Brighton and Hove bowlers hit by slash in council subsidies (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
Brighton and Hove bowlers hit by slash in council subsidies
2:30pm Monday 9th July 2012 in News By Tim Ridgway, Local government reporter
Bowling green cuts affecting thousands are to be debated by politicians – thanks to people power.
An estimated 3,000 people, the majority of whom are retired, play bowls in Brighton and Hove.
But Brighton and Hove City Council has said from next season it will reduce the amount it subsidises greens from £150,000 to just £56,000 – causing seasonal passes to rocket by about 200%.
The local authority said the current funding was “not sustainable” as it looked to combat Government cuts.
As more than 1,250 people have now signed a petition against the increases, the issue will be debated at a meeting of full council in Brighton Town Hall on July 19.
Labour councillor Leigh Farrow, who said he had coordinated the collection of signatures, said: “The strong feeling of the bowling |community is echoed in the vast amount of people who have signed this petition.
“This message is a direct one, straight to the Green party who should look at this decision again and do the right thing in doing another U- turn.”
One of the affected clubs is Vicarage Club in Preston Road, Brighton.
It must find an additional £4,450 next year, up from just over £2,000 – a 220% increase.
This means its 38 members would see their membership fees rise from £65 to more than £170 for the six- month playing season.
The Conservative group has submitted a notice of motion urging against the increases to be discussed at the same meeting.
Conservative councillor Vanessa Brown said: “The sport of bowls is enjoyed by many residents of Brighton and Hove, particularly older residents for whom it is an important way of keeping physically and mentally fit and of maintaining social interaction in later life.
“These mean-spirited proposals will put all these benefits at risk and I fear that many of the city’s bowling clubs, which have been a thriving part of our local communities for many years, will fold as a result.”
The local authority said it hoped to save money by making cuts to funding of less popular bowls clubs.
A spokesman said: “Our analysis of the usage of bowling greens in the city shows that we have some popular clubs which operate with a lower subsidy from the council, and some less popular ones which absorb a significant amount of funding in order to keep going.
“Our intention is to work with clubs to access other funding or to merge with other clubs to spread the costs of maintaining the greens and pavilions for the members that use them.
“With the cuts in Government funding the council has to work with we believe this is not sustainable, but we want to make sure that clubs are able to keep supporting bowls players in the city – many of whom are older people.
“We want to give enough time for clubs to consider their position and work up plans, so the proposed changes will not take effect until 2013/14.
“During this time we will do all we can to facilitate the process.”
A council spokesman said: “The council is in open consultation with all bowling clubs, presenting all the data which underlines the proposed £66,000 subsidy reduction.
“The focus of discussion has been ways to improve use of the facilities, and, should any proposal be agreed, it is expected that many clubs could choose to become self-managing, benefitting from the autonomy to use the income from their fees as they see fit to cover their costs and develop their club. The council will support these clubs with a subsidy in the region of £4,000.
“We are keen to hear proposals from clubs and there has been a suggestion that the smaller clubs could share greens. However, the council is still consulting. “
Comments(11)
Goldenwight
says...
3:34pm Mon 9 Jul 12
Ligand Fields wrote:Just some grass??
How on earth can it cost such vast amounts of money subsidise bowling?! It's just some grass! What on earth are they spending it all on? Are they paying fairies to individually manicure each blade of grass or something?!
I suppose you think Wembley Stadium is just a grass playing field with a couple of benches, too?
Seriously, though, bowls players along with allotment holders and various other minority groups receive relatively huge subsidies towards their leisure. When making cutbacks in Council spending it is items like this which really have to be looked at closely.
Morpheus
says...
3:42pm Mon 9 Jul 12
Ligand Fields
says...
3:52pm Mon 9 Jul 12
These these recreationalists want us to be bowled over by the funding needs, they need to present us some pretty persausive accounts, showing where all these hundreds of thousands of pounds get spent. Cos this is not Pimms o'clock.
Nick Brighton
says...
4:24pm Mon 9 Jul 12
Fight Back
says...
5:04pm Mon 9 Jul 12
Morpheus wrote:All the subsidised services are available to everyone though. Many people don't use a library, or a public toilet, or the bus service - all are subsidised by the council. You could argue that other than very core services the council should pay for nothing. It does seem somewhat bizarre that the Greens want to cut the services that support the type of lifestyle they encourage - i.e. sport, green living, using the bus etc.
Perhaps the councillors and bowlers could explain why other residents should contribute to the funding of the leisure activities of a small number of residents. I like to take it easy sometimes and enjoy an afternoon at the cinema. Any chance of the council funding my trips? I can't see the difference. Leisure is leisure and it is a personal matter.
salty_pete
says...
8:00pm Mon 9 Jul 12
HJarrs
says...
8:33pm Mon 9 Jul 12
Personally, I think this cut should be brought in over a couple of years, which would give the clubs time to build up membership. It would be good to see the greens saved. The threat of closure might just bring new members out of the woodwork. However, we might just have to face the fact that bowls just is not popular anymore. There must be plenty of retired people reading this column; would you join a bowling club?
Fight Back
says...
9:27pm Mon 9 Jul 12
HJarrs wrote:3.5% is NOT modest. Some of us haven't had a pay rise in 3 years, pay increasingly high fuel and utility prices as well as having the constant risk of redundancy ( not to mention resundancy all ready having happened in the household ). Most pensioners have a fixed ( and very low income ) and so can't afford increases in council tax. So stop defending the Greens - they could save the money if they wanted to. Scrap the Lewes Road improvement works, scrap any new cycle lanes, half councillor allowances, sell Kings House and one of the town halls, stop all council employee pay rises, stop the stupid rebrand, don't create the new travellers site. There are many things they could do to save the money but they'd rather increase taxes and charges and then blame the government who are attempting to balance the books.
I have a difficulty with Labour and Conservative councillors complaining about this when they ganged together along with an Argus campaign to stop a modest rise in council tax, thereby depriving the council of several million pounds. Also, we mustn't forget that other aministrations have done the same in the past, for example the Queens Park bowling green was closed under a Labour administration.
Personally, I think this cut should be brought in over a couple of years, which would give the clubs time to build up membership. It would be good to see the greens saved. The threat of closure might just bring new members out of the woodwork. However, we might just have to face the fact that bowls just is not popular anymore. There must be plenty of retired people reading this column; would you join a bowling club?
Maxwell's Ghost
says...
11:26pm Mon 9 Jul 12
I do wish they would tidy their gardens though. They always seem to be the grubbiest of poeple.
Morpheus
says...
9:03am Tue 10 Jul 12
Fight Back wrote:If everybody took up these services there would not be enough money or faciliies to fund them. Council subsidies only work when relatively small numbers use them. This is why they should be abolished - the council is not there to encourage or fund certain lifestyles. Take subsidies to their ultimate and you have a Marxist state which controls everything, which is effectively the way we are going. The lack of jobs and austerity is the proof. It will only get worse.
Morpheus wrote:All the subsidised services are available to everyone though. Many people don't use a library, or a public toilet, or the bus service - all are subsidised by the council. You could argue that other than very core services the council should pay for nothing. It does seem somewhat bizarre that the Greens want to cut the services that support the type of lifestyle they encourage - i.e. sport, green living, using the bus etc.
Perhaps the councillors and bowlers could explain why other residents should contribute to the funding of the leisure activities of a small number of residents. I like to take it easy sometimes and enjoy an afternoon at the cinema. Any chance of the council funding my trips? I can't see the difference. Leisure is leisure and it is a personal matter.
Ligand Fields says...
2:42pm Mon 9 Jul 12