£1.5m paid to subsidise Shropshire leisure and swim centres
Thursday 8th December 2011, 10:59AM GMT.
Five county leisure centres were subsidised with more than £1.5 million by Shropshire Council in the last financial year, a new report has revealed.
Shrewsbury Sports Village and Indoor Bowls Hall, The Quarry Swimming and Fitness Centre in Shrewsbury, Market Drayton Swimming Centre, Oswestry Leisure Centre and Whitchurch Swimming Centre were provided with a combined total of £1,538,347 during 2010/11.
Almost 840,000 people visited the five sites during the 12 month period.
The figures were revealed in a report by commissioning manager Neil Willcox to Shropshire Council’s Safe and Confident Communities Scrutiny Committee.
Members were discussing plans to outsource the management of the five leisure centres. Applications from 16 commercial businesses and social enterprises have been received.
Shropshire Council has now drawn up a shortlist of five companies to take over the running of the sites from next June, with the selected organisations now required to go through a second stage of the tender process.
Councillor Joyce Barrow, said: “We need to ensure that these services continue to be of a high quality and provided at an affordable price, by a company who has the resources and knowledge to sustain, and hopefully better, the current services.”
The report said outsourcing should result in ‘significant financial savings’ for the council, while not affecting the quality of the services provided’.
UK News
Most Commented
- Clampdown on Shrewsbury chuggers
- Bishop's gay marriage views do nothing to support bible teachings
- Planners ordered to stay on Newport visit bus
- Letter: Angered by close encounter of the furred kind
- Letter: Alcohol price plans annoy me
- Shrewsbury’s broadband speed one of slowest in UK
- Letter: No sense in overseas job adverts
Shropshire Star on Twitter
Keep updated with the latest breaking news and content on our Twitter feed.
Lifestyle
Interactive Dining Out map
Hundreds of reviews by the Shropshire Star and Express & Star's teams to help you decide where to eat.
Entertainment
All the film reviews
Before you plan a trip to the pictures, get our critics' verdicts on all the latest movie releases.
OUR NEW APP
Get the new Shropshire Star app
Download the Shropshire Star’s new app to your iPad or iPhone to get one week of access to our digital newspapers absolutely FREE.
shropshirestar.com
Popular sections
Useful links
Surely this is not a subsidy but the provision of a public service. These are not private health clubs but public facilities open to all.
I absolutely guarantee that when private management take over these facilities entry fees will rise, service will be diminished and the council will end up paying more.
That is what has happened where private firms have taken over leisure centres elsewhere in the country. The centre near my parents home was taken over by a private trust. It is now not open to the public on several days a year as the trust has a contract with a nudist colony to allow them to use the facilities. On those days, the general public is barred from using the centre.
Report abuse
Not only a public service but a means of saving the Health Service money – this common sense reality is completely ignored by those who have a blind hate of publically funded services. If people go to public services – they’re getting out, socialising, being happy and so more healthy.
Lets see a health value rating factored into the funding of any public service – say .. evening classes for at Shrewsbury College mean old folk (for example) get out and are more healthy – instead of sitting getting brains turned to custard in front of the meaningless 57channels/nothing on TV of today which leads to depression and illness (nobody knows they’re ill so costs more to be brutal).
This public service *saves* the Health Service money – but its ignored when governments and councils cut funding – just moving the debt along to the NHS.
Report abuse
Totally agree with above statement, I think there should be financial support for these services, they provide an opportunity for community activities and more importantly as a tool to tackle the growing physical inactivity epidemic in this county.
I do raise issue with the view that private management would in some way decrease service access. Currently use of the sports village astro turf facilities are restricted most nights to the 9-10pm slot, due to Shrewsbury FC youth set-up having the pitches until then. Don’t think this falls under the “community commitment” to sport originally set out by the council. And they wonder why amateur football in the county is dying? Have any of the fat cats at the Shropshire FA/council trained 9-10? Slightly of point admittedly but let’s not kid ourselves into thinking the current set-up is working for all.
Report abuse
Maybe if they didn’t have to help theatre severn out and let the young and elderly swim at a reduced rate then the subsidy might be less and with 840,000 users means the subsidy is less then £2 per head which is not alot if people use it for recreation and enjoyment what subsidy does the theatre get and what is it per head?.
Report abuse
theatre severn is 5 to 10 pound per ticket subsidised
Report abuse
How did you arrive at this figure?
http://www.shropshirestar.com/news/2011/05/30/161999/
A 2-year subsidy of 994,000 divided by 400,000 tickets sold reveals a subsidy of less than £2.50 per ticket.
also…
“a new independent report had shown the theatre contributed an extra £5 million to the local economy in its first 18 months.”
