Sorry if I'm being thick (usually the case ) but I don't understand how it can be said that there isn't one in place. As far as I'm aware it's been there from the beginning or else how could it be held that Newcold was outside it? If it didn't exist then there was nothing to be outside of, and certainly no reason to seek a legal opinion.

Without claiming to be in the know or to understand how these things work, because quite frankly I don't, I seem to remember reading that what is in place is a Unilateral Undertaking and not a Section 106 agreement.
Now that might be me getting it wrong and they may be the same thing, but I thought I heard that this was the issue. That the SOS wanted a 106 but that was not what was drawn up, which also explains the "wriggle" room.

I'm sure someone who understands this better than me will be along shortly to explain....



Please feel free to delete all of this if I'm talking garbage - my memory is shocking at the best of times and this saga has completely removed any semblance of sense regards what has happened.

Once again proven as a right set of anchors....

There is a Unilateral Undertaking in place. It is a Unilateral Undertaking persuant to Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. So you can call it what you will but its the same thing.

I understand that the Council have today said that the UU is between the Developor and the Government. WRONG the UU is GIVEN by Yorkcourt TO Wakefield MDC so I don't get how it can be nothing to do with the Council and everthing to do with the Government.

The Council can say what they will but they are as the Local Planning Authority responsible for enforcing the UU - something they are not prepared to accept.

Hi ho hi ho
It's off to work I go!

It's still there on their website...under s106 agreements...

I don't what's happening now but after tweeting @mywakefield with this information, I go to where it says s106 agreements on the planning website, scroll down to Newmarket Lane development page 21 and click on LINK and it comes up with a s106 agreement for a development at CUTSYKE . Funny that eh?

Sorry for the question, but if somebody ITK could answer I would be grateful.

Box said today that he and his chief executive have "spoken with a firm trying to get them to relocate onto that site knowing it will help the club". Given the Newcold development of which his team passed "helped the club" to the tune of zilch, where is it written that any other development will have a positive outcome?

And more importantly, he also said that with the council help and more parties building on more of the site this will unlock funding to build a stadium. If this is the case and he's so keen to stress this as fact, as well as state outright the UU was created by the Developer and the Government and that it's for the Developer and Club to sort a stadium out, then whose responsibility does he believe it is to keep to that belief? that what is built down there does in fact unlock stadium funding? Because from where I'm sitting if it's not the responsibility of his setup and by proxy the planning department (as evidenced by Newcold), and it's not the responsibility of the Club or Trust, and it's not the responsibility of the Developer as they've already demonstrated it's not as they built Newcold and it counted null towards unlocking that money, then who does he believe will be the one ensuring that site build is equal to stadium funding?

Forgetting all the intricacies, ill feeling and 106/UI controversy. If he genuinely believes this is what is going to happen who does he believe is going to make it happen? Given all involved parties have demonstrated there's nobody responsible for making this so. Where is his take on this outcome coming from?

That's the thing with double dealing, lying and manipulating, it eventually becomes too complex to conceal.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave: When first we practise to deceive!

Exposed as a liar and not fit for office!

At last someone who speaks the truth.

I'm just an ordinary working/retired rugby league supporter (Cas) who has been trying but failing to keep up with all this. You've just put it in a nutshell.

Peter Box Wakefield WMDC equivalent to Sepp Blatter