Chesterfield Online Forum
General Category => Rants => Topic started by: Pete on February 08, 2012, 08:17:10 PM
-
They are going to spend £2.5m on Queen’s Park Sports Centre with £50,000 going into the community sports outreach programme.
For some reason or other councillor Nick Stringer thinks it would be a good idea for people to "actively engage with sports and recreation."
What makes him think that? Is the Centre over-subscribed?
Sounds like more money spent on those that already have - not on those that have little or nothing.
-
I'd sooner they put a few more taxi ranks around town centre.
Perhaps one near the escalators ;)
I've not read the article yet, so shouldn't comment on it really.
-
M*nsfield achieved what we couldn't, an Olympic swimmer, because we ain't got the right size pool
-
M*nsfield achieved what we couldn't, an Olympic swimmer, because we ain't got the right size pool
and why?
Because the council at the time deliberately built it too small so that it wouldn't be constantly in use for galas and competitive swimmers and would be available for use by the people of Chesterfield.
Right or wrong? You decide.
-
In retrospect seems a bad decision. Always thought competitive swimming took place at weekend evenings after the pool was closed to the public.
-
Not sure I follow your point, Pete.
If, (if), the council have the money available, I don't see why they shouldn't spend it on facilties for the public to use. I used to take K4jnr swimming at Queens Park, but stopped going, its cold and run down and needs improvement work doing to it.
-
Re swimming pool - Last year they spent a million pounds on it - so might be worth having another a trip down there.
My point is that they are closing youth clubs and letting youth workers go - and they are promoting sport. What about the youngsters that aren't into sports? What do they have?
Also my experience driving past there every day is that, apart from the pool, there seems to be very much a middle class clientel with their squash/badminton rackets - hardly a deprived class of punter.
-
Re swimming pool, in that case might give it another go next week, half term.
Re youth clubs, shouldn't be an either / or situation. Some kids might be into sport, some might be into hanging around a youth club, council should be fair about how they allocate funds, but that doesn't mean this particular scheme is at fault, just the way they allocate money.
Re Middle class clientele, thats just more of your Guardian reading bullshit. I assume they don't have a sign over the door saying "No chavs". And I wouldn't be too pleased if they were spending our taxes on playstations for those people too lazy to get up off their backsides. The council has a duty to provide facilities for the public, and within this dept, their remit includes encouraging people to be healthy and fit, which makes sense, as it in turn, puts less pressure on the NHS. If some people choose not to use those facilities that is their fault, just like with the issue you raised about fresh fruit and veg. Why do you seem to have an issue with the middle classes, poor people have choices as well, they just make bad ones sometimes, (as do the middle classes, but they don't blame every one else). thats not the fault of the middle classes, maybe its because the poor people have got used to silly liberals making excuses for them all the time.
-
>> Re Middle class clientele, thats just more of your Guardian reading b*llsh*t.
No its not - it's what I see with my eyes everyday.
BTW Thanks for the Mail/Express diatribe but I'll pass on that if you don't mind. Unless, of course you are saying something worthwhile in an unoffensive way.
-
Now then lads - this looks like handbags at dawn! Don't get personal! :o
-
My point is that they are closing youth clubs and letting youth workers go - and they are promoting sport. What about the youngsters that aren't into sports? What do they have?
Unfortunately Pete you've got your local authorities mixed up.
Labour controlled Chesterfield Borough council are the ones who are doing the investment in sport. If I'm reading the reports right the £50k going into the outreach programme is something along the lines of lets spend the money improving the bowling greens in the Annexe so they can be used rather than blocking the sports hall up for bowls (thats just a made up example but you get the point)
Conservative controlled Derbyshire County Council are the ones cutting youth facilities and sacking youth workers.
You can argue that there should be some joined up thinking between the two but it ain't going to happen.
-
>> Unfortunately Pete you've got your local authorities mixed up.
Never thought of that.
But were the town council not aware of the attack by the county Tories on the Youth Service?
