Crump99

I do wish they wouldn't sell it like that, that's very very irritating and not needed. Everyone knows what's going on and most fans and others are fighting against that. If we have to suffer the last ever PR for Kings Lynn I don't think I'll bother. A speedway requiem isn't my idea of fun night. It's like watching Jason Crump riding for Kings Lynn or Ipswich which I never did either.

I think that you're right and that is something that we've got to argue against. AEPG will argue that the site is underused now that they've mugged everybody off and they never used the site to its full potential anyway. I'm sure that when the East of England Agricultural Society got in to bed with AEPG they didn't expect their legacy to be a toxic one, which is something different from that which the developer try to sell on their tin: "we leave a legacy of which all parties can be proud" - Peterborough City Council will never get over, be forgiven, or be proud getting rid of Peterborough Speedway from the city. As for the rent though, because we're inconvenient, they've wrecked the EoES and don't want to offer any help, especially financial (ie subsidise a community facility) their strategy allegedly will be for a break even rent which is clearly ridiculous. However, that does not get them out of their responsibilities under LP30. Hopefully PCC don't buy the guff that AEPG may have submitted to already (and we've yet to see I'm believe) to get them out of their responsibilities. It's worrying that Butterfield is quoted as saying: “We are working with the Speedway fans and owners but we understand the disappointment that the speedway is moving from Peterborough.” - when nothing has been approved. Peterborough Speedway in not moving anywhere if the planning is rejected and PCC are not hoodwinked over LP30.

The I know the real truth story is getting a bit tiresome though. Either post the facts, as you understand them or give it a rest, said in the nicest possible way. CJ has been a yo-yo for years and you seem to think that him making decisions is a plus. I'm not sure how many Panthers fans feel the same? Until Buster actually says what went wrong with the Tomlin deal, why he has been so negative on our future during 2023 (although I understand if it's not to upset AEPG as Bratters says), or why here at the end of 2022, at 1.01 he say that Panthers could have another few seasons at the EoES ? https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1285189478916248 then the jury is out and will remain so. Yes he's providing a good ending, and credit for that, but the emphasis very much on ending with others fighting for the club and energising the fans to get active. Surely even a die-hard Buster fan such as yourself can see that there are some questions to answer?

What's CJ bailing out got to do with it. Chapman is the owner and what he says goes no matter what the others underneath him do. He soon pops up on any team building issue that doesn't suit. He could have given us a decent team from the off irrespective of CJ. Good effort at deflection though. And credit for making avoiding the wooden spoon look like an achievement

Indeed. And that was the clever part of the article when he said: " If anyone did want to make me an offer, I wish they would have put it in writing, because I would have accepted it if it was anything sensible." - if those negotiations were only verbal and an offer price couldn't be agreed then there were no offers, despite others disputing that?

Didn't say that I believed it. Just that it has as much credibility as a post on a forum. Both are lacking detail and counter argument so treat both with a pinch of salt.

And in the programme he said that was cobblers: "There have been no offers; I can categorically assure you of that. Not one person has made an offer for the club. The only person I've spoken to was Michael last winter -- nobody else spoke to me about it or offered anything. If anyone did want to make me an offer, I wish they would have put it in writing, because I would have accepted it if it was anything sensible. So when I see that I've turned down two offers, I really wonder what people are trying to achieve by saying that." If anyone wishes to dispute that then feel free.

Last home meeting of 2023 yet to be confirmed but will happen so if you've been listening to the rumour mongers, not saying that that's the reason for your question, then fear not

He was 46, crocked, unproven since his injury and going to fall off at some point. How many bad indicators do you need to realise that it was a season breaking risk that we didn't need to take?

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?

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.

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

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

First green shoots in the programme last night. Rather than the "the end is nigh" message we got "enjoy the 3 final meetings (not specifying whether that means season or for good) & then take stock and look at what potential there is for the future, where and when? I'm probably reading too much in to that but have to cling on to whatever appears.

Good post. Keep the objections coming, even encourage friends and family to object. As well as the more detailed objections that point our their failings, it's a numbers game so a basic objection objecting to the loss of a perfectly viable existing culture, leisure, tourism and community facility; valuable city green space and one of the city's most successful and high profile sporting teams, in Peterborough Panthers speedway team, which has been in operation at the East of England Showground continuously for 53 seasons, that would do. Of course reword it or add your own thoughts so as not to look like a job lot, but do it. I'd favour AEPG being told where to get off by PCC and them also telling the East of England Agricultural Society that they need a new plan more focused on enhancing the existing culture, leisure, tourism and community facility (including Peterborough Speedway) and AEPG and co can build their residential housing, and its alleged positive outcome for Peterborough, elsewhere. Just a thought

Been like that for long time now. I've sort of got used to it but it's something that you notice every meeting. We still get some superb action but compared to what it used to be like we're missing 20% of the product. Iversen particularly tries what used to work in years gone by and can go wide for the pass for the lead but come out of the bend in 3rd or 4th. It must be so frustrating for the riders? However, that's a bit of a side issue as we fight for our future. Panthers as a club are now on fire (not literally as some may wish) at just the right time. If ever you wanted to see absolute speedway quality then Artem Laguta is it, both on track and his reaction to the fans. God knows who that imposter was who turned up at his first meeting?

