MK Dons ‘till we die. That is the message from football fans throughout the city in the wake of calls for Milton Keynes Dons to ‘Drop the Dons’ from their name.
Fans rallied around the club after manager Karl Robinson insisted there is ‘no chance’ the club will lose the moniker.
And one supporter even suggested setting up a separate campaign asking for AFC Wimbledon to drop ‘Wimbledon’ from their name – as they don’t even play there.
The angry reaction came after the Wimbledon Guardian launched a campaign asking for the club to remove the ‘Dons’ from its name as it ‘exists only as a cruel reminder to fans of both clubs of what came before’.
And next week, Merton Council is set to debate a cross-party motion calling for MK Dons chairman Pete Winkelman to apply to the Football Association for a change of name prior to the April 1 deadline for the 2012-13 season.
The move is part of a ten week campaign involving the Guardian, Merton Council and Wimbledon Independent Supporters Association (WISA) set to culminate on the 10-year anniversary of the formation of AFC.
The ‘Drop the Dons’ calls come despite:

> Wimbledon having left the Borough of Merton to play at Plough Lane 12 years before the move to MK

> Previous statements by high profile WISA members referring to the club as MK Dons

> Dons season ticket holders still travelling from Wimbledon to watch the club at stadium:mk

> Pete Winkelman having spent considerable money maintaining the Wimbledon youth sides and employing staff members from that club

> AFC Wimbledon playing in Kingston Upon Thames: outside the Borough of Merton

Although the club has remained tightlipped on the subject, Dons manager Mr Robinson said it had no intention of dropping the Dons part of its name.
Speaking after Tuesday night’s defeat at Stevenage, he said: “We’re MK Dons and we always will be, and they need to shut up.
“It’s our identity now. They know the truth and they know they had their chance. We’re MK Dons and we’re MK Dons to stay for as long as I’m here.
“I believe very passionately in this club. I went to see a film about Milton Keynes, and I am very proud to live here and proud to manage MK Dons. We are Dons for a reason and I hope we stay Dons for a long, long time to come.”
Chairman Mr Winkelman courted controversy when, as part of consortium Inter MK, he bought Wimbledon out of administration and brought it to Milton Keynes in 2003.
But while the club moved a long way from its London home, it even now maintains links to the old Wimbledon side.
Mr Winkelman kept the club’s youth side and paid relocation fees for staff. Furthermore Dons fans favourite and club captain Dean Lewington and goalkeeping coach Paul Heald were part of the set-up when the move took place.
And fan Paul Hatton says he will stop supporting Milton Keynes Dons if the side ‘Drop the Dons’.
Mr Hatton, a former Wimbledon fan who lives in London and travels to stadium:mk from the capital for home games, said: “I think it’s a joke, we are MK Dons and if Pete Winkelman allows himself to be bullied into dropping it I will stop supporting MK Dons,
“I’m ex-Wimbledon Football Club and travel to MK every week to watch Wimbledon. We are the real Dons and the real Wimbledon, end of story.
“I think AFC Wimbledon should drop Wimbledon from their name as they don’t play in Wimbledon.”
But one of the most compelling piece of evidence as to why Milton Keynes should ‘Keep the Dons’ comes from WISA vice chairman Ross Maclagan.
Speaking to FourFourTwo magazine about the signing of an Accord created partly to transfer the ‘patrimony of the former club’ to the Borough of Merton in June 2008, he said: ‘We put enough pressure on the MK Dons that they eventually decided to come to the table.
‘We’ve come to a solution. This is an opportunity to move on. We may never be on each other’s Christmas list, but we can concentrate on our own clubs now’.
In the same article Wimbledon legend Lawrie Sanchez – scorer of the goal that helped defeat Liverpool in the 1988 FA Cup Final – said ‘it is time to forget’, adding that both clubs should ‘stop thinking about one another’.
And former AFC chairman and founder Kris Stewart, one of the men who has backed the Wimbledon Guardian campaign, used the name MK Dons before the club had even moved to Milton Keynes.
Writing in WISA programme Yellow & Blue in March 2002, he said: ‘MK Dons would be an exhibition team, relying on famous players and a big-name manager’.
Merton Council’s motion states: ‘The council notes that Wimbledon FC effectively ceased to exist in 2004 when the owners moved to Milton Keynes’. But the club had not played in Wimbledon since it packed its bags and left Plough Lane for Selhurst Park, home of Crystal Palace, in 1991.
By the council’s criteria this suggests Wimbledon Football Club ceased to exist when they left Plough Lane.
It goes on to say that the 2006 Accord ‘ensured Milton Keynes Dons FC would no longer claim to be Wimbledon FC’.
In fact, while the Accord recognised ‘the hurt which was caused’ by the move to MK and gave over the ‘physical patrimony’ of the club including the 1988 FA Cup replica, it stopped short of making any such claim.
Throughout the Accord, signed by WISA, the club is referred to as Milton Keynes Dons.
Milton Keynes Council leader Andrew Geary, a Dons season ticket holder, said any moves by Merton Council to interfere in the running of MK Dons were unwelcome.
“Like it or not Wimbledon came to MK. It now has its own identity and brand that Milton Keynes, and I, are extremely proud of,” he said.
“MK Dons is a brand name and a community club. Any moves to change that name will be unwelcome.
“With the resurgence of AFC they might be more interested in concentrating on that very successful side rather than ours.”
And deputy leader David Hopkins added: “The club is the MK Dons. If it had not been for Pete Winkelman the business would have disappeared.
“They hadn’t played at Wimbledon for donkey’s years. If Pete hadn’t picked the club up it would have been lost.
“No-one stole their football club, it went out of business.”
Fans on Twitter also rushed to the defence of the Dons:

- @Paul_XL5: ‘It’s totally laughable and some people need to get over themselves.We’ll call ourselves what we damn well like’.

- @DominicNewbould: ‘Will they ask Aberdeen to drop “Dons” as well? Wimbledon use this fake controversy to build their support – nothing to do with MK’.

- @Richard_MK: ‘Have Wimbledon Council got nothing better to do. I hear the Wombles are looking for a pay rise!!’

- @Bingobrewtea: ‘Leave the dons alone, we like the title mkdons. Seems wimbledon need to get a life’.

- @LucindaOfficial: ‘I think Wimbledon should worry a bit more about their game rather than what other teams are called’.

- @AMacMKD95: ‘wimbledon care more about us than themselfs, past few weeks we had good media attention and they’re only trying to ruin it’.

- @SarahBowenMK: ‘regardless of if you agree with the way MK Dons were formed, Wimbledon are a part of Mk dons history, the name reflects that’.

- @kevinGroom555: ‘what the? Is Wimbledon going to object to every use of Dons nationwide for all towns’.

- @Mpr2009: ‘I presume the other dons, aberdeen, will be next on the campaign’.

- @goodvote: ‘Milton Keynes are proud of the Dons, we should keep the title to show where we’ve come from’.

- @Chris_mk: ‘it’s nonsense, that’s the name of our club! Will Man Utd be asking Newcastle to drop their United?’

- @HappyDude88: ‘Time to move on Wimbledon fans. Why bring this up eight years after the rename in the first place?’

But some Dons fans on the social networking site did back the name change:

- @Markdolling: ‘Dons season ticket holder – totally agree it’s time to drop the Dons. MKFC will do just fine thanks’.

- @wideawakewesley: ‘I think we should drop the Dons reference. Doesn’t help the image of the club or the town’.

> To send our letter, see below, to PM Mr Cameron write to: David Cameron, House of Commons, London, SW1A OAA

> To write to Mr Hague the address is: William Hague, House of Commons, London, SW1A OAA

> The address for the Zambian High Commission is: Zambian High Commission, 2 Palace Gate, London, W8 5NG.

Dear

I am writing regarding Milton Keynes resident Ken Spooner, whose children were taken on holiday to Zambia by their mother Zanetta Nyendwa in October 2008.
Despite signing an agreement saying she would return with the boys, Ms Nyendwa has since taken up residence in Zambia.
Mr Spooner has been forced to enter into a lengthy and costly legal battle in an attempt to bring his children – both British citizens – home to England.
In September the Zambian Supreme Court adjudicated that Mr Spooner should have custody of the boys.
However, a stay was placed on the ruling pending an appeal from Ms Nyendwa – meaning despite both British and Zambian Governments recognising that the children should be in England, they remain with their mother.
Mr Spooner has faced extreme emotional and financial pressures as a result of Ms Nyendwa’s relocation of their children. He has only been allowed fleeting visits to see them in the last three years.
I urge the Zambian High Commission and British Government to give this case their most urgent attention and, where possible, to intervene to make sure Mr Spooner is properly reunited with his children as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