-
No its not - it's what I see with my eyes everyday.
I'll ask the question again Pete, I know you don't like answering them but give it a go. Then maybe my point won't be so offensive, if you think they are.
Is the council spending money on a project solely to be used by middle class people, and not to be used by poor people, or is the facilities available to everyone should they choose.
Incidentally, during the summer months we often take our kids to Queens Park, as the play area is very good, sand pits, etc. It gets very busy with parents from all backgrounds, its free to use so not just there for the middle classes, and that's what I see with my own eyes.
So maybe you need an eye test, and I'm sorry if you think my posts are offensive, but maybe you ought to try putting together a logical argument instead of using every single issue that crops up, to have a go at the middle classes. Class war in my eyes is offensive!
-
When I was a kid, and I can't see much difference today.
I went to the local youth clubs. They had the equipment we could use to play sport etc.
I would never have walked into Queens Park and asked if me and my mate could have a game of badminton.
It would have cost us a fortune.
Perhaps Pete is just stating similiar. What does local lad/lass do.
They can't afford the cost of booking a badminton court.
Just my penneth :)
-
>> Unfortunately Pete you've got your local authorities mixed up.
Never thought of that.
But were the town council not aware of the attack by the county Tories on the Youth Service?
Very aware. Many of us at the consultation meeting. If the LibDems on the county vote with Labour against the cuts (as some have indicated they will) it can be stopped. Most of the LibDem county councillors are also on Chesterfield Borough.
-
Yep - let me make it clear, I do stick up for the old, poor and infirm members of society - the ones who suffer most under the present government.
@K4blades - I don't find your posts offensive - only your language.
-
>> Unfortunately Pete you've got your local authorities mixed up.
Never thought of that.
and there in lies the problem when it comes to local elections (and this is not a political argument all the parties are as guilty as each other). it's easy for the party in opposition nationally to blame the government for all ills and use this tactic to get the local council voted out. It was the tactic used by the Lib dems succesfully when they came to power in Chesterfield and the Labour party were equally as succesful blaming the local council for the failings of the coalition government and also managing to pin the blame on them for the snow clearing fiasco which was of course the failings of the tory controlled county council. Personally I'd like to see organised political parties banned from local elections.
-
I've worked on parish council elections (as a council officer) where all candidates were independents. This was however in a close knit village community where I assume they were all personally known.
Labour and LibDems will have a go at each other in elections at district council level but much of the time we are working together in committees to try and make decisions for the good of the community, putting political rivalry aside. I have also been involved in decision making processes (eg the extension of the conservation are round Saltergate) where the vote went totally against party divisions.
-
Yep - let me make it clear, I do stick up for the old, poor and infirm members of society - the ones who suffer most under the present government.
@K4blades - I don't find your posts offensive - only your language.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, just because you might be on the left politically, it doesn't give you a monopoly on caring for the vulnerable.
I also said, and emphasised, in my OP that it was a matter of if the money is available, there are other priorities. I also said that I agree, in that money should be used for a mixture of initiatives.
However, the point remains, and it appears to be one you seem to be struggling to answer, but where does it say that this particular initiative is for the use of the middle classes, and not the poor. That was the point of your OP, yet you can't justify the comment!
-
>> Unfortunately Pete you've got your local authorities mixed up.
Never thought of that.
and there in lies the problem when it comes to local elections (and this is not a political argument all the parties are as guilty as each other). it's easy for the party in opposition nationally to blame the government for all ills and use this tactic to get the local council voted out. It was the tactic used by the Lib dems succesfully when they came to power in Chesterfield and the Labour party were equally as succesful blaming the local council for the failings of the coalition government and also managing to pin the blame on them for the snow clearing fiasco which was of course the failings of the tory controlled county council. Personally I'd like to see organised political parties banned from local elections.
Good post JR, though I would go further and say that I would like to see political parties banned from ALL elections, then we might see some progress in this country. And at least we would have real democracy, not the pretend democracy that the political elite try to con us into thinking we currently have.
