A legally binding lease is a lot more than hot air

The recent letter by the current trust chairman deliberately avoids relevant clauses in the final lease that was agreed between the council and Firoka (Casino scheme for Ally Palace? Don't bet on it, H&H Broadway letters January 31).

The figure for the area for commercial offices has not been denied. In the secret Firoka User Clause (No 3.11.2.7) it is shown as 2,788 square metres, which sounds less than 30,000 square feet. This change-of-use alone might be worth £18 million pounds to Firoka. The true size of office development was not even hinted at in the Palm Court Display and the sheer scale was one of the biggest secrets in the lease. Sketchy outline proposals never showed how the huge swathe of offices might spill into the East wing.

Firoka's architects' plans showed - in place of the world's first television studios - the single word 'office'. There's a difference between an office and 30,000 square feet's worth!

If, in order to licence a new casino, the council had to apply to the Casino Advisory Panel by the end of March 2006, as claimed, why did Haringey agree to provide for a casino in the lease by the end of that year? If a casino was mere "talk ... back in 2005" why did the council agree to the casino clause in the lease in 2007?

The casino clause is in the contract stalled by court action in October, and would be in force already, but for the quashing secured by Jacob O'Callaghan. The chairman claims "a casino is simply not possible". Firoka must believe a casino is possible, otherwise they would not have thought it worthwhile to insist on the clause.

Much hot air is spoken about plans for Alexandra Palace. What counts is what is in the enforceable, legally binding lease, the document about which the chairman says so little.

CLIVE CARTER

Save Ally Pally Campaign