> As written by me and published in Milton Keynes Citizen today (January26)

Help Ken bring his boys home

FOR more than three years Great Linford resident Ken Spooner has been desperately trying to bring his children home to Britain.
Devlan and Caelan were taken on holiday to their mother’s homeland, Zambia, in October 2008. But Zanetta Neyendwa refused to bring the boys home, leaving a heartbroken Ken with the task of negotiating the maze of both the English and Zambian court systems.
Despite obtaining a court order making the boys Wards of the English Court, he has had to battle through the Zambian courts to try and gain custody of his children.
He has since had to spend more than £200,000 on legal fees, defeat false accusations that he tried to re-abduct the boys and gone long periods without seeing his children.
Milton Keynes Citizen launched its ‘Justice for Ken’ campaign last year asking the Government to intervene.
But the British Government say they can’t help as it would be wrong to interfere in the affairs of a sovereign state.
And despite the Zambian Supreme Court awarding Mr Spooner custody of Devlan and Caelan last month, the doting dad is still unable to bring his boys home after a clause was added putting a stay on the decision until an appeal has been heard – effectively allowing Miss Nyendwa to maintain ‘possession’ of the children.
Mr Spooner remains determined to fight on, despite the hurt the case continues to cause him.
But his pain and determination are not unusual. Hundreds of other left behind parents continue to fight a system seemingly incapable of coping with the problem of international child abduction.
CRAIG LEWIS examines the wider picture.

