Singer quit Labour party over controversial pools plan

First published in News

FOLK singer Peggy Seeger told Oxford City Council she had quit the Labour Party over its controversial plan to shut Temple Cowley Pools.

The 77-year-old – half-sister of legendary folk singer Pete Seeger – told a meeting of the Labour-run authority she had left the party for the third time and joined the Greens.

At a meeting last week she said: “It is because of this council’s attitude towards, and its duplicitous relationship on such issues, that I have decided to come here today.”

The council wants to build a multi-million pound leisure facility in Blackbird Leys.

Deputy leader Ed Turner said: “The Government is savaging living conditions of people on low and middle incomes. It is an odd issue to be focusing on.”

Related links

Comments (26)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:04am Wed 1 May 13

saddletramp says...

So let me get this right,an American folk singer,who until recently lived in the United states,has moved back to Britain,quit the Labour party for the THIRD time,joined the greens,the reason being, Temple Cowley swimming pool is being closed.
Question 1 is,from 1994 to 2013,while living in North Carolina,how many times did she use the pool?
Question 2 is,after quitting the Labour party twice before,what changed her mind and made her rejoin?
Question 3 is,with her record of swapping and changing her political views,how long before the Greens upset her and she rejoins Labour for a fourth time?
Apparently her half brother has some relevance to this story,but i dont see how.
What a total non story,some America,who im sure 90% of Ox mail readers have never heard of,leaves the Labour party,so what !
So let me get this right,an American folk singer,who until recently lived in the United states,has moved back to Britain,quit the Labour party for the THIRD time,joined the greens,the reason being, Temple Cowley swimming pool is being closed. Question 1 is,from 1994 to 2013,while living in North Carolina,how many times did she use the pool? Question 2 is,after quitting the Labour party twice before,what changed her mind and made her rejoin? Question 3 is,with her record of swapping and changing her political views,how long before the Greens upset her and she rejoins Labour for a fourth time? Apparently her half brother has some relevance to this story,but i dont see how. What a total non story,some America,who im sure 90% of Ox mail readers have never heard of,leaves the Labour party,so what ! saddletramp
  • Score: 9

9:09am Wed 1 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

Sounds a bit indecisive really, which political parties did she switch to the 1st and 2nd time she rejected the Labour party?

(I've often wondered, do you get a refund on the remaining subscription when you cancel your membership to a political party?)
Sounds a bit indecisive really, which political parties did she switch to the 1st and 2nd time she rejected the Labour party? (I've often wondered, do you get a refund on the remaining subscription when you cancel your membership to a political party?) Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 10

11:06am Wed 1 May 13

Joe Chapman says...

Good. There are too many people who stick with councillors and parties simply on the basis of loyalty to a flag or colour. Changing your mind is healthy but also shows some integrity in principles too.
Good. There are too many people who stick with councillors and parties simply on the basis of loyalty to a flag or colour. Changing your mind is healthy but also shows some integrity in principles too. Joe Chapman
  • Score: 7

11:44am Wed 1 May 13

Paul0 says...

Deputy leader Ed Turner said: “The Government is savaging living conditions of people on low and middle incomes. It is an odd issue to be focusing on.” No, it is not an odd issue to focus on. It is a local issue that the council are involved in. It is also an issue that clearly matters to people. What is "odd" is that Ed Turner, who is in local government and should care about this kind of issue, dismisses it and instead makes comments on national economic policy (which is NOT in his remit).
Deputy leader Ed Turner said: “The Government is savaging living conditions of people on low and middle incomes. It is an odd issue to be focusing on.” No, it is not an odd issue to focus on. It is a local issue that the council are involved in. It is also an issue that clearly matters to people. What is "odd" is that Ed Turner, who is in local government and should care about this kind of issue, dismisses it and instead makes comments on national economic policy (which is NOT in his remit). Paul0
  • Score: -4

11:51am Wed 1 May 13

Scaramucia says...

saddletramp wrote:
So let me get this right,an American folk singer,who until recently lived in the United states,has moved back to Britain,quit the Labour party for the THIRD time,joined the greens,the reason being, Temple Cowley swimming pool is being closed.
Question 1 is,from 1994 to 2013,while living in North Carolina,how many times did she use the pool?
Question 2 is,after quitting the Labour party twice before,what changed her mind and made her rejoin?
Question 3 is,with her record of swapping and changing her political views,how long before the Greens upset her and she rejoins Labour for a fourth time?
Apparently her half brother has some relevance to this story,but i dont see how.
What a total non story,some America,who im sure 90% of Ox mail readers have never heard of,leaves the Labour party,so what !
Does she need the publicity for a new record release?
[quote][p][bold]saddletramp[/bold] wrote: So let me get this right,an American folk singer,who until recently lived in the United states,has moved back to Britain,quit the Labour party for the THIRD time,joined the greens,the reason being, Temple Cowley swimming pool is being closed. Question 1 is,from 1994 to 2013,while living in North Carolina,how many times did she use the pool? Question 2 is,after quitting the Labour party twice before,what changed her mind and made her rejoin? Question 3 is,with her record of swapping and changing her political views,how long before the Greens upset her and she rejoins Labour for a fourth time? Apparently her half brother has some relevance to this story,but i dont see how. What a total non story,some America,who im sure 90% of Ox mail readers have never heard of,leaves the Labour party,so what ![/p][/quote]Does she need the publicity for a new record release? Scaramucia
  • Score: -67

1:03pm Wed 1 May 13

SaveTCP says...

Integrity and being prepared to change their mind appears to be sorely lacking in the local Labour party. It should be mandatory viewing for anyone who wants to vote to go to a Council meeting and watch councillors in (in)action. People going for the first time are appalled at the way our City Council operates, particularly some Labour councillors attitude towards the general public - like walking out for a cuppa while people are speaking, or ignoring them and playing with their handheld devices, or barracking.

Joe and Paul0 make really good points.- Ms Seeger's speech should be read in its entirety, and you shouldn't rely on a small report in the Oxford Mail.

Odd issue? Not at all. When the Labour leader Bob Price is sending us all a message in his Guide to Council Tax about how many millions the City has to save in its forthcoming budgets, Labour should be looking again at where it wants to spend our money. £13m on a 25m non-Olympic pool in a place where there's no evidence of demand, and closing existing facilitiies for thousands of people, is what most people would call "odd".

And Labour ignoring the views of the people it claims to represent, especially when there's no evidence to support building the proposed new pool, combined with the Judicial Review decision that there is a case for Town Green status Blackbird Leys Park, seems even more "odd".

There are two by-elections for City Council seats tomorrow in Churchill and Rose Hill/Iffley - people have another chance to have their say, but no doubt this will get lost, hidden behind the County elections....
Integrity and being prepared to change their mind appears to be sorely lacking in the local Labour party. It should be mandatory viewing for anyone who wants to vote to go to a Council meeting and watch councillors in (in)action. People going for the first time are appalled at the way our City Council operates, particularly some Labour councillors attitude towards the general public - like walking out for a cuppa while people are speaking, or ignoring them and playing with their handheld devices, or barracking. Joe and Paul0 make really good points.- Ms Seeger's speech should be read in its entirety, and you shouldn't rely on a small report in the Oxford Mail. Odd issue? Not at all. When the Labour leader Bob Price is sending us all a message in his Guide to Council Tax about how many millions the City has to save in its forthcoming budgets, Labour should be looking again at where it wants to spend our money. £13m on a 25m non-Olympic pool in a place where there's no evidence of demand, and closing existing facilitiies for thousands of people, is what most people would call "odd". And Labour ignoring the views of the people it claims to represent, especially when there's no evidence to support building the proposed new pool, combined with the Judicial Review decision that there is a case for Town Green status Blackbird Leys Park, seems even more "odd". There are two by-elections for City Council seats tomorrow in Churchill and Rose Hill/Iffley - people have another chance to have their say, but no doubt this will get lost, hidden behind the County elections.... SaveTCP
  • Score: 6

1:38pm Wed 1 May 13

Topcheese says...

Deputy leader Ed Turner said: “The Government is savaging living conditions of people on low and middle incomes. It is an odd issue to be focusing on.”
YES they are - great observation Ed.
So why is the local council planning to spend £13 million when only £3 million will keep a good Pool in operation for years to come? This is not the time for personal ego trips or to have your name on a new building! People in this city are hurting with the present and future cuts.

