LET us all hope Warrington Borough Council’s six-week consultation over the future of Woolston Neighbourhood Hub results in a positive outcome for the thousands of local people who rely on the community facility.
Ever since Warrington Borough Council changed course on its investment policy to raise additional funds to plug holes in budget shortfalls, cutbacks have been coming thick and fast.
They say they have been listening to the people over their investment concerns.
Well now it is time to listen to the people over the loss of an important community facility which provides vital services for health and wellbeing, both physically and mentally.
Even if the £3m quoted to bring the facility back into use is correct – it is a small price to pay to keep the hub open.
Not long ago, Warrington Borough Council’s leadership didn’t think twice about investing millions of pounds into a private bank, an energy company which went bust or lending money to private enterprise for a return on investment.
Now they are having to think twice about investing money in maintaining a vital community facility which helps people remain active by swimming, or using a gym, or visiting a GP to maintain their health and wellbeing or visiting a library to help children appreciate the benefits of reading a book.
I’m sure the money required could be borrowed cheaply over a period of time, to ensure this much-needed community facility can remain open and continue to provide the facilities local council-tax payers contribute to. It is the council’s duty to provide these services.
I know difficult decisions have to be made – but this should be an absolute no brainer. Warrington Borough Council made the decision to take LiveWire back in house – did they not think about their duty of care maintaining their asset?
With the consultation due to end in the New Year let’s hope the council can see some common sense, keep the facility open and then run it so it can maintain itself – like any other leisure centre run by a private business.
With all the housing developments taking place, including just down the road at the former Padgate campus site, there is going to be some section 106 monies available.
4 Comments
I see the sentiment, but you’re being deliberately peevish here.
You know monies borrowed for investment purposes can’t be used for what amount to day to day expenses.
No, now the envoys are in place, as everyone shouting about “the debt” whilst not understanding it wanted, you can’t just go and borrow £3m, no matter how “sure” you may be that you can.
There is already a forecast overspend on the “current account” for this year, can’t add to that.
Also can’t divert money awarded directly by government to Culcheth, Poplars and Hulme, cycle path construction or other projects.
Difficult isn’t it? Everything is already pared right back, what would you cut to find £3m? What are you going to tell someone else they can’t have, that their need is less than the need to keep the hub open?
The consultation document should provide some insight and give the council some useful ideas, as long as people fill it in in a constructive way.
However you want to badge it up, you have to invest in your community assets by keeping them fit for purpose.
It appears to be clear negligence on the part of the council for having not maintained the building. You could speculate that it was a deliberate ploy to lead to the position they now claim to be in. They have a history of failure and not listening to the communities. Can I remind you of the utterly farcical LTN’s? They are incompetent and arrogant. Why the people of Warrington continue to vote for them beggars belief. There is a case that they are potentially breaking the law in certain aspects. If you take the time and trouble to research their legal obligations your opinion might change.
WBC has an evident history of failing to maintain its assets. “Regular maintenance” doesn’t feature in the council’s lexicon or rule book. Inevitably this has resulted having to spend more hard earned (or borrowed) cash to bring those neglected assets back into use. Add to that the flawed actions of the previous administration, when Bowden, Broomhead, Mitchell and Lynton Green were “investing” in questionable ventures (as you have pointed out Gary) and it’s not difficult to see the financial legacy they left for their fellow Labour Party colleagues. Many of whom were part of the council led by Bowden, Mitchell etc.