I'm afraid I agree - like it or not, Joe Public will see this as a new stadium for WTW and as a result, won't give two hoots about whether it gets built or not; half a dozen worthies spoke in favour at the hearing and I think most of them were connected to the club, or persuaded to speak by people connected to the club.

Without knowledge of what moves are planned by the Trust, it doesn't look good; if YCP have a) no desire to meet their obligations and b) no money anyway, it could be an impasse that lasts for years.

Oh come on Bren. You make it sound like we have nothing worth fighting for! We have other people who think otherwise and this is about a complete package, not just the stadium.

I'm not saying it's easy, far from it, but we need a little bit more fight than to just shrug our shoulders and accept the current position as being all we deserve! There are technical, political and moral arguments which suggest we should be receiving something for our pains. You yourself were aware of the connections involved and their reasonings for support - I don't think those reasons have altered one jot and I feel some responsibility to at least make my best endeavours to deliver what we planned!

There are many of us that have done our bit in supporting and helping the cause of a new stadium, but the realisation and the constant slow moving/lack of info being brought to the table speaks volumes to me.
Years and years of hoping and praying for a kickstart to the success of Wakefield Trinity gets more painful by every setback.
Good luck to all involved but I sadly fear the worst.......yet again.

York Court have a nice piece of land in the paragon business park that will be just right for a stadium and fairly near City centre tell Sir Rodney to tell them we want it there for messing us about. With YC owning half of Wakefield you'd think they wouldn't want to upset the council so hopefully we will get something I'm not giving up the fight or stopping believing.

I'm not shrugging my shoulders TRB - far from it - I've advocated getting tough with YCP and that's what I'd do; I just don't think it's realistic to expect to receive outpourings of support from Outraged of Outwood on this issue. The whole thing received so little media attention, that it never entered the consciousness of a massive majority of the Wakefield public - people, as a rule, don't give a toss about things that don't directly effect them, and this doesn't.

I hope that whatever the Trust is working on is enough to get YCP to do the right thing - really I do - but there's a massive disincentive to doing the right thing when it's going to cost you millions of £'s.

Can't believe what I'm reading on here.

It's not a moral or political obligation its a LEGAL obligation, that's what a Section 106 Agreement is, its a UNILATERAL UNDERTAKING from one or more parties to another in return for something.

In this case it is a planning consent that results in £m's of profit being made in return for a Community Stadium provided for the Stadium Trust.

The profits will be made so do we just forget the Unilateral Obligation to provide the Stadium. If legal documents have been badly drafted they can be put right as long as the original intent is met.

I for one aint going to give up the fight even if others already appear to have capitulated.

we have voted people into positions to look after our needs(community sports stadium}ect.make them do their job.ring or write to them,show your anger.

So if it the 106 is watertight and is a legal requirement and they renege on it there should surely be no problem taking them to court then? Threaten them with that and the job is a good 'un. Unless the agreement isn't watertight and the legal requirement isn't there of course. Then there is a problem. So which is it?

Isn't the point though that the original agreement was drafted in such a way that it *didn't* created a legal obligation?

Which takes me back to my original point; it's been going on for months now and it sounds like YCP are doing everything they can to duck out of what should have been a legal obligation, but is now only a moral one; given that stance, dob them in to the SoS and let Eric Pickles deal with them - while you're at it, talk to the WE, YEP and anyone else who'll listen. Property developer colludes with council to create millions in profit and skanks local community out of sports facilities? Would go nicely in the 'Rotten Boroughs' section of Private Eye for starters.

If your capitulation dig was aimed at me - you're misunderstanding; I'd fight back in the strongest possible terms, and balls to the feelings or sensitivities of whomever else is involved.

Bren, don't want to go into too much detail because this may well end in a Court of Law but needless to say we have a 106 Agreement that shall I say is not fit for purpose and does not reflect the intent of the Inspector at the Public Inquiry.

We need to put that right by whatever means we have at our disposal and I don't know if you have been involved in any Court actions of this nature but you try to resolve matters by dialogue and litigation is always the last and final resort.

We are on with this and all I'm asking for is supporters patience, trust and more than anything support because we may well need it.

We are fighting for what we all love.