-
>Incidentally, during the summer months we often take our kids to Queens Park, as the play area is very good, sand pits, etc. It gets very busy with parents from all backgrounds, its free to use so not just there for the middle classes,<
No it is not free to use. This facility is paid for by the middle classes who pay their rates and taxes.
-
And at least we would have real democracy, not the pretend democracy that the political elite try to con us into thinking we currently have.
And how would this democracy work?
Leave it to the officers of the Council, who you say are left wing?
Have a public vote everytime a decision has to be made.
Nowadays Councils are a business where decisions have to be made about profit and loss.
Would you like to make the decision about where money has to saved?
Could you make that decision based on the good for everyone or just yourself.
Doubt it.
-
Its much easier to make a financial decision when you are not motivated by political allegiances, millions of businesses do it all the time!
-
Its much easier to make a financial decision when you are not motivated by political allegiances, millions of businesses do it all the time!
True but they are invariably motivated by profit which means the decisions are not necessarily in the best interests of the people.
If you made local authority decisions on those lines you'd close the Pomegranate. The Winding Wheel, both sports centres, The Museum and probably Hasland Village Hall.
-
I think if they go down that route, eventually some business will buy the town and turn it into a theme park...
-
My thoughts on the chesterfield swimming baths - if DCC have any money to spend they should start with spending it on the water heating system in the pool.
I took a young person swimming there a couple of months ago and am still traumatised by it :o - it was freezing in there. I would have hoped that especially in the cold weather they would turn the dial up a few notches! >:(
I won't be going back I can tell you! >:(
-
DCC?
-
Elaborate please Slacker.
Did you mean to say DCC don't run the pool.
CBC do ;)
-
Yep
-
My thoughts on the chesterfield swimming baths - if DCC have any money to spend they should start with spending it on the water heating system in the pool.
I took a young person swimming there a couple of months ago and am still traumatised by it :o - it was freezing in there. I would have hoped that especially in the cold weather they would turn the dial up a few notches! >:(
I won't be going back I can tell you! >:(
popular misconception. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the temperature of the water at QPSC. It's constantly monitored and kept at a temperature which is deemed the best for swimming whilst also keeping the risk of water borne viruses to a minimum. The PROBLEM with QPSC is that all the glass in there means the air temperature is far too high which makes the water seem colder than it is.
-
I drove past there last week and couldnt believe the array of Solar Panels on the roof. I hope the roof is supported somehow, theres a lot of weight there.
-
True but they are invariably motivated by profit which means the decisions are not necessarily in the best interests of the people.
If you made local authority decisions on those lines you'd close the Pomegranate. The Winding Wheel, both sports centres, The Museum and probably Hasland Village Hall.
Is that how Sainsburys runs its business, lets screw the customers for all we can so the shareholders will get more profit?
A good business knows that not only to survive, but to grow and develop in the long term, it needs to look after its customers.
The idea that public bodies should not worry about profit is nonsense, you are implying that its OK to run at a loss, and that is exactly why this country, (much of the world) is in the mess its in, because its been living beyond it means, hoping that some mug, (taxpayer) will always pick up the tab, or they can turn to debt.
If the facilities you mention are NOT making a profit, then why would you expect the taxpayer to fund something that they don't want to use.
Except that maybe they do want to use them if better ran.
The theater business is booming at the moment, I know lots of people who often, at high cost, jump on a coach to London for a theatre break. We went to Manchester a couple of months back to see Oliver and spent about £200 for the day. So how come a theater around the corner can't make money?
Last year we went to the Natural History Museum in London. Free to get in and the place was rammed, with massive queues to get inside. Once inside there was all sorts of ways the place were making money: kids packed lunches / explorer packs / one off exhibitions, sponsorships / kids parties / over night stays / expensive coffee place, etc. When did Chesterfield Museum last have a queue waiting to get in.
