No consolation for Liverpool’s council leader

May 7 2008 by Bill Gleeson, Liverpool Daily Post

THE outcome of last week’s local elections has sent a clear signal to national government that it is failing to impress voters.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown spent the Bank Holiday weekend publicly acknowledging his shortcomings as a leader, and Cabinet ministers were forced to speak up for their beleaguered boss by insisting there was no chance of a leadership election contest just yet.

The same can’t be said locally.

Yes, Liverpool’s voters have sent the incumbent Liberal Democrat city council administration a clear message that they are dissatisfied with the way the place has been run in recent years, with the result that the party is clinging on to power by its fingertips. With a majority of one, the Lib-Dems are dependent on the support of an ex-Labour defector, a situation that looks precarious to me.

But the big difference between national and local politics in Liverpool is that city council leader Warren Bradley doesn’t have the consolation that there won’t be a leadership contest. His political enemies are circling and a contest seems inevitable.

Nor is any of this surprising. There have been huge problems with the way aspects of Culture Year, the Liverpool Culture Company and the city’s finances have been managed.

The real harm from last week’s vote comes from the potential for the political instability in the city council to run on and on. As well as politicians taking their eyes off their main job, namely the provision of important public services, there is huge scope for the infighting to undermine the city’s reputation as a good place to do business.

It has only been since the Liberal Democrats came to power ten years ago that the city has returned to the short-lists of potential inward investors, the people who can boost wealth and jobs in our region. The previous Labour administration was disastrous for Liverpool’s economy, mainly because it presided over the highest local taxes in the country. Liverpool can not afford a return to those bad days.

Hopefully, the Liberal Democrats can sort out their leadership issues quickly and return to the business of winning back voters in time for the next round of council elections.

HOW realistic is it for Everton to raise £60m towards the cost of its planned new Kirkby ground from selling stadium naming rights?

Clearly, Arsenal set the precedent, securing a £100m shirt sponsorship and stadium naming rights deal from Emirates, the Middle Eastern airline.

When it comes to raising brand awareness, stadium naming deals are an excellent way for businesses to reach the public. Every time BBC sports journalists report on an Arsenal match, the airline gets a mention. The value in airtime will be many times that paid for the naming rights. The same is true of Bolton’s Reebok, Wigan’s JJB, newly-relegated Leicester City’s Walker and newly-promoted Stoke City’s Britannia grounds.

But not everybody has secured a deal. Newcastle United, Sunderland and Millwall have not been able to raise money from naming rights. Indeed, Liverpool has yet to do any deal either for its much talked about new ground at Stanley Park.

At least Everton is now showing serious intent to secure the funding for the ground. That can only be a good thing.

Clearly, money from naming rights is essential for the new ground, yet, in itself, it won’t be enough. Everton will need to raise further cash, but there again, a couple of good runs in Europe’s Uefa Cup and the club could find itself most of the way there.