have we a link as I can't get the video up

www.wakefield.gov.uk/about-the-c ... l-meetings Basically: It's the conservatives fault. There was no 106 just a unilateral undertaking. They can't enforce anything until the trigger point has been met. Apparently it's Trinity that wanted the same deal as Cas but it's too late now etc etc. Box is picking and choosing what he says wisely.

www.wakefield.gov.uk/about-the-c ... l-meetings Basically: It's the conservatives fault. There was no 106 just a unilateral undertaking. They can't enforce anything until the trigger point has been met. Apparently it's Trinity that wanted the same deal as Cas but it's too late now etc etc. Box is picking and choosing what he says wisely.

Aye, Box throwing Cas’s 106 agreement about saying this what Labour does compared to Pickles half d attempts. He was rather angry lol

Conveniently fails to recognize the fact that Yorkcourt have been allowed to circumvent the trigger point altogether, also fails to recognize it was himself that said in public that he wanted 'the perfect deal for Wakefield, similar to Castleford's'. He was getting rather venomous towards the Councillor asking the questions, would love to see him head to head with MC.

Who was the Councillor asking questions?

Councillor Ahmed, who was getting involved on Twitter etc on Wakeys side of the debate earlier. Council say they will defend themselves vigorously as they believe they have acted correctly.

If I was watering the garden and caught sight of Cllr Box on fire I would continue to water the garden.

Up the Trin

Let’s hope his ‘ venomous ‘ response is based on deep down guilt feelings.
Then again some are incapable of that, so maybe it’s fear of being ‘rumbled’.
Still remains a mystery to me why the council are so hostile, antagonistic towards Trinity rather than genuinely trying to help in making the city’s only professional sports team a success , which would obviously be advantageous in further promoting the city.

If the stadium, were to go ahead, as per the plans, and with Manni's intentions, of creating entertainment facilities within the complex, and a hotel, the city could benefit with jobs, the profile of the city, and also revenue from outside of the city too.

Add in to that, if the stadium were to be used as neutral venues, for the challenge cup, and minor internationals (we hosted Wales v Jamaica not that long ago)

For me, the worst part of the city, appearance wise, in the past 20 years or so, has been Kirkgate. With the work that is currently being carried out near Wilkos, and the plans for Rutland Mills being developed near the Hepworth, if this did happen I think the area will start to look a whole lot better and more appealing on the eye, for both locals and visitors, whether you support the club or not.

It will show how short sighted the council really are, should they continue to drag their heels on this, and not deliver as per promised

If I was an outsider I would find Boxes response quite convincing. He does not however look comfortable , or could that be how he performs at all council meetings .
I have found many of the reports / statements made confusing by both parties and many of the main points lost .
I wish the club all the best in its endeavours.

Best form of defence is attack. He is rattled.

Could not agree more......just watched the video of the meeting . The minute he starts to make a joke of the situation ...trying to be funny/clever he loses the argument. Comes over rattled and very unprofessional .....

That's exactly how he behaved in that infamous public council meeting a few moths ago, cocker. He was downright edmbarrassing.

Having watched and listened to Councillor Box this evening I do think we need to be very careful about taking the matter to the High Court. Councillor Box states that a figure of £500,000 per annum for rent has never been mentioned. As a supporter of 50 years standing I can honestly say I have seen it all. MC and CB have done an outstanding job in pulling our Club back from the brink, we have the best side for years and I do believe that this season, a top three finish and a Grand Final appearance is possible. However we must get back round the negotiating table, we the supporters are being let down, we need to sort out a deal NOW, if we go to the High Court I do not think we will win, in fact there will be no winners, only the lawyers. We cannot draw a line in the sand and say “Bring it on” re a Court Case, it is too risky. Negotiate a deal , our Superstars will then do what’s needed on the field and put us back where we belong!!

I agree it would be brilliant if it gets announced an agreement has been reached and we will be anchor tennents at the new community stadium at Belle Vue. Let's see what happens.

