*A letter to Jo Cox, Labour's PPC for Batley and Spen Valley, from Kirklees Council Leader, Cllr David Sheard, in response to questions raised. Very importantly, the response offers some good insight and context for residents as well and serves as the reason for its open publication.*
Dear Jo
The decision to close the Whitcliffe Mount Sports Centre is final and there are no proposals from any Political Party or any other body to reverse that decision.
I personally have had no requests, other than yours for copies of the reports and minutes of meetings where the decisions were taken. All reports and decision summaries are available on the Council web site with the exception of reports that were deemed to be exempt from the public due to the nature of information in them.
Any information that was not considered exempt can be provided. I have asked the Chief Executive to write a report for Cabinet that can be put in the public domain, including all the factors (without confidential details) that were considered.
The decisions that will be taken by the Cabinet later this month will involve securing alternative provision where possible to reduce the lack of provision to a minimum as a result of the earlier decision to accede to the request from the EDA to set a date for demolition of the Sports Centre to allow them to create the new school on the site.
Cabinet have already taken the decision in proposing a budget to the council, to allocate funds to create a new sports centre on the Princess Mary Site including a sports hall, in the knowledge that the build will have to be completed before the current swimming pool is demolished as the current swimming provision in the area does not meet the current demand. It is intended that the sports centre would include a pool larger than the current pool to take up some of the unmet demand. This decision was part of the budget decision of full council. No Groups submitted an amendment to reverse that decision. The Liberal/Democrats made a proposal to not provide a public sports hall on the new site, but to add £2m to the Whitcliffe Mount School PFI to build a second sports hall for the school.
To my knowledge, this is not a request from the school, we have no indication that they are willing to take on this extra responsibility or indeed what their “offer” to the public would be. It certainly will not include Bowls and probably not include the “Fitness” users of the current facilities who make up over 50% of current users. Whatever the configuration included, the provision would not be continuous provision.
The choice for the Council is to buy a Sports Hall we will own, or give money for a “PFI” Sports Hall that will be owned by the school. This was not a difficult decision for the Cabinet to make.
In making the decision to close the Sports Hall on the date requested, the Cabinet asked KAL to conduct a review of Sports Provision in North Kirklees to meet and extend current demand; I understand that there are particular difficulties with Bowling and Roller Hockey and that a solution to their location is still being sought, though there is no reason that Roller Hockey could not continue to use the School Sports Hall when it is built, if the school are willing.
What must not be forgotten is that the council were approached by the school to help them in procuring new school buildings, something that we were very keen to do as one of the first acts of the current government was to scrap all investment in school buildings, in part so they could divert money in to their “pet” “free schools”. The timetable was driven by the needs of the school and the government agency in making their procurement decisions, the Cabinet did not want to “lose” the New School Build.
The Sports Centre is owned by Kirklees but is “land locked” by land owned by the Endowment Trust. The Cabinet was advised on the costs it would need to incur to retain the current Sports Centre but decided that better provision could be provided by a new Sports Centre. Once that decision was taken the provision for the Valley was considered. Mindful of the fact that a strong campaign had been launched in the Valley to retain the Swimming Pool and that new development was the only answer. In the current financial position, a good case (because of the swimming needs) could be made for the Spen Valley, but only for one Complex.
I understand that all current users do not want any change, but as only one Sports Complex can be funded, the location would be obvious to anyone looking objectively at the Spen Valley.
The pace of the decision making was at all times driven by the needs of the EFA and the school. We were ever mindful of the needs to build a new school.
David
Dear Jo
The decision to close the Whitcliffe Mount Sports Centre is final and there are no proposals from any Political Party or any other body to reverse that decision.
I personally have had no requests, other than yours for copies of the reports and minutes of meetings where the decisions were taken. All reports and decision summaries are available on the Council web site with the exception of reports that were deemed to be exempt from the public due to the nature of information in them.
Any information that was not considered exempt can be provided. I have asked the Chief Executive to write a report for Cabinet that can be put in the public domain, including all the factors (without confidential details) that were considered.
The decisions that will be taken by the Cabinet later this month will involve securing alternative provision where possible to reduce the lack of provision to a minimum as a result of the earlier decision to accede to the request from the EDA to set a date for demolition of the Sports Centre to allow them to create the new school on the site.
Cabinet have already taken the decision in proposing a budget to the council, to allocate funds to create a new sports centre on the Princess Mary Site including a sports hall, in the knowledge that the build will have to be completed before the current swimming pool is demolished as the current swimming provision in the area does not meet the current demand. It is intended that the sports centre would include a pool larger than the current pool to take up some of the unmet demand. This decision was part of the budget decision of full council. No Groups submitted an amendment to reverse that decision. The Liberal/Democrats made a proposal to not provide a public sports hall on the new site, but to add £2m to the Whitcliffe Mount School PFI to build a second sports hall for the school.
To my knowledge, this is not a request from the school, we have no indication that they are willing to take on this extra responsibility or indeed what their “offer” to the public would be. It certainly will not include Bowls and probably not include the “Fitness” users of the current facilities who make up over 50% of current users. Whatever the configuration included, the provision would not be continuous provision.
The choice for the Council is to buy a Sports Hall we will own, or give money for a “PFI” Sports Hall that will be owned by the school. This was not a difficult decision for the Cabinet to make.
In making the decision to close the Sports Hall on the date requested, the Cabinet asked KAL to conduct a review of Sports Provision in North Kirklees to meet and extend current demand; I understand that there are particular difficulties with Bowling and Roller Hockey and that a solution to their location is still being sought, though there is no reason that Roller Hockey could not continue to use the School Sports Hall when it is built, if the school are willing.
What must not be forgotten is that the council were approached by the school to help them in procuring new school buildings, something that we were very keen to do as one of the first acts of the current government was to scrap all investment in school buildings, in part so they could divert money in to their “pet” “free schools”. The timetable was driven by the needs of the school and the government agency in making their procurement decisions, the Cabinet did not want to “lose” the New School Build.
The Sports Centre is owned by Kirklees but is “land locked” by land owned by the Endowment Trust. The Cabinet was advised on the costs it would need to incur to retain the current Sports Centre but decided that better provision could be provided by a new Sports Centre. Once that decision was taken the provision for the Valley was considered. Mindful of the fact that a strong campaign had been launched in the Valley to retain the Swimming Pool and that new development was the only answer. In the current financial position, a good case (because of the swimming needs) could be made for the Spen Valley, but only for one Complex.
I understand that all current users do not want any change, but as only one Sports Complex can be funded, the location would be obvious to anyone looking objectively at the Spen Valley.
The pace of the decision making was at all times driven by the needs of the EFA and the school. We were ever mindful of the needs to build a new school.
David
