"I'm not anti-Hornets", says
Brett
We read between the lines
of
THAT Observer article
.
That Councillor Brett - he's a veritable tangle of contradictions. Take his
comments in today's Observer.
He said: "I have no objection with them going ahead with the game. "
That'll be why he suggested moving the game to Boundary Park and depriving
both Hornets and the Stadium Company of some much needed revenue.
He said: " I wrote to them asking them when they were going to pay the rent."
Actually, that was a minor comment. The reference to the disputed rent payments
was restricted to 18 words at the end of a much longer letter. The first
two and a half paragraphs referred to a) how the Law Cup was 'inappropriate'
due the busy part of the football calendar; b) anticipated damage to the
pitch due to 'exceptionally wet weather'; c) how playing at Boundary Park
would be better because their pitch has had 'a lot of money spent on it'
and d) how the limited resources of the Stadium Company left him 'not sure'
whether Spotland was capable of hosting the fixture.
He said: "I wrote them a private and confidential letter, but if they want
to publish it okay". So he's happy with it being published?
The club didn't publish it, we reported on it - but then in the next breath
he says: "...instead of talking to me and doing things properly, they do
what they've done as regards this letter." So he's not happy with it being
'published'?
He said: "I'm not anti-Hornets. This is a myth created by Hornets."
Actually this is an opinion formed by those who believe him to be anti-Hornets.
"It goes on the Internet and leads to attacks on me, using what I call mean
spiteful stuff."
The internet is an open forum. It's a channel through which people pick up
information. We've never used mean or spiteful 'stuff' in our reports, we've
merely questioned his motives. And if visitors to the message board get angry
- as an elected representative of Rochdalians, if he does something that
people don't agree with, he's bound to pick up some flak. As a councillor,
he's answerable and accountable to the people he represents - and some of
them might be a little to the point in their opinions.
"I don't go on the Internet..."
Why does he have an e-mail address at the council if he doesn't use current
technology such as the internet? Surely that's a good way for him to
communicate with people? The more channels of communication he has open to
him, the more accessible he is.
"I'm not a bit anti-Hornets, and I want it stated. I want them to survive..."
Well that's good, let's see that put into action.
"The bottom line is I want to help Hornets and help them move forward." Of
course you do, Allen.
|
:
