hi i think its ggod that tesco is building a depot it means it will keep people of the street and create jobs for everyone and not just the europoeans and also does anyone know where i can apply for a job

   They will not get a lookin the people on the benefit all those jobs have been taken up with people from the eastern block countries. Amazing what people will do for the minimum wage ah well what do you expect from a government who will not look after its own people when there is a recession on.

   Jobs being created is a GOOD thing, although any of those long term benefit scroungers wont see it as an opportunity for them. I feel that these jobs will be taken up by those who have lost their job and will be essentially over skilled for these jobs. I definitely agree that food vouchers should be given and perhaps vouchers for energy bills for the long term work shy. To reduce the people that are work shy that get away with it for their entire lifetime! Unbelievable!!!

   Look this will give the unskilled job seeker a big boost. In Reading the majority of unemployed fall into this catorgary.So good very good.This is long overdue.Now all the long term unemployed need is a lead into the jobs with a series of intensive workshops to boost confidence and to get them back into good work practices like regular attendance time keeping and actual work. If a kick up the backsides for reluctant to do so is needed stop all benifits except food vouchers for the kids.

   PCWatch, C8H10N4O2, I ron, whitespirit, mavdo - My god you lot are boring. Seriously.

Jobs = good. So shutup writing things just to make yourselves 'seem' clever and informed. Its amazing how many careers PCWatch has supposedly have which makes her the expert on everything on this little site.

   It's a big, isn't it? Madjeski Stadium looks tiny next to it

   Hey I Ron, don't sell yourself short. I know it's tough, but give it a go. I understand your hesitation - being knocked back so often must be demoralising - but this time you could be in with a chance to do something worthwhile. Forget the spite and envy, apply now.

   http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2095308_investigation_into_councils_section_106_cash

S106 payment lacking in accountability? Someone else alluded to that. Your thoughts, PCWatch?

   @PCWatch - ok, let's see now. The S106 payments put forward for the Wokingham Cricket Club development was used a reason by the council to not reject the application, despite concerns over the increase in traffic. In the end, the council rejected it, they lost on appeal, and they lost the S106. The S106 payments would have gone towards a crossing on Wellington Road, and to prevent regular access across the railway line behind the site. These now won't happen and the council will probably have to pay for this on health and safety grounds. However, most of the money would have gone straight into the Wokingham TC regeneration project that would have gone ahead or not gone ahead independantly of the Cricket Ground development. The money was a sweetener to the councillors to get their dream of the regeneration kicked off, whilst it was also a way of preventing them rejecting for fear of losing at appeal, as actually happened.

The S106 payments made for the development in Plough Lane, Wokingham, have partially been used to improve infrastructure with a short footpath connecting to the next estate, an extended 30mph limit on local roads, and a a crossing and no right turn at Plough Lane, but more payments were made than just for that, and no further improvements in the local roads are to be made. In fact, the bus service has decreased in the area. The arguement is that the S106 payments would also be used to increase places at local schools etc, whereas the second nearest school to this is closing down entirely! The local school may potentially expand, but it's nothing to do with Plough Lane, or their S106 payments.

S106 payments ARE currently used, regularly, as a reason not to reject planning applications because then the S106 payments will be lost *if* the application is successful at appeal. They are better to approve the applicataion subject to some small changes, then they get to shape it, and get the money. I've attended meetings of the planning committees when they have said exactly this, and it is entirely understandable. Whether or not it is intentional, although S106 payments can be very helpful to local services, they can and do affect planning decisions.

@C8 - I agree. I did say that I shop at Tesco and that I was in favour of this. I just think that saying it is an ecologically sound development is only being done to appeal to the planning lot at the council because it sounds good. The reality of this distribution centre, and supermarkets in general, being good for the environment is simply not true. It is spin that is so spun, it is close to a lie. I'm not saying we should all start paying double to shop at our local shops, most of which have disappeared, but let's not kid ourselves that this place will be "ecologically sound". Judge it as it is, don't spin it into something it is not.

   A thousand jobs ! a thousand jobs ! a thousand jobs ! a thousand jobs ! Do you get it ?

   PCWatch - offensive! (Just because i can, and i want to see those caps !!)

   @ PCWatch : experience, and the functional application of any such acquired knowledge, are worlds apart, as you persist in demonstrating.

   lol @ Daniel but watch out, most people on here are unable to take a joke and start kicking off!

   mavdo, Wokingham - I worked on the front line for people applying for planning applications over many many local authorities and can speak from a vast experieinmce. What depth of knowledge of the actuale have you?

   This will made a big difference to those seeking work, but the feckless and jobshy will find any excuse to sponge off decent folk until the government forces them to work or lose benefits.