Ed Balls was one of the chief spokesman on the application. He gave a glowing reference, of the city, the club and the development as a whole and what it will bring to the district.


Here we go:

"The Wildcats are a keystone of our community in Wakefield. It's important that the team have a top-class venue to call home, so I'm fully backing plans for a new stadium. As a community stadium, it will also open up sporting opportunities to people across the district - so it's good news for sports teams, families, and young people in our area.”

Firstly, Parliamentary protocol does dictate that Members of Parliament can only take up specific individual cases on behalf of their own constituents. However, that is what they are doing, the objections being raised are being raised by their prospective constituents, albeit outside the constituency in which the development is being planned. That also said, they are not currently bound by Parliamentary protocol anyway, as they are all candidates and not sitting MP's, so they are not doing anything strictly against any rules at the moment.

They are however quite blatantly electioneering, are all quite happy to jump on what they see as a vote winning 'band-wagon' and happy to leave their integrity at the side of the road. I have written to all three of them this evening expressing my concern at would appear to be a clear lack of knowledge of the facts and also to point out that they too appear to have been fooled by the same small group of people who have fooled many of their prospective constituents. It was quite a long e-mail, so I will not post it here, but I also had a sly dig at them for being photographed committing what would appear to be Civil Trespass on private land! The e-mail was also copied to Ed Ball, Anthony Calvert (The prospective Tory candidate for Outwood & Morley) and all three Ward 15 councillors for Stanley and Outwood.

Now, I have also spoken face to face with all three of my Ward 15 councillors, Clive Hudson, Jacqui Williams and Simon Wilson over the weekend. Both Simon and Clive were already aware that this sudden influx of objections had been generated by the flyer from the small group of Newmarket Lane residents and that therefore, the response was disproportionate. They are also aware that the majority of these objections to the planning application, with the exception of the green-belt issue, had little merit and did not stand up to any real scrutiny. Jacqui was not aware of the flyer (but is now) as was less eager to be drawn on the issue as she is a member of the planning committee which will decide on whether the planning application is granted. Reading between the lines, just based on her general comments and her mannerisms, I think I know which way she will be voting and it will be in the positive!

I have also passed some useful information on to TRB about the UDP being replaced by something now called Local Development Frameworks (LDF's). This process started a couple of years ago and has already been to the Secretary of States office for comment. We have some very useful information about green-belt designations within the Wakefield district going forward, and before you all leap to conclusions, it is not site specific however, this information may be very useful in the future if we have need to use it!!!

Finally, you can often tell a lot from what politicians don't say, rather than what they do say! It is interesting that, in the main, the ward 15 councillors, Ed Balls and Anthony Calvert have remained publicly quiet about the development (however, I can tell you that Cllr Clive Hudson has spoken to the 'Wakefield CCG' guys and most of the residents of Newmarket Lane in person and they did not want to hear what he had to say!). As experienced politicians they know that publicly drawing attention to an issue, more so in support of something, often generates objections and negative feeling that would not otherwise exist had they kept there mouth shut in the first place. It is also interesting that not one single letter or news story was published in last Friday's Wakefield express about the development, yet the YEP ran letters before the Expresses Wednesday lunch print deadline! I am sure they have got a bag full of mail and suspect they will have to print some at some point, probably tomorrow, but that is now after objections had to be in... hmmm!

Finally, in response the the list of prospective parlimentray candidates for the new Outwood & Morley seat, please see the BBC website here - rlhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/constituency/c99.stmrl

i recall not so long ago seeing a flyer from anthony calvert giving his full backing to the project and have also been contacted by his office to my home. i will contact them tomorrow to get a response.

Inflatable_Armadillo you are an absolute star!!!

I always look forward to reading your posts, and usually feel much happier about things when I've read them - please keep posting

Thanks for that....I shall bob an email over to them!

just sent an email, will post replies when / if i get one.

Thanks for the nice comments everyone. You see, not all Rhinos supporters are the same!

I just think the whole project is well thought out and also very relevant to the continued growing economic success of the area. Believe it or not I paraphrased Mr Spock from Star Trek in my e-mail to them and said, that they should not let the needs of the few, outweigh the needs of the many, to do so would be illogical. I know, I got a bit carried away!

I am not expecting one back from the three Elmet and Rothwell candidates as I think they are going to struggle to come up with a meaningful counter argument... mainly because there isn't one (with the exception of the green-belt, which is the best they have got, and that is not great!). If I do get one it will be along the usual lines of "representing the views of my prospective constituents, working on their behalf, they feel strongly about it, blah, blah..."

However, I would hope that Ed and Anthony reply but it could take a while, and I understand that Ed tends to write back via snail-mail so he does not get drawn into long e-mail exchanges unnecessarily. Given the amount of e-mail and letters he must get, I can understand that approach.

Especially with what the site was 25/30 years ago!

Mr Inflatable, I tip my hat to you or should it be doff my cap.
Many thanks for your interest and your deeds.

what can I say Inflatable Armadillo never lets him self down
cracking posts, like many on here I too look forward to hear support from fellow fans from other clubs but you seem to be helping that bit further,

The Yorkshire Water response to the development has been received today. Whilst not supporting or objecting they have a number of constraints to the development should planning be granted, such as feasibilities studies on the local pumping stations and to have separate draining systems rather then combined. Usual stuff I imagine.

Also a petition, was received against the development with about 50 signatures on it. I could include it on the figures but then a certain other petition would blow it out of the water.

Final thought, would it be worth having a sticky or something for all stadium news? It keeps everything in one place then