And as for the pools, I live just round the corner from Staveley's Healthy Living Center, a perfect example of a swimming pool designed by committee, rather than asking the public what they want. When we go swimming we go to Queens Park because its much better suited to small kids.....except last year we went to Ponds Forge and again massive queue, took us an hour to get in and cost £12.00, at the same time there was a special offer on at the HLC, a pound to get in the pool....clearly being under used.
So maybe the problem isn't that the facilities aren't wanted, maybe they just aren't wanted in their current form, which suggests being badly managed, and not caring because they know Mr Taxpayer will be along to pick up the tab.
Then there are countless other ways councils can make money, many are now fitting Pvs on roofs to claim back FIT payments, I've heard about councils becoming utility providers, wrap around care at primary schools, sponsored gardens, lots and lots of different things if the attitude is right, and profit not disregarded.
And by doing all this sort of stuff, it then means the council can afford to spend money on things that they can't profit from such as social care, the elderly, etc. I've never felt that any public body should spend money on an attraction that no-one uses at the expense of the sick and infirm, but if you think that's a good idea, well that's your choice, but I know where I want my taxes spent. And if loss making facilities can become profit making facilities to help fund the needy I would see it as a good thing, not bad....but then my views are based on sound economics and not any political dogma.
-
And I didn't even mention car-parks.
-
It's not political dogma to subsidise things so people who can't afford a trip to London can go to see a show can go and see something at the local theatre that may only appeal to a small audience.
If profit was the only aim then there wouldn't even be any parks. A small percentage of theatre goers in London amounts to many times a small percentage of Chesterfield theatre goers so they obviously can cater for wide tastes an run at a profit. You wouldn't put a McDonalds in an isolated village and expect it to do massive trade would you?
The council, along with neighbouring ones, was all set to go ahead with rented roof space for solar panels but I believe there was a stumbling block with changes to feed in tariffs leading to a bit of delay.
If you want consultation or to voice an opinion go along to your local Community Forum meeting.
-
Natural History Museum? You mean the one that gets £7m a year in government subsidy?
London theatres? Like the National? Built at a cost to the taxpayer of £20m and receives 40% of its income from the taxpayer?
Total tax bill on the Arts
Around £300m a year
Don't make the mistake of thinking they make a profit.
-
And in those 2 responses we see the real problem its not about specifics, its about attitude. If all you ever do is come out with excuses why things can't be done, nothing will change. Adopt a "can-do" attitude and anythings possible.
OK, The Pomegranite will never be the London Paladium, but it could do more to attract bigger audiences. Saying Chesterfield is just a "small village" is a cop out, people are willing to travel to London / Manchester, why wouldn't people travel to Chesterfield, within half an hours drive we have Sheffield / Nottingham / Derby. Many times on this forum, members have said that they have seen this band or that show, people want to go out and be entertained.
And as I said, we have traveled to Sheffield to go swimming when there's a pool on my doorstep.
I have nothing against subsidising anything if its what the public wants, that's democracy. But if a venue can't attract an audience then clearly its not what the public wants, so change whats happening at the venue.
The bottom line is this:
Limited funds are available.
I would prefer to spend those funds on things like social care / elderly and ask other facilities to become less dependant on the taxpayer.
You seem to suggest that you are happy to spend taxes subsidising these facilities which need subsidising because the public don't use them enough, at the expense of more needy issues. That's fine as long as you are happy to stick to that view come election day, Slacker!
And as for me taking part in consultations, etc, forget it. While ever we have the current political system that only allows success for the mighty parties with their massive funding and party machines, we have no real democracy, and as we have seen time and time again, they just do what they want, irrespective of what anyone else wants. Otherwise we wouldn't be at war, we would probably be out of Europe, and would have much tighter immigration control...what we don't have is representative for the common man!
-
The Pomegranate has 546 seats
The Sheffield Lycuem (in example) has 1068
The City Hall has over 2000
How much would the Pomegranate have to charge per ticket to attract the same class of act / show? Double? Treble?