This £13 million is also in addition to the £1.5 million the city council is spending on school improvement which is again completely outside their remit. Ed and the council need to realise they should be representing local people on local issues and not be playing global politics! How much money (our money) has been wasted on this frivolous project that no one wants apart from an elite swimming club the vast majority do not live in the city! Cut out taxes not waste our money...
Deputy leader Ed Turner said: “The Government is savaging living conditions of people on low and middle incomes. It is an odd issue to be focusing on.” YES they are - great observation Ed. So why is the local council planning to spend £13 million when only £3 million will keep a good Pool in operation for years to come? This is not the time for personal ego trips or to have your name on a new building! People in this city are hurting with the present and future cuts. This £13 million is also in addition to the £1.5 million the city council is spending on school improvement which is again completely outside their remit. Ed and the council need to realise they should be representing local people on local issues and not be playing global politics! How much money (our money) has been wasted on this frivolous project that no one wants apart from an elite swimming club the vast majority do not live in the city! Cut out taxes not waste our money... Topcheese
  • Score: -3

2:04pm Wed 1 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

SaveTCP wrote:
Integrity and being prepared to change their mind appears to be sorely lacking in the local Labour party. It should be mandatory viewing for anyone who wants to vote to go to a Council meeting and watch councillors in (in)action. People going for the first time are appalled at the way our City Council operates, particularly some Labour councillors attitude towards the general public - like walking out for a cuppa while people are speaking, or ignoring them and playing with their handheld devices, or barracking.

Joe and Paul0 make really good points.- Ms Seeger's speech should be read in its entirety, and you shouldn't rely on a small report in the Oxford Mail.

Odd issue? Not at all. When the Labour leader Bob Price is sending us all a message in his Guide to Council Tax about how many millions the City has to save in its forthcoming budgets, Labour should be looking again at where it wants to spend our money. £13m on a 25m non-Olympic pool in a place where there's no evidence of demand, and closing existing facilitiies for thousands of people, is what most people would call "odd".

And Labour ignoring the views of the people it claims to represent, especially when there's no evidence to support building the proposed new pool, combined with the Judicial Review decision that there is a case for Town Green status Blackbird Leys Park, seems even more "odd".

There are two by-elections for City Council seats tomorrow in Churchill and Rose Hill/Iffley - people have another chance to have their say, but no doubt this will get lost, hidden behind the County elections....
Some people are able to multi-task. Thousands of people up and down the country manage to enjoy a cup of tea and watch television at the same time, or walk along the street and text. To put it into a suitable context for the SaveTCP group - it's not unlike protesting about more than one issue at the same time.

I'll pass on reading the speech from Ms Seeger. They always tend to follow the same format...

"I'm leaving this hotel/bank/relations
hip/golf club/political party/gym because you aren't doing what I want you to do." followed by a rambling soliloquy.

Then there is the embarrassed silence when nothing happens and no-one runs after them and pleads with them to come back.

The SaveTCP group should really publish who their preferred political party is...

Isn't the Parish Green bid a County Council issue?
[quote][p][bold]SaveTCP[/bold] wrote: Integrity and being prepared to change their mind appears to be sorely lacking in the local Labour party. It should be mandatory viewing for anyone who wants to vote to go to a Council meeting and watch councillors in (in)action. People going for the first time are appalled at the way our City Council operates, particularly some Labour councillors attitude towards the general public - like walking out for a cuppa while people are speaking, or ignoring them and playing with their handheld devices, or barracking. Joe and Paul0 make really good points.- Ms Seeger's speech should be read in its entirety, and you shouldn't rely on a small report in the Oxford Mail. Odd issue? Not at all. When the Labour leader Bob Price is sending us all a message in his Guide to Council Tax about how many millions the City has to save in its forthcoming budgets, Labour should be looking again at where it wants to spend our money. £13m on a 25m non-Olympic pool in a place where there's no evidence of demand, and closing existing facilitiies for thousands of people, is what most people would call "odd". And Labour ignoring the views of the people it claims to represent, especially when there's no evidence to support building the proposed new pool, combined with the Judicial Review decision that there is a case for Town Green status Blackbird Leys Park, seems even more "odd". There are two by-elections for City Council seats tomorrow in Churchill and Rose Hill/Iffley - people have another chance to have their say, but no doubt this will get lost, hidden behind the County elections....[/p][/quote]Some people are able to multi-task. Thousands of people up and down the country manage to enjoy a cup of tea and watch television at the same time, or walk along the street and text. To put it into a suitable context for the SaveTCP group - it's not unlike protesting about more than one issue at the same time. I'll pass on reading the speech from Ms Seeger. They always tend to follow the same format... "I'm leaving this hotel/bank/relations hip/golf club/political party/gym because you aren't doing what I want you to do." followed by a rambling soliloquy. Then there is the embarrassed silence when nothing happens and no-one runs after them and pleads with them to come back. The SaveTCP group should really publish who their preferred political party is... Isn't the Parish Green bid a County Council issue? Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 6

2:45pm Wed 1 May 13

mytaxes says...

Topcheese wrote:
Deputy leader Ed Turner said: “The Government is savaging living conditions of people on low and middle incomes. It is an odd issue to be focusing on.”
YES they are - great observation Ed.
So why is the local council planning to spend £13 million when only £3 million will keep a good Pool in operation for years to come? This is not the time for personal ego trips or to have your name on a new building! People in this city are hurting with the present and future cuts.

This £13 million is also in addition to the £1.5 million the city council is spending on school improvement which is again completely outside their remit. Ed and the council need to realise they should be representing local people on local issues and not be playing global politics! How much money (our money) has been wasted on this frivolous project that no one wants apart from an elite swimming club the vast majority do not live in the city! Cut out taxes not waste our money...
100% correct.
[quote][p][bold]Topcheese[/bold] wrote: Deputy leader Ed Turner said: “The Government is savaging living conditions of people on low and middle incomes. It is an odd issue to be focusing on.” YES they are - great observation Ed. So why is the local council planning to spend £13 million when only £3 million will keep a good Pool in operation for years to come? This is not the time for personal ego trips or to have your name on a new building! People in this city are hurting with the present and future cuts. This £13 million is also in addition to the £1.5 million the city council is spending on school improvement which is again completely outside their remit. Ed and the council need to realise they should be representing local people on local issues and not be playing global politics! How much money (our money) has been wasted on this frivolous project that no one wants apart from an elite swimming club the vast majority do not live in the city! Cut out taxes not waste our money...[/p][/quote]100% correct. mytaxes
  • Score: -3

8:16am Thu 2 May 13

SaveTCP says...

Andrew – you make a really good point about the “Parish Green”. If you mean Town Green, yes, the application was to the County Council, who own the land. However, the City Council got involved as they have an ‘interest’, and the City Council has now ‘adopted’ the case and taken it on from the County Council. The City Council has so much to lose on this (reputation, our taxpayers money, votes) and evidently didn’t trust the County. And so confident of winning the appeal. Well, the City Council has lost the permission appeal by the Town Green group. Serves them right – they should listen to the people of Oxford. Or even ask them what they want. They haven’t consulted properly over closing Temple Cowley Pools, and they haven’t consulted properly over closing the existing Blackbird Leys swimming pool, and they haven’t consulted properly over the proposed new pool. And, oh yes, they haven’t even consulted over their new venture into funding school facilities at Spires Academy, the supposed replacement for TCP. At least Cllr Coulter acknowledged in Council last week that he knows it’s not possible to swim in a gym.