Totally correct and do not forget the numerous council officers on 6 figure salaries who have also been involved in all of this. Yet again , as usual they have let the people down that they are paid to serve.

I have the utmost respect for TRB, Sandal Cat, IA and everyone else who's volunteered their time and resources for ten long years. This certainly isn't a dig or any form of criticism of them because they're honourable people who have acted in good faith. Unfortunately the other parties involved have been criminally incompetent or constructively deceitful in their actions and I wonder if there's a route there in which to follow a legal challenge to the loophole in the S106, similar to constructive dismissal.

I'm certainly not advocating giving up but I'm certain from what I know that YCP have zero intention to pay 1penny towards sports facilities for the community.

Trying to appeal to their better nature or hoping they'll cave in because lots of people are upset at them is the same nativity that allowed them to dupe everyone in the first place.

It's as clear as the nose on your face that the only way to deal with them is a heavy handed approach. Therefore going Legal with the weight of the SoSs Office, WMDC Officers, Media and any other means behind you is the way to go IMO.

And it's just that, an opinion, formed from the outside looking in so please don't condemn me or anyone else for having and discussing a view on a forum.

Just a couple of questions:
1. Can anyone tell me what "community" features would be incorporated into a new and improved belle vue?
2. If the matter does end up in litigation, who will pay for it?

Yes I have - on a regular basis - and I don't agree with you that litigation is always the last and final resort; if your opponent has shown that they're not interested in dialogue, then it's sometimes the only thing you can do.

All that said, I've no doubt that the club, or the Trust, or whomever is handling the matter, can't afford litigation, and YCP will be very aware of that; so the next best thing is to hand it to the Government dept who have also been duped, and let them deal with it.

Plus throw as much muck publicly as is humanly possible!!
I'm 100% with been on this one.
YCP don't appear to have any good intentions and we don't have any dough to take it to court.
It's stalemate unless we can garner some very public or very high profile support.

Sir Rodney Walker

YCP are too clever to just walk away - hence all the time taken to get to this point. There does come a point where the talking has to stop and hard facts put down in writing - which is what we are seeking.

YCP may also not be worried about a bunch of 'tree hugging Wakefield supporters', or our equivalent, but other parties maybe. It all depends on who you are talking about when it comes to deciding what they have to lose. The council will not want this on their doorstep - we know they hate bad publicity and the press will be our weapon in this respect. YCP is a different matter.

He's been involved since day one hadn't he?
Look where we are.
That's not a criticism, just that we need some new "clout".

With the Tour de France done with hopefully he can fully concentrate on delivering a stadium for his City, Sir Rodney Walker isn't the kind of person to give in easily. He saved the Theatre now he can deliver a sporting theatre for Wakefield.

I agree but dialogue has to be tried first before commencing expensive litigation, we are not at that stage yet. I doubt the Government will be interested if our own Council is not showing a great deal of interest - yet.

As I have said before please trust us, be patient and be prepared to get behind us because "we are in this together".

Council can also keep the " can't build on Belle Vue unless alternative stadium within City is built" safeguarding B V for us

How much seeking has to be done to write a letter?

I'm not having a pop at you TRB, or the other volunteers who are doing their bit, but how many meetings will YCP duck and dive their way through before someone involved says, "enough - we'll refer it to the SoS and let them decide how to progress?"

It is more complicated than it sounds on here, but you are right in essence.

Again, from the outside looking in.

Maybe that's part of the issue, maybe it's not that complicated, take a step back from it and look from a distance, it's clear that YCP need 'shotgun wedding' tactics before they'll do the right thing.

At the risk of looking dafter than usual.

How can York Court be in a position to move away from what was promised and what we understood to be an absolute certainty that a new stadium would be built at Newmarket.
Again, at the risk of looking stupid, what was the point of the P.I. if there was even the smallest possibility of them being able to walk away from this and leaving another developer to "do very well" out of a deal, which was less than popular with local residents.
Although there are no certainties in life, apart form birth and death, the perception at the time of the PI was that the new ground was a cast iron certainty, with only the timing and size of the stadium that were open to some change.

All Wakefield supporters know and appreciate the time and effort that you have personally devoted to the cause but, is it even possible that it could end with nothing (apart from a small community facility) ?