Made me smile.

So Ed looks like he's gone public now. I don't know what to think really I don't trust the guy as far as I could throw him. www.edballs.co.uk/blog/?p=5927

So Ed looks like he's gone public now. I don't know what to think really I don't trust the guy as far as I could throw him. www.edballs.co.uk/blog/?p=5927

I would like to see his commitment go as far as questioning the actions of the local authority. As it is written, his blog could read as no more than the official line taken by the council. They have not officially withdrawn support, they have just failed to acknowledge their own failings in getting us into this mess in the first place!

At least he has replied, Mary Creagh doesn't seem to want to engage at all.

But he's not likely to start saying that in his blog is he!

It's a start and he can't spell out how much he's behind the stadium build much more than he has. What comes next is important though.

I see Tricky John is included in the Triumvirate. Hope to see him round the constituency in the near future although I know he won't be wasting his time knocking on my door.

Seems like politicians can't win with some people. He states his support but that's still not good enough - some posters still don't trust him. Why not wait to see what he actually does before you slag him off. We don't really deserve any support if that's the attitude.

This. And if he is a big player in the next government then that influence will surely help when applying the pressure.

A coincidence? that it comes directly after Antony Calvert, Tory candidate for Wakefield, publicly states that the first thing he'll do after being elected is knock on Eric's door and ask about the stadium.
Still, it's good news. We need all the support we can get, whether it's just election rhetoric or not.
It's easier to work with them than against them.
#FightForNewmarket

Mary Creagh has replied to me. She contacted the council for an update and was provided with one. I have offered to meet and explain our position, as I have with Mr Balls. Unless they are prepared to listen to us, how can they have full appreciation?

That statement from Balls could have come from the council. At this point they have not withdrawn support, in fact their responses continue to contain phrases such as 'doing all we can'. It doesn't mean they are doing all they should!

Forgive me for being a little cynical in all this these days, but as said above, the offer to meet is there. They only know what they've seen in social media and on doorsteps and what they've been advised by WMDC. If the 3 of them wish to meet and discuss, then we will, until then there is a suspicion of lip service and its funny how that has come about since we alerted Joe Public to the problem - we could get nothing from them before!

Correct me if I'm wrong but the whole argument now seems to rest on the SoS clause that the land can not be aggregated away piece by piece in order to circumvent the S106.

Yorkcourt, perhaps chancing their luck, put in a revised Newcold planning permission half expecting the WMDC to knock it back and quote the aggregation clause at them. Instead the WMDC, in their incompetence, waved it through and allowed the loophole to open.

That's the 'Once Upon a Time' version, the other version is far more sinister with dark rooms, shady characters, conspirators and certainly isn't bedtime story stuff for young kids.

In hindsight, and I know this doesn't help, the clause should have had a monetary value linked to every m2 of development on the site, say £200 for every m2 which equates to £12,000,000 for 60,000 m2.

That would mean that even if YCP only built 30,000m2 they would owe us £6,000,000 etc etc. that kind of clause would actually encourage YCP to do the whole development to mitigate or dilute the percentage of profit per m2 down as far down as possible.

Maybe if this becomes a legal battle and YCP lose or are found guilty of acting fraudulently during the PI, this scale could be used to award money to the Stadium Trust even retrospectively taking the Newcold building into account.

Far fetched, maybe or maybe not, you'd have to convince a judge that YCP intentionally misrepresented their position, never intended to build a stadium and have acted outside the spirit of the partnerships and agreements they entered into. Remember verbal contracts can be upheld in law if the actions of a party are such that they indicate acceptance of the agreement.

Just a bit of food for thought!