One of many reasons we must save Queens Park Sports Centre

[Henri07]

In light of a further release of information from CBC (though certain info still blacked out). We have come to the following conclusion:

The involvement of Chesterfield College within the  business case model for refurbishing Queens Park Sport centre is not in the best interests of Chesterfield residents. Having analysed the figures and associated notes, it's evident the involvement of Chesterfield College creates a loss of income from bookings which can no longer be accommodated. This reduction in the forecasted income is  a consequence of the 'Dual Usage Agreement' allowing  Students  a fixed level of facilities.
Nonetheless, the refurbished centre will STILL deliver efficiencies and an improved centre. On the back of those savings, CBC have ALREADY implemented a restructure of their leisure staffing expenditure; delivering a year on year saving of circa £300k. Therefore, if we assumed going forward that any capital investment of the refurbished Queens Park Sports Centre did not involve the College, it would not be unreasonable to forecast, income to increase by 10% due to demand of a revamped centre. This equates to around £100k. On  top of the already £200k savings from the refurbishment and the staffing savings of £300k, the centre can achieve savings of around £600k per annum. Without the need of involvement from Chesterfield College.

This enables the Council the ability to invest AND reduce the overall subsidy of the building. Keeping access to facilities for the Chesterfield public on an equal & fair basis, plus preserving the promise of the Annexe for future generations. Additionally, further savings could be made if the Council explored outsourcing the management of the Centre. 
 

[Slacker]

Outsourcing would go against Labour election pledges, a point that was made on several election leaflets. Any income should be re-invested not go to private individuals or shareholders. It was made very clear on pre-election contact on 2011 that the (Chesterfield residing) public were behind this. Julia Cambridge was not around at the time and is probably unaware of this.

[Pete]

Agree with Slacker - any income should not go to private individuals or shareholders.

[Slacker]

I am not point blank against private companies, they are needed for specialist services and where expensive equipment is required that would not be fully utilised all year for instance at county things like traffic management on dual carriageways is done by a private company. However I don't think it's right to transfer council employees into management of a private company.