On a serious note there has been more meat put to the bones of the Localism bill over the weekend.

I honestly believe NM could (and should) be used as a shining example to other councils of how to fund essential local facilities in a time when the purse strings are tight enough to snap!



If we look at ours and Salford's projects as isolated case studies:

Case A has been funded virtually by local council borrowing, while case B will be funded from the private sector by a rather large section 106 agreement.

One of the cases in the eyes of our political leaders harks back to the days of new Labour and run away borrowing, while the other has been developed in a cooperative & proactive manner between the local council and local developer.



Question; which fit's with the "BIG SOCIETY" we're hearing so much of these days?

In the style of Sun Bed Kid,

I have just seen her coming out of the Kingdom Hall car park in a Face The Future Vauxhall nova!!

Face the future? Face that only a Mother could love more like!



Seriously though, how ironic is that name Face the Future!!

I certainly hope there will be some positive news soon. There just seems to be an assumption in so many threads on message boards that it will be us getting booted out when the next franchises come along (Cas hardly ever mentioned for some strange reason). We need a big boost and SOON.

Fortunately the people discussing licenses on the various forums don't get to choose who's in and who's out.



If the stadium is a goer there will still be the sceptics, but if it does come off and Trinity do get a license then it will make it all the more sweeter knowing how many people Trinity are p!ssing off just by refusing to go away.

That's our bread and butter Khlav! We draw strength from being written off!!



Print em off & post em up on them dressing room wall!

I honestly believe that adversity breeds character! And like you said pal, it makes it all the more sweet when it does come off and your still standing!!

Hope this snipit from mr pickles today dont effect either of our stadiums

"More power for local people to overrule planning decisions, decide where new homes should go and protect green spaces"

The way he's going what the are the government going to be doing. You cant have the patients running the asylum, thats why we are supposed to have elected representatives.

15,000 of us decided a long time ago mate.

Why should 150 people (who live outside the city) have any say on NM.



Localism doesn't help the residents of Methley at all. If anything it's our golden bullet!

There's just been a news item discussing this and from what I can tell it would actually work in our favour.



Very basically, it seems to be a system whereby private developers are allowed to build their projects as long as they agree to provide the community with new or improved facilities as part of their planning application.



For example a housebuilder may get planning permission to build 20 new houses as long as he agrees to pay for the creation of a new road junction complete with pelican crossing.



When you look at Newmarket it fits almost hand in glove with this new initiative.

I still reckon tuesday is the day, just have a feeling.

That is essentially correct Clan.



It does also move for more power to local consensus on large scale projects. Communities could veto projects to protect green space. On the face of it our opponents could be licking their lips, but they'd be wrong IMO when it comes to this case.



IMO the case for a community stadium is one we can all agree on. There have been numerous studies, some by WT, others by WMDC.



The same for locations, let's not forget that NM was named as a potential site in the feasibility study for Thornes years ago. Then there are much more recent studies which have been done in conjunction with our OPP, this site IMO has been proven to be the best for such a project in our district.



Then let's think about the 15,000 petition, which was done on the back of the need for such a facility, yes opponents will say that it failed to mention the "true nature" of the site. But IMO if you had asked every person who signed the vast majority would happily accept the whole concept in the process of acquiring a new home. So IMO any claim of a lack of validity on the part of the petition is false (& very insulting to those who worked so hard to make it the success it was!).



The people of Wakefield have spoken on mass on this issue, the council have acted, the logic of "localism" says the government will not only allow this but encourage it. In fact localism IMO end's the days of the "nosey neighbours" such as our friends in Methley. Why should anyone outside our region have any say?? Are we not best to decide for ourselves, as they are for themselves?



Localism only gives local groups greater powers to object to plans in their own area. Unless Mrs. Fender wants to start forwarding her council tax to WMDC I think she should mind her own business, and leave Wakefield to mind ours!