they don't appear to be doing anything either - if they can't be bothered, why should we?

The SCB exists to regulate the sport, protect the integrity of their rulebook ( ha ha ) so it is outwith their remit, but one does wonder how the BSPL could be any less effective at achieving its basic mandate: to protect thd business interests of its members.