A NEW Pow Beck scheme to develop rugby, soccer and other sports facilities at Whitehaven could still go ahead – despite the £2.6million cutbacks which threaten leisure facilities in Copeland.
Have your say
I can see Baileys point of view and others who think the sports complex (or whatever it will be called next week) would be of benefit, putting my other hat on of course. But let's just think about this. Has anyone gone out and really canvassed the opionion of the population about what they want? I don't recall ever been asked.
Promoting sports and a healthy lifestyle is one thing but what percentage of the population would use it. Evidence suggests that even following the surge from the Olympics that only 0.5% of the population will take up a sport and that will only last a maximum of 4 weeks. Time has a way of making people forget.My point really is about choice. If I was given the chance to vote for the hospital rebuild or sports complex I would vote for the former. But of course we haven't. We assume the officials we voted in will do what is right for the population. And I'm the King of China and the pink elephant I spotted outside my garden this afternoon has promised to clean the drains more than once a year.....sorry that was my local councillor taking his Jag out for a run.
Posted by Pete on
23 October 2012 at 22:54
Boots has it right. If only 0.7 of the population attend what is a professional, money making, sport then the money could be better spent on amateur sports or encouraging the wider population to exercise. It seems to be forgotten that Copeland is not just run down Whitehaven.
Posted by Chuck on
23 October 2012 at 18:49
I've said it before and will say it again....If the money was redirected to pay towards the hospital refurb (as the people who don't follow sport want)...wouldn't our wonderful government then just see that as someone else chipping in and reduce their current hospital funding accordingly? I definitely wouldn't put it past them! So why don't we just be happy that we may have at least some improved sporting facilities (in the face of other things getting taken away)...just remember, an healthy interest/participation is not only good for the health of young folk, but gives them a pasttime to follow. I have no kids of a younger age...so it would be easy for me to dismiss local sport, as I don't particularly follow it (perhaps like the moaners on here?). But I at least care about the future of our town and think we need to encourage the youth to remain and look for a career locally and prevent Whitehaven becoming a run-down retirement town full of old whingers!!!
Posted by Bailey on
23 October 2012 at 14:37
In my original comment about the proposed Stadium, I said that it was something that most people do not need or want. So far, in all the subsequent comments, no one has contradicted this. As a matter of interest, the population of Copeland according to the CBC website is 70,300. The highest attendance this year was on 24 June against Workington at 1,954, 2.7% of the population. I understand that the average attendance is around 500, which is 0.7% of the population.The statistics speak for themselves.
Posted by Boots on
23 October 2012 at 14:34
I completely agree with pete's views on elected officials, the only issue there is that we live in a complete democracy, and ultimately it's the people that vote for their councillors, no one else so that would be hard to implement.
Obviously if it wont be built then it is a waste of money but the point is the funders want it to be spent on a sports stadium, hospitals cost 10-20 times more anyway so would need a whole different level of funding....Mr Irving makes the point about indirectly being taxpayers money...that's too loose, it's like saying a teacher cant spend her money on wine and holidays...yeah it comes from the taxpayer, but so what, ultimately it's up to them what it gets spent on? They exist to make those decisions. let them do it. My original point is that throughout this whole debacle Mr Irving and the W'haven News and misled the reader to think it was the council's own money out of their govt grant/council tax income.
Posted by hangonaminute on
23 October 2012 at 11:44
It really doesn't matter where the money has come from. The point is that a large sum of money has been wasted on a shambles. That money could have been put to far better use on things the borough needs e.g. towards the new hospital. What comes first....peoples health and lives or sport? I really don't think I need to answer that.
What really beggars belief is that those in authority who made these, and I will be kind in saying unfortunate decisions, have no been held to account, not even a reprimand.It's about time the law was changed so the people have the authority to hold council officials and MPs for that matter to account. If they fail the people should have the right to have them removed, not by elections every 4 or 5 years. At least then we might have councillors that think with some grey matter rather than trying to look good!!!I also think that councillors should have a minimum qualification. You can't walk into a job in the real world without them so why not public officials who are dealing with and spending vast sums of the tax payers money.
Posted by Pete on
22 October 2012 at 22:38
Hangonaminute....Whether the money was RINGFENCED or not it has gone, it has been squandered. If not squandered it would still be there and eventually used by someone somewhere for a good cause. Obviously the chosen Consultants did not have the skills either.
Posted by It's me again on
22 October 2012 at 19:47
hangonaminute you clearly either work for the council or are a labour councillor. you say that councils need consultants when they dont have permanent staff with skills. just look at the payment information over Â£500 on the copeland website. as far as I can make out the consultants are permanent never mind the staff. you don't see many people being paid Â£10,000 a month for years with nothing to show for it anywhere else.
Posted by Phil on
22 October 2012 at 19:32
Alan, thanks for your reply.
However, I think that connection is pretty loose. I was under the impression that the NMP was made up of big private sector business like AMEC, ARREVA etc.I think your explanation is so loose it's like saying when people get paid by the local or national govt its actually still taxpayers money.... what you're suggesting compares to when teachers get paid it is acutally taxpayers money so they shouldn't spend it on what they want? Like wine and holidays?You've painted a wrong picture. disapointed.
Posted by hangonaminute on
22 October 2012 at 10:47
Well the article says where the money has gone, read it.If the funders say the money is RINGFENCED for a sports stadium project then it cant be used for anything else. I think the council need consultants when they dont have the permanent staff with the necesary skills/experience. THat's what they're typically for anyway, it's a more efficient method rather than having a full time member of staff with all the oncosts such as pension contribs and exps etc.Honestly, I'm shocked reading this article, it wasnt taxpayers money at all, but Irving and the W'haven News have slaughtered the council over this for 18months. Time for council bashing to stop and people to start pulling together in this town.
Posted by hangonaminute on
22 October 2012 at 10:40