LEADING charity Reunite says internationally it dealt with 398 abduction cases involving 596 children in 2011.
Of those kids 380 were from the UK.
Children and Families Across Borders assistant manager Marek Ganther estimates the figure in Britain last year would have been around 400 children.
But the true scale of the plague of international child abduction can only be guessed at.
PACT (Parents & Children Together) was founded in 1999 by Lady Catherine Meyer, whose own children were abducted in Germany by her former husband in 1994.
Their ‘Every Five Minutes’ report published in 2005 was scathing of the British system for tracking and recording missing children.
Estimates for all missing children, included those taken abroad, ranged between 100,000 and 180,000.
The report said an analysis of the UK’s ‘multiplicity of available sources of information’ showed that ‘the raw materials for effective responses to the problem of missing and abducted children in the UK is at best incomplete, at worst virtually non-existent’.
It concluded: ‘Before all else what is now required is a change in attitude on the part of government, police, and society as a whole, so that much higher priority is given to children who go missing’.
International child abduction is a growing problem. More marriages are breaking down leading to more disputes over custody.
The breakdown of international borders is equally important. Marriages between people of different nationality are increasing – leading to potential problems should the relationship fail.
Whereas a disgruntled parent may previously have taken a child 100 miles up the road to get away from their former partner, they are now returning home to far flung corners of the globe.
Disputes over custody and access can be further exacerbated by differences in culture and in the legal system of the two countries involved.
So what can our Government do to help? And is it enough?
The Foreign Office’s own website suggests that support and advice is the best it can do if a child has been taken abroad.
It breaks down child abduction into three categories: abduction, wrongful retention – such as in Ken’s case where a child has been retained in a foreign country following an overseas trip – and threat of abduction.
What happens next depends on whether the country a child has been abducted to has signed up to the Hague Convention or not.
The 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is an agreement between certain countries which aims to ensure the return of an abducted child to the country they normally live in.
Issues of custody and access can then be decided in that country.
If a country is signed up to Hague, so the theory goes, it should be a simple process to get a child back home again.
If a child is taken to a non-Hague country the left-behind parent has to apply for custody and permission to bring their child home through the courts of that country.
In these cases the Child Abduction Service can provide lists of English-speaking lawyers and interpreters, share general information on dealing with abduction cases to a particular country and on custody issues and travel.
But the website is also open as to what the Foreign Office says it can’t do: The Government can’t be involved in any attempts to ‘rescue’ children; offer legal advice or interfere in the legal system of another country; or pay any legal, travel or accommodation costs.
Such rules mean parents like Ken can be left to fight their own battles.
Speaking in October, he slammed the Government for allowing ‘abductors to laugh in the face of the law’.
“I would like to see Government bring through some sort of legislation on international child abduction,” he said.
“It would be good if something could be put in place so that left behind parents get some financial help. I have colossal legal fees that need to be addressed and no choice but to meet them myself.
“The Government need to start getting involved in the whole issue of child abduction. There needs to be reciprocal agreements.
“I’m not saying my situation is more important than other things the Government have to tackle, but it is important to me and my children and as long as it continues other would be abductors continue to laugh in the face of the law.”
Lady Meyer’s sons Alexander and Constantin, then aged nine and seven, were abducted by their German father, although she had been awarded custody. Over the next nine years, she saw them for only a few hours, faced endless court applications and spent thousands of pounds.
Only now they have grown up has she managed to re-ignite a relationship with the boys.
She insists the problem is much more widespread than the Government realises. In an interview with The Times, she said: “The Government does not collect exact figures, so we don’t know the true scale of the problem.
“Our Government and our courts should be much tougher and protect British citizens much better. We should expose these injustices. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office should put pressure on governments abroad.
“We should follow the example of the French and the Americans, who seem to be more active in defending their victim parents.
“Children are often kidnapped after a holiday abroad or taken during contact visits.
“Sadly, even the Hague Convention does not work as well as it should.
“In the UK, we seem to be playing by the rules and our judges have one of the highest rates of returning children who have been abducted and brought to the UK from abroad. But other countries do not necessarily abide by the rules as we do.”
And Children and Families Across Borders’ Marek Ganther, who has operated his own child abduction project in Libya for nine years, believes the Government could do more.
He said: “I think I have a slightly different version of the Government’s policy in the affairs of a sovereign nation.
“On occasions they do interfere… in Ken’s case I believe that what the British Government can do is keep the pressure on the Zambian Government to say ‘we are not losing sight of this case’.
“I would suspect and hope that something is going on behind the scenes.
“This is not the sort of thing the Government is likely to admit to doing, but it does go on.
“It is important for left-behind parents to make sure the Government is doing something.
“They wouldn’t do anything unless there is pressure on them.”
Reunite, which works closely with the Government on the issue of child abduction, presents a somewhat different picture.
Advice line manager Sharon Cooke said: “Government departments are doing all they can for parents.
“In most cases the child involved is a dual national, and therefore a national of the country to which they have been removed, and when dealing with the overseas country we are governed by the laws of the country and cannot be seen to be breaking that law.
“As well as raising individual cases at a diplomatic level, government departments also promote the use of mediation, which can be a successful tool for securing a child’s return or for ensuring the child is able to maintain a meaningful relationship with both parents.
“Much of the work undertaken by the Government departments is unnoticed as it goes on behind the scenes. They are always striving to build relationships with other countries and encourage countries to become members of the Hague Convention.”
But Mr Ganther said more needs to be done to prevent abductions taking place in the first place.
“It is a huge problem. We are extremely bad at preventing abductions,” he said.
“One of the reasons is that the border agency has a greater interest in people entering than leaving the country.
“They are not bothered about who leaves. If you want to get out of the UK there are not that many checks.
“If you want to abduct a child go on Eurostar, hop on a ferry. You are more likely to be caught on a plane, but lots of people still get through airports.
“Recently I heard that some police officers even believe a mother can abduct her child. There have been cases where police have escorted a parent and child to the airport to put them on a plane.
“And some of these officers refuse to consult senior officers who might tell them what they should be doing because they think they know better.”
Mr Ganther believes that different countries present a variety of issues that need to be handled in different ways – and said that Hague is far from the final solution.
“The Arabic countries and Muslim states, because of their legislation, beliefs, cultures and traditions, are never going to sign up to Hague because of the conflicts with their own laws,” he said.
“You need to look at the laws in different countries, what conventions they have and what ways you can get round these.
“One example is that all but two countries in the world are signed up to the UN convention on the rights of a child, which says that a child is entitled to have contact with both parents unless there are very good reasons why they shouldn’t be.
“There are other ways this problem can be addressed.
“If it is a Hague country we address parents on the processes and suggest the avenues that they can go down. Some countries operate it much more speedily than others. There are some which would appear to favour their own citizens rather than following the legislation.
“With countries that are not signed up to Hague we can try to mediate with our colleagues in those countries speaking to the parent there. For that to work both parents need to be agreeable to engage in discussions.
“There is very little information for people, One of the problems is when a trans-cultural or racial marriage breaks down that is usually where these difficulties come.
“Currently with the Libya situation we have had groups of 20 or more come over. If I had told them don’t enter this marriage because the dangers are A, B and C most say they would not have listed anyway as they were in love.
“Half of these women alienated their families by wanting to marry a foreigner so they wouldn’t have wanted advice on what to do if the relationship was to fail.”
Via its advice line Reunite provides information for parents and assists in international contact issues.
But the charity also concentrates on prevention.
Ms Cooke said: “Parental child abduction causes real harm to children who can suffer great emotional trauma, a trauma which can remain with them throughout their lives.”
Reunite produce Child Abduction Prevention Guides which advise how to proceed if a parent believes their child is at risk of abduction.
The group also runs an outreach programme to raise public awareness of the issue.
So is there a solution to the problem?
“As long as relationships break down you are going to have an issue,” said Mr Ganther.
“Hague assumes neither parent is going to let the other one win. The children end up being an afterthought.
“Basically if there is a relationship breakdown the trick is to keep the lines of communication open because once they are shut it is difficult to open them again.
“As part of a long term solution if you can keep talking and bite your tongue that helps. Often one person will hope enough provocation will make things so difficult that the other half gives up.
“Many won’t give up. It can still be festering years afterwards and you can’t relive that lost time, not mothers or fathers or children. They are all victims.”
Lady Meyer is more forthright: “The solution is for governments and parents to realise the irreversible harm done to children who are forcibly separated from one of their parents.”
Perhaps only then can the 400-odd people embroiled in international child abduction every year find a solution.