Up the Trin

Where exactly did the £500,000 rent figure come from if Box is denying it? Was it speculation or has someone got a direct quote at hand?

I seem to recall it first being mentioned in an online newspaper article, but I could be wrong.

Quote ="PHe"I seem to recall it first being mentioned in an online newspaper article, but I could be wrong.'" Found the link/mention here: https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/rugby ... remy-Cross

Quote ="PHe"I seem to recall it first being mentioned in an online newspaper article, but I could be wrong.'" Found the link/mention here: https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/rugby ... remy-Cross

Having watched the link showing the council meeting one thing jumped out at me which I haven’t heard or seen before.

Peter Box States, The owners of Wakefield Trinity demanded £400,000 a year from The owners of Belle Vue (assume 88M) to cover the cost of Trinity paying rent at the Tetleys Stadium Dewsbury. Can someone deny or confirm that

I had heard that 88M wanted £400,000 to cover vital repairs and restoration of Belle Vue which were due because of a lack of investment and upkeep in recent years.
Maybe Peter Box is confusing the two and needs to be corrected before he makes this statement again.

Maybe it's just a further example of Box's twisted logic. 88m make a demand for £400k repairs should WT leave BV. MC refuses (quite rightly as they don't plan to use the current stadium and there's a common sense get-out clause that prevents pointless renovations ).
So, on planet Box that means that 88m will be left with the £400k bill (for repairs that will never be carried out), so the club are demanding that 88m pay for it...

The bit that struck me as odd was his statement that Wakefield Council did not give planning permission for the development at Newmarket, that was granted by the Conservatives (Eric Pickles).
My understanding was that the public enquiry made a recommendation, however Wakefield MDC are the planning authority and therefore still responsible for granting the planning permission. Does anyone know if that's correct as it is a big part of his argument over the difference between Cas's deal and Wakefield's deal.

My blood was boiling watching him speak and he has only reinforced my opinion that he is a bully and my hope that he gets what all bullies deserve.

I get the impression Box is resorting to pedantics in his statements to twist the public view, aswell as picking and choosing what points he addresses. One thing that struck me as quite aggressive was him saying to Councillor Ahmed - 'you don't have a clue at all do you...NOT A CLUE!' - not very diplomatic, and very bully boy.

What an unedifying experience - if only because it reinforces the view that local politics is dominated by thick as mince grandees who are happy to ride on the gravy train for as long as possible, without affecting any positive change for the communities they purport to serve.

With regard to the specifics - Mr Box is an aggressive, lecturing bully; that's not news. What is interesting is how he skates over 2 fundamental issues: 1. If the Council can't enforce the UU until the trigger of 60k m2 has been developed, why did they collude with the developer and use planning chicanery to help them avoid reaching that trigger point with the Newcold development? And 2 - he glibly refers to Mr Hussein as the 'new owner of Belle Vue' - but fails to mention WMDC's role in ensuring that he became the new owner partway through the process; if the club hadn't been tricked into not bidding on BV, WT would own it now and the whole thing would be much more straightforward.

And on another note - with friends like Cllr Ahmed, who needs enemies; he can't even articulate the arguments in any coherent way, and appears to be relying on press releases for his pre-meeting briefing material, which is very poor indeed.

It was mentioned at a meeting I was at, where MC, Chris B and Ian B were also present. They will confirm that this was the figure mentioned. Peter Box was not at that meeting, but Denise Jeffery and Andy Wallhead were and it was Andy that gave us that figure. This is the only figure we have ever been given and also, we don't have a single scrap of paper with anything in writing from them what-so-ever... absolutely nothing!

Worked in education Bren and had to tolerate throughout my career the antics and bullying of local councillors.
Recently attended a planning meeting where discussion ,if you can call it that, took place re. industrial development adjacent to my home.
Most could hardly string two words together, all were inaudible, and all had obviously decided (been instructed) which way to vote.
Utterly disgraceful.