Are you on again?

Mick Bratley was looking at the possibility of that sort of protection should common sense not prevail for Panthers 2024. I don't know what mechanisms he was looking at or if any progress was made but basically yes it was considered.

And more: The first AEPG planning document outlines the construction of up to 650 homes, ie: Land A (part of the current local plan). The Peterborough Local Plan for 2016-2036 says that 650 homes on the Showground is an acceptable number; though building works might take a decade and this is subject to LP36 & LP30 And that's before their 850 AEPG application that appears nowhere, totally confuses the issue and would have a similar timescale at best. The current local plan, which was adopted in 2019, covers development in Peterborough up until 2036. However, national policy is for this to be updated every five years and that review in now underway by PCC. The process would take approximately three years with several public consultations included and that's the only time that we should see that 850 application. I see no reason why Peterborough Speedway cannot continue at the EoES for many seasons, or indeed permanently (now there's a curveball!).

It's a bit mixed. We are told that that AEPG wouldn't negotiate on Panthers 2024 and beyond yet they say that that they have negotiated with the club's owner? Because we're basically a stand-alone operation now at the EoES and the site is now underused and badly maintained, AEPG/EEAS (whoever pays the bills?) are allegedly not prepared to subsidise this existing culture, leisure, tourism and community heritage asset, if they ever did, and allegedly they want to charge a break even rent (which is where the 7k figure came from, although whether accurate, who knows?) for Peterborough Speedway which one assumes is a fantasy figure the club couldn't entertain? AEPG would hope IMO that that then helps them in some way to agree with LP30 k. The facility is demonstrably no longer fit for purpose and the site is not viable to be redeveloped for a new community facility;

Usually though nobody is watching and the resistance is minimal. Everyone is aware of what's going on here though, it's high profile and already getting significant local publicity and people will be watching. If it can be argued that the site and/or speedway is a heritage asset then the NPPF points in my previous post should certainly scupper the AEPG planning application.

As helpfully pointed out by Old Nutter, I think that there are questions to be potentially asked and answered on those issues: The revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out government's planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. Conserving and enhancing the historic environment - Paragraph196. Where there is evidence of deliberate neglect of, or damage to, a heritage asset, the deteriorated state of the heritage asset should not be taken into account in any decision. - this relates to AEPG claiming that Peterborough Speedway is no longer fit for purpose if it isn't used due to bad faith negotiations, or lack of, and they don't maintain the perfectly working operation that was handed over at the end of the 2023 season/contract? Promoting healthy and safe communities - Paragraph 99. Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless: - this seems to be the same as LP30 which is just reworded in the Peterborough Local Plan. (a) an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or (b) the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or (c) the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the benefits of which clearly outweigh the loss of the current or former use. Definitions of terms used within heritage protection legislation and documents. https://historicengland.org.uk/advice/hpg/hpr-definitions/#cat_E

The BSF is hardly representative though of the majority view in many instances. It's like saying that you saw it on Twitter (X) and/or Facebook.

Yes you'd think so but plans seemingly changed, so if they can change once then they can certainly change twice? I'm reliably informed that allegedly the original plan was that the EoES be closed completely at the end 2021 & that all of the existing buildings, Peterborough Arena included (interesting to note that bit), would be demolished with the entire site then developed for residential housing. I guess that, if true, then that would have been problematic and extremely unpopular, hence the need for a new plan incorporating all of the latest buzzwords and PCC strategies around leisure, health safety and wellbeing, their green & environmental agenda as well their tourism strategy. If PCC buy that, does anyone expect that in 10 years time anything like the AEPG brochure will be the outcome?

I'm just a supporter like yourself trying to do the only thing that we can do. Those are all valid points and I don't know the answer. We just have to hope that someone really is interested in taking the club forward and AEPG come to the table, whether voluntarily or due to outside pressures. PCC and AEPG thought that this would go through on the nod so we can only try to put a spanner in the works, make it difficult and cross our fingers. Whether we'll win I don't know but doing nothing will hand victory to the executioner.