-----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Firstly, the main malicious comment:
- Anonymous said...
- This website is ridiculous!! Just a pathetic swipe at a decision which has been put through the democratic process.
- Let's go through the reasons why the baths were closed.
1. Inspectors deemed the concrete roof to be unstable due to weathering within the concrete. It therefore had to be closed as it was a risk to the public. No argument.
2. So it closed. What next? Do we spend millions fixing the roof or shall we just build a new one? Coseley Baths already had the lowest usage for swimming baths in Dudley. Millions was invested into the baths, but every 'cheaply built' building has a use by date. So it had to close. Plus the neighbouring authority is building a brand new swimming baths. Which is just over a mile away. This will take even more people away from Coseley to these new baths. We will then only have a select group of people that use Coseley Baths. Anyone with a brain would realise that two competing competitors in a small market will lead to the closure of the most delapidated one. Simple economics.
2. So it closed. What next? Do we spend millions fixing the roof or shall we just build a new one? Coseley Baths already had the lowest usage for swimming baths in Dudley. Millions was invested into the baths, but every 'cheaply built' building has a use by date. So it had to close. Plus the neighbouring authority is building a brand new swimming baths. Which is just over a mile away. This will take even more people away from Coseley to these new baths. We will then only have a select group of people that use Coseley Baths. Anyone with a brain would realise that two competing competitors in a small market will lead to the closure of the most delapidated one. Simple economics.
3. This smear campaign against these Cllrs is unjust. The democratic decision was taken by elected representatives. Not one of the 72 councillors voted against it. Fact. This Socialist fuelled smear cmapaign is an insult to democracy. Your camapign is disgusting and I hope that these lies and smears will come back to haunt you Mr Wilkes. You had the chance to vote these Cllrs out but instead local people backed them. The Conservative support at the locals even increased at the recent local elections.
It's in the past. Move on.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Response:
How democratic was the process?
The public were not consulted on this and nobody voted on whether to close in any election. In fact, the decision was taken in the one year out of four without an election.
1. The roof-problem was identified in a Council Surveyors' report in November 2006 but its exact nature was not publicly revealed until Cabinet decision time in 2009.
2. Dudley Council's own Surveyors' Report estimated the roof-replacement as £1.1million and not “millions”. There was, however, the other £1.1million estimated for health & safety and D.D.A. compliance. The magnitude of both these figures has been disputed by the Coseley East ward-councillors.
The long-standing neglect of Coseley Baths didn't help the numbers of visits. The current leadership had seven years of opportunity to put this right. Long closure-times for the odd bit of servicing didn't help. Then there were the instances of low staffing reducing the numbers of people admitted. Also, was each visit by a swimming club classed as one visit rather than by however many were in the visiting party?
"Millions was invested into the baths". When, and by whom? "Every 'cheaply built' building has a use by date." How cheaply built was it? A frame featuring 27" steel roof girders bolted to very substantial steel-reinforced concrete pillars, clad with heavy-loading bricks, all on top of a concrete foundation-raft containing 18 miles of steel reinforcement. Note that Halesowen Baths is the same vintage, with Sandwell's Haden Hill Leisure centre nearby and that seems to have been invested in including having the cubicles from Coseley installed!
"Plus the neighbouring authority is building a brand new swimming baths. This will take even more people away from Coseley to these new baths. We will then only have a select group of people that use Coseley Baths. Anyone with a brain would realise that two competing competitors in a small market will lead to the closure of the most delapidated one. Simple economics.” This is to replace Bilston's existing 5-lane 33.5 metre pool. Coseley's was a 7-lane 33.5 metre pool. With increasing demand for public swimming pools (Black Country Consorteum), I'd like to know how all this can fit into an 8-lane 25 metre pool with learner-pool of around 17 metre max.!
Since when has 1.8 miles been "just over a mile away"? More like just under two!
3. "The democratic decision was taken by elected representatives." I've covered this above. "Not one of the 72 councillors voted against it." Were they given a chance?