IMPORTANT NUMBERS

Foreign Office Child Abduction Section: 0207 008 0878.

PACT:
UK Office:

PACT
22 The Vineyard
Richmond
Surrey
TW10 6AN
Tel: +44 (0)7506 448116
E-mail: support@pact-online.org

Reunite:

Reunite International
Child Abduction Centre
PO Box 7124
Leicester
LE1 7XX
United Kingdom
Registered Charity No. 1075729
Advice Line: +44 (0) 116 2556 234
Telephone: +44 (0) 116 2555 345
Fax: +44 (0) 116 2556 370
Email: reunite@dircon.co.uk

HOW many pounds does it take to recruit a senior council officer?
More than £20,000 if you’re Milton Keynes Council.
The authority has splashed out £378,477 in the last three year to bring in 17 senior executives – at a cost of £22,263 each.
In 2009 alone the council spent £320,854.66 to bring in a new chief executive, three corporate directors and nine assistant directors.
The expenses included almost £1,5000 on hotel accommodation and refreshments for candidates applying for the chief exec position and more than £1,000 spent on internal catering to help bring in a new director of children’s services.
But the vast amount of money went on ‘Search/Selection Services’ – cash spent on recruitment consultancies and covering candidates’ expenses, printing and courier costs.
More than £274,000 was spent on such services in the last three years.
The council insists the money needed to be spent to recruit top quality managers.
A spokesman said the appointment processes were approved on a cross-party basis to provide ‘effective budget and project management.’
He added: “Since 2009 there has been a high degree of stability at senior management levels at the council, so recruitment costs have been much lower.
“By investing money to recruit the right managers, of the right calibre the council has secured real benefits.”
The information was obtained via a Freedom of Information request submitted by this newspaper to the council, Thames Valley Police and Buckinghamshire Fire & Rescue Service.
Despite having more than a month to answer our question, Thames Valley Police were unable to come up with a final answer as figures relating to advertising spend were not available.
However, a spokesman said police did not spend a penny on travel, accommodation or refreshments during the recruitment of six senior management posts in the last three years.
The spokesman added: “We have paid costs for advertising some of these roles externally, where appropriate.
The Force has undergone significant restructure to support our budget cuts and has only advertised externally when unable to appoint internally.”
In the same three-year period Buckinghamshire Fire & Rescue Service spent £36,645 to recruit senior staff.
David Rowlands, chairman of Bucks and Milton Keynes Fire Authority, said: “The figures show the investment the authority has made in order to ensure fair and open process is used when undertaking recruitment.”

