THE future of the multi-million pound redevelopment of Margate Football Club hangs by a slender thread as the troubled scheme heads into 2004.

Thanet council leader Cllr Sandy Ezekiel say the club’s failure to meet a series of deadlines “has called into question the viability of the project,” and the council is demanding evidence of action by January 9.

The club met some of the deadlines imposed but a detailed application for commercial development has not yet been submitted.

Cllr Ezekiel said: “Over the last two and a half years, the club has given start dates, but failed to meet any of them. Therefore we have demanded a proper project plan with a detailed business plan and we need to know where their secure funding is coming from.

“We cannot allow this situation to continue indefinitely, otherwise we could still be in the same position in a year. The club know exactly what we require.”

Margate chairman Jim Parmenter said failure of support from the council could put the future of the Hartsdown Park stadium project and the club into serious doubt.

Margate are in their second season playing their home games at Dover's Hoverspeed Stadium. The Conference league is fining Margate £5,000 a game for every match they are forced to rearrange because of the clashes with Dover fixtures, but the club is appealing for the fines to be reduced by the Football Association.

Mr Parmenter has branded the Thanet council statement a disgrace. He said the heading on the statement, "Margate Football Club scores own goal", was misleading, confrontational and biased.

Mr Parmenter added: "Maybe now people will realise what we are up against with this council. They obviously have a hidden agenda. We have provided a letter from our funders and a business plan.

"The council have said these are not satisfactory, but have not told us why. The bank have offered to go to the council offices over Christmas to explain the viability, but we have received no response.

"Many of the issues raised are minor and we have pleaded with the council to work with us to resolve the statutory requirements. They have responded by re-issuing a list of demands some of which they know we cannot meet without their help. Obviously designed to “time-out” the project.

"The council has always known we needed help to bring the new scheme to the table, but whilst publicly expressing support they have not lifted a finger to help.

"For the leader to say they have bent over backwards is bizarre. Some of the matters previously agreed with the previous administration seem to have been lost and no one is in a hurry to find the files.

"At the last meeting the chief executive described the council's position as benign. Perhaps that explains it all."

Mr Parmenter stressed that the club was now considering its position.