The users of the existing Blackbird Leys swimming pool (how many people realise that it’s there?) don’t want the proposed new pool. They want the privacy that the current pool gives them; they like the pool temperature as it is, 32 deg C. And no-one from the Council has bothered talking to them to find out what they do, or what problems the proposed new pool would give them. Councillors have ‘promised’ that the temperature of the new pool can be changed to suit. That doesn’t make sense, either for timetabling or in terms of energy. The Swimming Club, the vast majority of whom drive to wherever they are told swimming practice or galas will take place, will want the temperature as low as possible, 27 or even 26 deg. And they will want to train there every day, twice a day, taking up public swimming time and space. It won’t be feasible to raise the temperature then cool it down again every day. So, as this proposed new pool seems to be mostly for the Swimming Club, the public will lose out. Again.
Andrew – you make a really good point about the “Parish Green”. If you mean Town Green, yes, the application was to the County Council, who own the land. However, the City Council got involved as they have an ‘interest’, and the City Council has now ‘adopted’ the case and taken it on from the County Council. The City Council has so much to lose on this (reputation, our taxpayers money, votes) and evidently didn’t trust the County. And so confident of winning the appeal. Well, the City Council has lost the permission appeal by the Town Green group. Serves them right – they should listen to the people of Oxford. Or even ask them what they want. They haven’t consulted properly over closing Temple Cowley Pools, and they haven’t consulted properly over closing the existing Blackbird Leys swimming pool, and they haven’t consulted properly over the proposed new pool. And, oh yes, they haven’t even consulted over their new venture into funding school facilities at Spires Academy, the supposed replacement for TCP. At least Cllr Coulter acknowledged in Council last week that he knows it’s not possible to swim in a gym. The users of the existing Blackbird Leys swimming pool (how many people realise that it’s there?) don’t want the proposed new pool. They want the privacy that the current pool gives them; they like the pool temperature as it is, 32 deg C. And no-one from the Council has bothered talking to them to find out what they do, or what problems the proposed new pool would give them. Councillors have ‘promised’ that the temperature of the new pool can be changed to suit. That doesn’t make sense, either for timetabling or in terms of energy. The Swimming Club, the vast majority of whom drive to wherever they are told swimming practice or galas will take place, will want the temperature as low as possible, 27 or even 26 deg. And they will want to train there every day, twice a day, taking up public swimming time and space. It won’t be feasible to raise the temperature then cool it down again every day. So, as this proposed new pool seems to be mostly for the Swimming Club, the public will lose out. Again. SaveTCP
  • Score: 2

9:31am Thu 2 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

SaveTCP wrote:
Andrew – you make a really good point about the “Parish Green”. If you mean Town Green, yes, the application was to the County Council, who own the land. However, the City Council got involved as they have an ‘interest’, and the City Council has now ‘adopted’ the case and taken it on from the County Council. The City Council has so much to lose on this (reputation, our taxpayers money, votes) and evidently didn’t trust the County. And so confident of winning the appeal. Well, the City Council has lost the permission appeal by the Town Green group. Serves them right – they should listen to the people of Oxford. Or even ask them what they want. They haven’t consulted properly over closing Temple Cowley Pools, and they haven’t consulted properly over closing the existing Blackbird Leys swimming pool, and they haven’t consulted properly over the proposed new pool. And, oh yes, they haven’t even consulted over their new venture into funding school facilities at Spires Academy, the supposed replacement for TCP. At least Cllr Coulter acknowledged in Council last week that he knows it’s not possible to swim in a gym. The users of the existing Blackbird Leys swimming pool (how many people realise that it’s there?) don’t want the proposed new pool. They want the privacy that the current pool gives them; they like the pool temperature as it is, 32 deg C. And no-one from the Council has bothered talking to them to find out what they do, or what problems the proposed new pool would give them. Councillors have ‘promised’ that the temperature of the new pool can be changed to suit. That doesn’t make sense, either for timetabling or in terms of energy. The Swimming Club, the vast majority of whom drive to wherever they are told swimming practice or galas will take place, will want the temperature as low as possible, 27 or even 26 deg. And they will want to train there every day, twice a day, taking up public swimming time and space. It won’t be feasible to raise the temperature then cool it down again every day. So, as this proposed new pool seems to be mostly for the Swimming Club, the public will lose out. Again.
The current BBL pool is very small. I'm sure you've made use of it on a regular basis, so will be aware that it is smaller than some domestic pools in East Oxford.

As you point out in your posting, for every person who demands a small 32C pool, considerably more prefer one that isn't quite so unpleasantly warm for adults and again as you point out to heat a pool heated to 32C - particularily in an elderly poorly insulated builidng doesn't make sense!

I'd recommend that you consult a map and local authority guides if you are looking for sports facilities in any parish. I picked up a free local newspaper for BBL when I was in Templars Square recently, it is delivered to all relevant local homes too. It goes into good detail about the leisure facilites in the area.

I didn't notice a newspaper exclusively for the SaveTCP community though - I appreciate from your post the other day that the SaveTCP group consider themselves to be a separate community from the rest of East Oxford.

If you are concerned about privacy issues, why did one of the SaveTCP board campaign to prevent the refurbishment of the Temple Cowley pools with modern Village style changing facilities - just like Barton.

