OK, so you're as usual, playing with words. The questions I asked that you still haven't answered are: Why was this"stipulation" placed on the Cabinet note and when would any sane person expect this "stipulation" to be met?
To save you the time on google: stipulation noun agreement, arrangement, article of agreement, bargain, bond, compact, concordat, condition, contract, convention, covenant, deal, pact, pactum, promise, provise, specification, stipulatio, treaty, understanding
So if the cabinet note is fulfilled by MoS and then they request the "stipulation" to be met and TTFA do not comply, what will be the effects of this broken "agreement", "bargain" "bond" "compact" "understanding" "specification" or , bloody hell "CONDITION"?
You're just playing with words instead of answering the questions, but your smart reply that my "condition" is in fact a "stipulation" has painted you into a corner because "condition" is a definition of "stipulation".
In any scenario, whatever the word you use, the fact is that if TTFA break this "stipulation" there will likely be no more money released to the current TTFA administration. A promise is a promise, and TTFA agreed to it. Now, answer the damn questions please.
Is it me playing with words... or is it that you're too damn slow and blinkered to look past your desire to justify Sancho's actions to understand what is being explained to you. This is not some common, everyday arrangement, but rather a governmental action. The word "stipulation" in the realm of contracting speaks to an "agreement." In that agreement will be several components to the agreement, which colloquially could be referred to as "terms." What you doggedly keep trying to refer to as a "condition" is simply one term of the larger agreement.
A "condition" by contrast, is some antecedental event which must occur before some other related action could commence. Something that's conditional is typically expressed as "if, then"... if such and such happens, then such and such would follow. The opposite is also true, if X does NOT happen, then some consequential action would or would not follow. There is no such language in the cabinet note no matter how you spin it. You could argue that this was the intent, but it's not an argument that would get you very far because there's no evidence that this was the intent.
You insist that I should answer for why the term of the agreement was included... as if I'm some sort of mind reader. How would I know? Best I could hazard to guess is that they wanted the TTFA to produce audited accounts so that they would know where government monies were being spent by the FA. That is fair. However there is no indication as to when the TTFA has to produce this accounting, since there is no time frame referenced or timeline given. I could see if the note said something along the lines of "in order to", or "as a condition of this agreement", or "should the TTFA not produce accounts by..." or something like that, but the note is silent on that. I could also see if a year after the note was passed the TTFA still hasn't produced any accounting... but Sancho took over 4 months after the note was passed and immediately came in grandstanding in the press about how there will be no funding if audits are not produced, then decided all by himself that the TTFA were not complying with the agreement... after only 4 months mind you, and decided to halt funding for the Senior Men's and for the coaching staff.
You could try and justify it all you want, but it was both unilateral and heavy-handed, if not vindictive... and no matter your protests to the contrary, given the current political climate, as well as the simmering animosity between Sancho and the TTFA, it is very likely that there was an element of vindictiveness to it as well. You swore up and down last year that Sancho had no political aspirations, despite the clear naked agenda... yet here it is he's campaigning for a parliamentary seat today. Either you don't know your boy as well as you think you do. or you're just as conniving and deceitful as he's revealing himself to be.