‘IT is about finishing what we started’, writes Craig Lewis.
That is the message from Milton Keynes Dons chairman Pete Winkelman after details of a new £56million shopping park were revealed on Tuesday.
Outlets including Primark and Marks & Spencer will take pride of place in the MK1 Shopping Park, while the cash generated will pay for the completion of stadiummk. The development will also bring around 1,000 jobs to the city.
For Mr Winkelman it will mark the completion of his dream to bring a super stadium to Milton Keynes – a dream which was first revealed by the Citizen in February 2000.
This newspaper was the first to report how the music entrepreneur, who is also chairman of the consortium behind the project, Inter MK, planned to bring Wimbledon to the city and give them a spectacular new home to play in.
We printed the above artist’s impression on February 17, 2000. And although the look of the stadium has changed dramatically over the years, the intentions have not.
The shopping complex was always a massive part of the brand, while the completion of the upper bowl of stadiummk – which will take the capacity from 22,000 to 32,000 – will mean the ground will be capable of holding top level international matches.
Work on the MK1 Shopping Park is due to be started in the next few weeks and should be completed in time for the start of next season. When finished it will be home to retailers such as Marks & Spencer, Primark, Arcadia and River Island.
It will cover 235,000 sq ft and will be split into seven units, complete with 600 car parking spaces.
Work on both the shopping complex and the upper bowl will be carried out by the Buckingham Group, the company responsible for building stadiummk.
Mr Winkelman said: “In its own right it is an exciting development and, of course, it finishes the stadium.
“If people remember back to the start of the stadium there was nothing there. The first Chamber of Commerce awards were held with outside caterers. When the Queen opened the stadium the ballroom roof was still metal.
“We had agreed to further development to deliver UEFA specification. It has always been an integral part of the plan.”
The Dons supremo said he had feared the project might collapse ‘many times’, but heaped praise on what he calls ‘MK Incorporated’ – the various stakeholder groups including Milton Keynes Council and the city’s MPs who have backed the scheme.
He said: “Nobody else does it better than MK. All our stakeholders come together to give a united message.
“We have always relied on cross party support from the council. This is a sign of the strength of the MK economy. This city is open for business.”
He added that the development would also see the completion of the area surrounding the stadium, with kerbs, footpaths and trees added.
“This will be a big attraction for MK. It is in line with our green theme,” said Mr Winkelman.
“It is just so important to finish what I have started. We still have work to do to get the Arena completed, but finishing the stadium is about finishing what we started.”

A SENIOR MP has given assurances he will raise the case of a city dad whose children were abducted to Zambia when he visits the African country.
Henry Bellingham, who is the Minister for Africa, promised to bring Ken Spooner’s story to the attention of the Zambian authorities when he next visited the country.
And he was given a early opportunity to do so when he flew out to see the new Zambian government this week.
Mr Bellingham will conclude a three day visit to the country today, during which he has been discussing trade links and the region’s security.
Mr Spooner’s children, Devlan and Caelan, were taken on a holiday by their mother Zanetta Nyendwa to Zambia in October 2008 – but never returned.
In a letter to Milton Keynes MP Mark Lancaster, Mr Bellingham wrote: ‘Following the election of the new Zambian government I hope to visit Zambia in the near future and can assure you that I will bring Mr Spooner’s case to the attention of the authorities if it remains unresolved in court.’
Despite having a Court Order making them Wards of the English Court, Mr Spooner has had to fight through the Zambian Courts for custody of the boys.
He has spent several thousand pounds trying to bring the children home to Great Linford and even had to fight to clear his own name after he was accused of attempting to re-abduct them.
In September the Zambian Supreme Court granted Mr Spooner custody of the children.
Mrs Justice Elita Mwikisa stated: ‘I find it is in the best interest of the children as British Citizens to be living in Britain where they will have an opportunity to be with their father.’
But a stay was put on the ruling pending an appeal by Miss Nyendwa.
The Citizen launched its ‘Justice for Ken’ campaign last year and earlier this year we submitted a petition to Westminster calling on the British Government to intervene in the case.
The Government’s stance is that it cannot be seen to interfere in the affairs of a sovereign state.
In his letter, Mr Bellingham added that he couldn’t guarantee that raising the case would make a difference.