"This Socialist fuelled smear cmapaign..." What do you mean by “Socialist fuelled”? So far, I have made little or no mention of political parties on this website but here goes: I'm very proud of a late Uncle (John Hyde) who, as a card carrying Conservative, stood as an independent on principal of objection to party-politics in local council's and, even so, then felt pressurized by Labour councillors to withdraw his candidacy. Sadly, his being a Conservative may have counted against him when applying for school headships around here but, happily, he found one in the early 1970s in Lincolnshire. I, also, very strongly believe in putting locality above party. If this is a smear, please give a fully justified and detailed demonstration that any of this website is untrue to the personal defamation of any councillors or officers mentioned.
"...is an insult to democracy." Is democracy about working with local people or about telling them to go away, outside election-time? I had high hopes of Dudley Council's controlling-group on taking office in 2003 which were only to be dashed as time went on. I'm not anti-Conservative locally. Other Conservative groups in Wolverhampton and Wallsall have been more open to local people on the issues of Hilton Hall and Willenhall Leisure Centre respectively. I've met Conservatives who are very good people. I still miss the courteous nature of Charles Fraser-MacNamamra. Paul Wynn tried to help on the Baths and has publicly stated his belief that Baths demolition was wrong. On a personal level, conservative councillors, including Cllr. Kettle, Cllr. Wright, and the three Cllrs. Turner, have always been very pleasant. It's not a matter of party but of “group-think”. We wanted to work with the Council leadership to save Coseley Baths, to the extent of taking it on as a trust. Was there any sign of them facilitating this as Mr. Cameron expressed a wish to do with many of our public facilities? I hope this will be easier now he is prime minister.
Most people who know me, realise how independent-minded I am. My attendance of various Council meetings as a member of the public since 2004, and being a member of various open-spaces friends groups, as well as Save Coseley Baths is what has shaped my perspective. The lack other independent-minded local people attending council meetings bodes badly for the principal of informed choice.
“The Conservative support at the locals even increased at the recent local elections.” If this is so (and I'm yet to compare the relative percentages, so bear with me on this for now) then one has to consider the possibility that, with a simultanious general election people were voting on national issues. Remember that U.K.I.P.'s high-point for Dudley Council has coincided with U.K.I.P.'s regular high-point of an E.U. Parliament election. Also to be considered is the way the Representation of the Peoples Acts makes holding the Council to account difficult for the few weeks before election day, by which time the popular memory can be dulled by party political campaigning. Whilst newspapers have no such constraints, the main paper for this area (Express & Star) is owned by Conservatives whose support of Campaigns such as Save Coseley Baths may evaporate at election-time. Hence, more of certain people and less of the Coseley Baths people on the letters page in the run-up.
This isn't my website. It exists to reflect the perspective and feelings of those who fought valiantly to Save Coseley Baths and were denied information, consultation/feedback, and debate. Dudley Council's “The full picture – media statements, Coseley swimming pool closure” reflects the perspective of Dudley Council and I was generous enough to include a link to this above-right.
“It's in the past...” The absence of Coseley Baths and concerns for the future of the site and other important parts of Coseley are very much in the here and now for us.
After our campaign, the demolition of Coseley Baths as if we didn't exist still hurts. The loss of a popular centre, important landmark and very important piece of Coseley Council heritage, which we cared about as our own, approaches bereavement. Considering this, to expect us to simply declare Dudley Council right and proper in its actions and “move on” only adds insult to injury, when Dudley Council can easily afford magnanimity – a virtue espoused by Churchill. The controlling group won an extra seat in these elections but you behave as if this website made it lose!
Why, with your saying “It's in the past. Move on”, are you so anxious to comment on it?
My involvement with this website has been an open secret but you choose to remain anonymous. Why? How near do you live to Coseley?
“I hope that these lies and smears...” What lies and what smears? This is covered above and your comments have been far from impartial. “...will come back to haunt you Mr Wilkes.” This is threatening language. Because of this and further threatening language in another anonymous comment, elsewhere on this website, I have disabled anonymous commenting for the time being.
Wednesday, 12 May 2010
No comments:
Post a Comment