Report abuse
why not add a £2.50 surcharge to all theatre tickets to make them cost neutral then?? most theatre goers are v wealthy and often buy a drink before the show. go without the drink and save us so much taxes please
Report abuse
I’m sure there is a balance to be struck here. If prices were raised, fewer tickets would be sold and the subsidy per ticket would increase.
You appear to think that those who do not use a public facility should not have to contribute. There are plenty of public facilities which I do not use but I am happy for our taxes to be spent on maintaining them.
Report abuse
a bargain compared to the theatre!
Report abuse
Yeah but if these people didnt have cheap affordable gyms they would not go and so it would cost the NHS more than this. This is an investment, in people. A spend to save measure which helps society and the economy.
Report abuse
Good health for the people of Shropshire is priceless. In an Olympic year we should be investing more in sport not less. Only a short sighted narrow minded right wing tory council would see privatising these services as a good idea. Profits first people second, that is not the way I want my council run with my money thank you very much.
Report abuse
This needs context like how many visitors spend how many hours there, if they get 1.5 million visits a year then its not bad is it, but if they get 1,500 then they are taking the mickey. Some where in between I guess? Look of course we need to get value for money and these Leisure centres must find savings like every other bit of the Council must but I dont mind some subsidy, the whole point is its subsidised isnt it. To keep prices lower and therefore encourage more participation. I think i would be more aggreived to read they were profiteering from my taxes! It would suggest they are overpricing it and detering usage. Anyway 1.5million out of a 632m council budget is 0.2% of the council budget! In my opinion that is not much to ask, for the most visible of frontline services I cant begrudge them that. They probably spend more on planning policy or corporate hospitality or some other back office functions which no one even heard of
Report abuse
cheap at half the price
shows the public sector are running it well
hands off OUR services please tory vultures
no selling it to your mates on the cheap like you did with bt and british rail
Report abuse
there are ample leisure facilities in shropshire they are called parks and pavements, if you want to get people fit stop them driving and get them out walking simples
doesnt cost a bean either.
lets promote outdoors leisure over gyms please
Report abuse
more of my taxes going to the poor and the obese then – nothing changes in this country i bet the very same people are the ones who live in taxpayer funded housing and have sixteen children in taxpayer funded schools and get child benefit of a grand a month as a result etc etc etc, meanwhile i pay through the nose and have to pay to use a private gym
Report abuse
Good ‘ranting’ Ct. It’s only spoiled by having just one word of relevance to the above article!
Report abuse
Why do you have to pay for a private gym? Have you been banned from the council ones??
Report abuse
‘ri’ I think you’ll find parks and pavements cost something to keep in place and safe.
‘Ct’ (innacurate) Stereotyping is so 1990s! can’t you see it’s a time to think out of your box.
‘Nothing changes’? well quit whinging get out there and change it. Nothing changes if you just sit back and whine about it. First though – try and actually understand what the problem is.
Report abuse
country walking paths cost v little to maintain compared to buildings though Devils. in particular where their cost is put onto the private land owners it can be a very cost effective way to provide leisure facilities which is why shropshire councils recent decision to cut £1.5million from the countryside services budget as criticised by the ramblers and others is such a perverse one
Report abuse
yeah but they have to maintain the pavements anyway regardless right, so it is effectively free to go walking / jogging
Report abuse
(with the exception of the new sports village in sundorne and oswestry swimming baths which are very new) the leisure facilities in shropshire are crumbling wrecks, most of that 1.5 million is going on avoidable energy use caused by old buildings. investment is needed, several millions at least. the best place to invest and the cheapest rate would be the public sector who via prudential borrowing can get the best % interest rates. however because we have a financial problem in reality that money will never be forthcoming and thus an external partner to provide the cash up front and then recoup that (with a reasonable but fair profit) over the years is naturally a sensible option
i do however question the “logic” that private sector managers will run the place better. this is a myth. of course it would be welcome to get the councillors out of interfering with the running of the sites but actually the same management team will just TUPE across and run the sites still so there will be no new people and no massive changes, they will just put prices up to cover the cost, simples. the myth that private sector good and public sector bad is just that as evidence by the spate of banking busts and the fact that a local authority in the uk has never gone backrupt
Report abuse
Swimming pools are the problem here, the common theme, what we should be doing instead of expensive heated treated water is getting the kids in the river severn which is better for their real swimming skills as well as cheaper, as part of the big society we could also have volunteer lifeguards who free from the red tape of brussels could choose to guard them or not.
close these centres, cut my taxes and give us back our FREEDOM to put kids up chimneys too
Report abuse
with all the cheap keep fit stuff you can get online now i dunno why people go to the gym anymore, its boring any way i prefer to use the wii fit at home or just go for a long walk myself, i got weights, bike and treadmill at home for less than a years worth of gym membership too so they could close them down for all i care
Report abuse
close them all then
Report abuse