Agenda item

Purpose: To present to OSMC the work undertaken by the Task and Finish Group to review the Draft Leisure Strategy and the business case for the Newbury Lido.

Councillor Tony Linden presented the Scrutiny Review of the Draft Leisure Strategy (Agenda Item 7). Thanks were given to Members and Officers for their contributions. The Task Group had made a number of recommendations, which were listed on pages 86-87 of the agenda papers. While there were no major shortcomings in the Strategy or supporting public engagement exercises, a number of areas were identified where improvements could be made. The Newbury Lido was considered to be an excellent project that would attract people from a wide area including those living outside the District and with a longer operating window, there was a strong likelihood of turning a profit. The project would also address issues relating to the water table. The Executive Portfolio Holder, Councillor Howard Woollaston, had significant property experience which he could bring to bear with the project.

The Chairman expressed his thanks to Councillor Tony Linden for taking over as Chairman of the Task Group.

Councillor Woollaston congratulated Paul Martindill and his team for producing a very good Leisure Strategy, which was tied in with the Playing Pitch Strategy, that would be renewed every three years. He felt the Lido scheme would be a fantastic solution. However, he agreed that there was need to look at leisure facilities in the east of the district in the medium to long-term.

Councillor Adrian Abbs noted that there was widespread support for an improved lido. However, he expressed concern that the public consultation response was still very low, and there was no detail about the number of people who had attended the workshops. This meant that decisions could be taken without sufficient data.

Councillor Tony Vickers noted that the new Strategy was a significant improvements, and acknowledged that there had been challenges as a result of Covid. He indicated that there was no reason for Executive to not adopt the Strategy, but there were still some unanswered questions. He expressed surprise that access to transport was not raised as an issue in the consultation. Also, with many leisure centres based in schools, this restricted opening times, which may deter elderly residents who would not want to go out in the evenings. In addition, he noted that there was no data for privately run leisure facilities.

Councillor James Cole queried whether the Strategy was looking widely enough, since the strategy was focused on organised sports, and did not consider activities such as walking. Also, he questioned whether culture and heritage activities should be considered in the Leisure Strategy or kept separate.

Councillor Tom Marino agreed on the need for additional leisure facilities in the east of the District.  He questioned why it had taken so long to appoint a new Chairman of the Task Group.

Councillor Steve Masters noted that the Task Group had expressed concerns about access from rural areas and sustainable transport issues, but there had not been time to go into these in depth. He confirmed that he had raised concerns about the lack of leisure facilities in the east of the District. He commended Councillor Linden for his chairmanship.

Councillor Claire Rowles was pleased to see that individual charities working with disabled people had been engaged, but suggested that the Learning Disabilities Partnership Board could have been used to further widen engagement.

The Chairman noted the proposals in the report. These picked up on Members’ concerns regarding the quality and quantity of data on which the Strategy was based. He suggested that rural communities would like to have leisure activities in village halls rather than travelling to leisure centres and agreed with the recommendation to reinstate the outreach programme. He agreed that the Strategy was focused on organised sports, but many people engaged in other leisure activities (e.g. visiting stately homes, gardens, etc).

Councillor Linden agreed about widening the scope of the Strategy and suggested that this and the other recommendations could be picked up in the Delivery Plan.

Paul Martindill agreed that the detailed responses could be captured in the Delivery Plan. While he recognised the value of cultural leisure activities, the scope of the Strategy had been on leisure activities with health benefits (i.e. physical activities). He confirmed that future research would capture the postcodes of respondents. Also, he confirmed that the new leisure contract would include provision for outreach services, with a focus on the most inactive and deprived wards.

Councillor Woollaston felt that the consultation response was good and it was difficult to get residents to respond. Efforts had been made to engage with key stakeholders and maximise the response. He agreed that rural communities needed to have their own leisure activities, but larger facilities such as swimming pools required economies of scale and had to be located in major urban areas. He accepted there were challenges in basing leisure facilities in schools, but there were opportunities for access in the holidays and at weekends. He highlighted that section 5.4 of the draft Strategy referred to enhancing access to, and utilisation of greenspace and bluespace, through improving accessibility to open water, waterways, parks, commons and Public Rights of Way.

Councillor Vickers was pleased that there would be investment in the Lido and felt that the consultation had come up with the right options. He noted that this drew people from a wide area and while he acknowledged the lack of facilities in the east of the District, he noted that residents were able to use pools in neighbouring areas.

The Chairman noted that Members had been campaigning for a new pool in the east of the District for around 25 years and expressed the hope that this would be achieved in the near future.