-
It's unreasonable for a town of our size not to have such facilities. If it was all run purely for profit it would be sad day indeed.
-
The Pomegranate has 546 seats
The Sheffield Lycuem (in example) has 1068
The City Hall has over 2000
How much would the Pomegranate have to charge per ticket to attract the same class of act / show? Double? Treble?
You and Slacker are giving contradictory arguments. On one hand you are are saying that the theater is too small to put on a big show, and on the other hand, he is saying that the local audience is too small to fill the theater??????
The point is, if the show is entertaining enough, local people will pay to go and see it. Chesterfield FC haven't got the same size ground as Man Utd, but this years gates are bigger than last year because they are playing in a higher league, hence perceived to be putting on a better show against bigger teams, the ground would be sold out every week if they were in the premier league, and empty if they were in the blue square. Its not the size of the venue, its the quality of the entertainment that matters.
Its bloody hard work coming on this forum sometimes.
-
Pete and Slacker, me, and everybody else on this forum have their own opinions.
The Admin team also have their own opinions.
:)
The admin team may not agree with lots, but stay impartial.
;)
Edit: Pete and Slacker don't share opinions. They have their own.
Its bloody hard work coming on this forum sometimes.
Yes it might be. Your not talking to 1 person.
-
And in those 2 responses we see the real problem its not about specifics, its about attitude. If all you ever do is come out with excuses why things can't be done, nothing will change. Adopt a "can-do" attitude and anythings possible.
OK, The Pomegranite will never be the London Paladium, but it could do more to attract bigger audiences. Saying Chesterfield is just a "small village" is a cop out, people are willing to travel to London / Manchester, why wouldn't people travel to Chesterfield, within half an hours drive we have Sheffield / Nottingham / Derby. Many times on this forum, members have said that they have seen this band or that show, people want to go out and be entertained.
And as I said, we have traveled to Sheffield to go swimming when there's a pool on my doorstep.
I have nothing against subsidising anything if its what the public wants, that's democracy. But if a venue can't attract an audience then clearly its not what the public wants, so change whats happening at the venue.
The bottom line is this:
Limited funds are available.
I would prefer to spend those funds on things like social care / elderly and ask other facilities to become less dependant on the taxpayer.
You seem to suggest that you are happy to spend taxes subsidising these facilities which need subsidising because the public don't use them enough, at the expense of more needy issues. That's fine as long as you are happy to stick to that view come election day, Slacker!
And as for me taking part in consultations, etc, forget it. While ever we have the current political system that only allows success for the mighty parties with their massive funding and party machines, we have no real democracy, and as we have seen time and time again, they just do what they want, irrespective of what anyone else wants. Otherwise we wouldn't be at war, we would probably be out of Europe, and would have much tighter immigration control...what we don't have is representative for the common man!
I am happy that certain things are subsidised by the tax payer.
Why should children that have the misfortune of being born in less well off families be deprived of leisure and entertainment?
I don't begrudge people who have earned themselves good salaries having nice houses, cars, holidays etc but the disadvantaged shouldn't be left with nothing.
This is why I have attended meetings opposing the Youth Service cuts. They were an easy target for DCC not being mandatory provision.
In my ward we listen to the opinions of people involved in community forum, estates committees, Friends of Eastwood park etc. They may not represent everyone in the area but they are open to anyone who wants to influence local decision making.
-
Why wouldn't we use contradictory arguments, we very rarely agree on anything!!
the quality of the entertainment may matter but so will the price.
If a ticket to the arena (6000 seats) is £40 then to attract the same act to the Pomegranate or the Winding wheel the ticket price would be in 3 figures and chances are the first figure wouldn't be a 1.
So are you going to get in your car, use the petrol, pay the parking fee buy the ticket and still be in pocket?
Or are you going to support your local theatre so it can make a profit?
-
If we all agreed on everything there would be no point to being on a discussion forum.
-
Arena last Saturday (Il Divo) , Winding Wheel this one (Smokie), quite happy with both but wouldn't have worked the other way round