SOLC- Queens Park-Meeting

[therealjr]

Monday nights are reserved!!

[Old Cruser]

You two ought to have come along last night... 

Come on then Pete - I'm sat sitting here ---- how did it go?

[Pete]

It was over 2 hours long - and full of differing opinions. But mostly it was about losing the Annex, the costs involved and the diminishing activities/availability. The most popular grievance was the loss of the green space by building on the Annex - far and away the biggest complaint.

[Old Cruser]

Anything resolved or promises to look into things deeper?

[Slacker]

Were a lot of the people residents of adjacent houses? I can't imagine the green space issue is a big deal for others when you think that a large amount of the borough is what was on farm land about 40 years ago. The Annexe is tiny by comparison.
Some on the SOLC site are also pushing for a grandstand thus taking up more green space than the leisure centre.

[Pete]

>> Were a lot of the people residents of adjacent houses? I can't imagine the green space issue is a big deal for others when you think that a large amount of the borough is what was on farm land about 40 years ago. The Annexe is tiny by comparison.

Which is why it is important! It's alright for you lot up in Grangewood, you've got a nice, green environment with plenty of space - why shouldn't people who live nearer town have a bit of space too?

When the council want to force through ideas using council funded magazines etc the situation looks like bullying tactics, like when the Labour party sent out leaflets saying the LibDems were going to sell off the Sports Centre - hurriedly retracted as I remember.

[therealjr]

>>
Which is why it is important! It's alright for you lot up in Grangewood, you've got a nice, green environment with plenty of space

As long as it's kept mown short so small dogs don't get lost in it !!!

[Pete]

 

[Slacker]

>> Were a lot of the people residents of adjacent houses? I can't imagine the green space issue is a big deal for others when you think that a large amount of the borough is what was on farm land about 40 years ago. The Annexe is tiny by comparison.

Which is why it is important! It's alright for you lot up in Grangewood, you've got a nice, green environment with plenty of space - why shouldn't people who live nearer town have a bit of space too?

When the council want to force through ideas using council funded magazines etc the situation looks like bullying tactics, like when the Labour party sent out leaflets saying the LibDems were going to sell off the Sports Centre - hurriedly retracted as I remember.

Maybe they mistakenly think the whole area will be built on. Not the case, there will still be quite  bit of outdoor area. I would say a bigger loss of green space is where they built at the back of your house.

The LibDems STILL want to privatise you've only got to look at the regular letters from Cllr Morgan or listen to him at council meetings. I've seen staff transfer to private companies from an employee point of view; we lost the motorway contract some years ago and some staff transferred under TUPE. In theory their terms and conditions were protected but their employment went from company to company and some ended up a distance from their old workbase.

[Pete]

>>Maybe they mistakenly think the whole area will be built on. Not the case, there will still be quite  bit of outdoor area. I would say a bigger loss of green space is where they built at the back of your house.

Nope - there was no green space that people could see behind our house, it could only be seen if you went to a footy match. What you could see was the lopiest looking building in Chesterfield. The state the old football ground was in was a disgrace by anyone's standard.

>> The LibDems STILL want to privatise you've only got to look at the regular letters from Cllr Morgan or listen to him at council meetings. I've seen staff transfer to private companies from an employee point of view; we lost the motorway contract some years ago and some staff transferred under TUPE. In theory their terms and conditions were protected but their employment went from company to company and some ended up a distance from their old workbase.

And how is that relative to this thread? Is it just more Labour bullying? Throw as much mud as you can and some of it will stick?

When I think of local politicians, their attitude and and intelligence, I shudder...

[Slacker]

What's irrelevant? We said LibDems intended to privatise running of the sports centre and the admit that they do. No argument.

[therealjr]

What's irrelevant is what the Lib Dems either proposed to do or propose to do. They are not in power and are not taking the decisions at the minute. It's like saying there's no point in debating the coalitions economic policies because Labour would be doing something different.

The problem with this whole shooting match (and I've told Henri this) is that there are too many issues all being rolled into one and this is diluting the argument.

Issue 1. Can QPSC be legitimately saved and refurbished. Answer almost certainly not, the pool end is effectively 40-50 years old and the leisure end 30 years. It was a poor design concept in the 60's probably worse in the 80's. The whole thing was done on the cheap and that decision is now proving to be the centre's downfall.
Issue 2 Should it's replacement be built on the annexe. Answer almost certainly not, the annexe should be re-furbed and used properly. It could be used for athletics events, concerts, fetes and galas as well as providing a much better finishing point for things like the Race for Life, Hospice Drag Race, the new proposed marathon etc etc.
Issue 3 Should a new leisure centre wherever it is built be part funded by another body effectively rendering a public building out of public use for large proportions of the time. Answer again probably not though of course you then have the argument can the council afford to go it alone?

[Big Dave]

I'm not getting involved in the pros and cons of this issue but could someone (Slacker?) confirm whether the provision of leisure/sports facilities is a statutory or discretionary requirement of local authorities?

[therealjr]

It's a statutory duty but the statute is quiet on exactly how those facilties have to be provided.
So for example Chesterfield exercises its duty by having 2 leisure centres plus other facilties like the football and cricket pitches, tennis courts etc.
If you look at Bolsover they dont have a leisure centre in the main town but do have ones in Clowne and Cresswell.

[Slacker]

2 for a borough size of Chesterfield is recommended but not mandatory which is why some councils hit by government cutbacks are closing theirs down. Partnership deal is probably the best option for long term future.
If anyone can suggest a good audio equivalent of youtube I will upload the SOLC / Radio Sheff interview and post on here.