On 15 July 2014, the Labour Cabinet were asked to consider a report proposing service led changes to the business operating model, of the New Huddersfield Leisure Centre.
Specifically, this was to seek reconsideration of the inclusion of a permanent indoor bowls facility in the new leisure centre and approval for its replacement with enhanced fitness provision.
The Cabinet heard from several members of a dedicated bowling community, whom each eloquently and passionately expressed their arguments for keeping the bowling facilities open within the new centre. The Cabinet were not in disagreement with the principles of the arguments put forward.
Unfortunately, since the original consultation and promises made back in 2008, that the new centre would maintain a bowling facility, local government finance has been severely cut. This has had a knock on effect to the support the council provides to the charitable organisation that is Kirklees Active Leisure (KAL).
This is not therefore a case of one group of service users contesting with another on which of their activities should hold most prominence. It is the unfortunate position of an organisation seeking a position of long term financial sustainability; choosing to expand facilities of significant user growth and more people over 55 years of age, rather than install facilities that would quickly create a financial loss, is the only credible decision.
For the Cabinet to act in any other way than to make this very tough decision, on agreeing the changes proposed, would have been condemning KAL, its users and staff, to a potentially uncertain future.
No doubt those councillors in opposition will try and make much of the decision taken, to somehow highlight an apparent lack of integrity, but who are really only acting to gain public support whilst ignoring completely the reality of the situation.
Perhaps many of these opposition councillors ought to look south, to their compatriots in the Coalition Government, whose decision it was to bleed northern councils dry of their funding that would have otherwise seen the bowling facilities maintained; or is that something they can’t stomach?
Specifically, this was to seek reconsideration of the inclusion of a permanent indoor bowls facility in the new leisure centre and approval for its replacement with enhanced fitness provision.
The Cabinet heard from several members of a dedicated bowling community, whom each eloquently and passionately expressed their arguments for keeping the bowling facilities open within the new centre. The Cabinet were not in disagreement with the principles of the arguments put forward.
Unfortunately, since the original consultation and promises made back in 2008, that the new centre would maintain a bowling facility, local government finance has been severely cut. This has had a knock on effect to the support the council provides to the charitable organisation that is Kirklees Active Leisure (KAL).
This is not therefore a case of one group of service users contesting with another on which of their activities should hold most prominence. It is the unfortunate position of an organisation seeking a position of long term financial sustainability; choosing to expand facilities of significant user growth and more people over 55 years of age, rather than install facilities that would quickly create a financial loss, is the only credible decision.
For the Cabinet to act in any other way than to make this very tough decision, on agreeing the changes proposed, would have been condemning KAL, its users and staff, to a potentially uncertain future.
No doubt those councillors in opposition will try and make much of the decision taken, to somehow highlight an apparent lack of integrity, but who are really only acting to gain public support whilst ignoring completely the reality of the situation.
Perhaps many of these opposition councillors ought to look south, to their compatriots in the Coalition Government, whose decision it was to bleed northern councils dry of their funding that would have otherwise seen the bowling facilities maintained; or is that something they can’t stomach?