Village style changing offers private showers and the facility to change in privacy, with dignity, helps ensure child welfare and allows friends, couples and families to change together in the larger rooms. A wall doesn't stop you from talking to your friends in the cubicle next door, indeed I'm uncomfortable with people hanging around heritage style locker rooms to engage in conversation.

The earlier poster "MyTaxes" has pointed out that the Swimming Club is an elite group - surely this is aspirational for young people to see that an elite group trains in their local pool focussing on fitness goals and achievement as individuals and as a team - I'm aware that they strongly encourage new members to join them.
[quote][p][bold]SaveTCP[/bold] wrote: Andrew – you make a really good point about the “Parish Green”. If you mean Town Green, yes, the application was to the County Council, who own the land. However, the City Council got involved as they have an ‘interest’, and the City Council has now ‘adopted’ the case and taken it on from the County Council. The City Council has so much to lose on this (reputation, our taxpayers money, votes) and evidently didn’t trust the County. And so confident of winning the appeal. Well, the City Council has lost the permission appeal by the Town Green group. Serves them right – they should listen to the people of Oxford. Or even ask them what they want. They haven’t consulted properly over closing Temple Cowley Pools, and they haven’t consulted properly over closing the existing Blackbird Leys swimming pool, and they haven’t consulted properly over the proposed new pool. And, oh yes, they haven’t even consulted over their new venture into funding school facilities at Spires Academy, the supposed replacement for TCP. At least Cllr Coulter acknowledged in Council last week that he knows it’s not possible to swim in a gym. The users of the existing Blackbird Leys swimming pool (how many people realise that it’s there?) don’t want the proposed new pool. They want the privacy that the current pool gives them; they like the pool temperature as it is, 32 deg C. And no-one from the Council has bothered talking to them to find out what they do, or what problems the proposed new pool would give them. Councillors have ‘promised’ that the temperature of the new pool can be changed to suit. That doesn’t make sense, either for timetabling or in terms of energy. The Swimming Club, the vast majority of whom drive to wherever they are told swimming practice or galas will take place, will want the temperature as low as possible, 27 or even 26 deg. And they will want to train there every day, twice a day, taking up public swimming time and space. It won’t be feasible to raise the temperature then cool it down again every day. So, as this proposed new pool seems to be mostly for the Swimming Club, the public will lose out. Again.[/p][/quote]The current BBL pool is very small. I'm sure you've made use of it on a regular basis, so will be aware that it is smaller than some domestic pools in East Oxford. As you point out in your posting, for every person who demands a small 32C pool, considerably more prefer one that isn't quite so unpleasantly warm for adults and again as you point out to heat a pool heated to 32C - particularily in an elderly poorly insulated builidng doesn't make sense! I'd recommend that you consult a map and local authority guides if you are looking for sports facilities in any parish. I picked up a free local newspaper for BBL when I was in Templars Square recently, it is delivered to all relevant local homes too. It goes into good detail about the leisure facilites in the area. I didn't notice a newspaper exclusively for the SaveTCP community though - I appreciate from your post the other day that the SaveTCP group consider themselves to be a separate community from the rest of East Oxford. If you are concerned about privacy issues, why did one of the SaveTCP board campaign to prevent the refurbishment of the Temple Cowley pools with modern Village style changing facilities - just like Barton. Village style changing offers private showers and the facility to change in privacy, with dignity, helps ensure child welfare and allows friends, couples and families to change together in the larger rooms. A wall doesn't stop you from talking to your friends in the cubicle next door, indeed I'm uncomfortable with people hanging around heritage style locker rooms to engage in conversation. The earlier poster "MyTaxes" has pointed out that the Swimming Club is an elite group - surely this is aspirational for young people to see that an elite group trains in their local pool focussing on fitness goals and achievement as individuals and as a team - I'm aware that they strongly encourage new members to join them. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

1:23pm Thu 2 May 13

SaveTCP says...

It’s always unfortunate when Andrew tries to divert onto making personal points, and misrepresent what has been said, rather than talk about the matter that is really important – why has the Labour-controlled City Council committed so much of our money into a venture without proper consultation or talking to the people that use the current facilities about what they want?

There is no reason to close the existing Blackbird Leys pool. There is no reason to close Temple Cowley Pools. The only evidence of demand for a new pool in Blackbird Leys is that the Swimming Club is threatening to close if the Council doesn’t spend our money on building it. The Council has been unable to provide any evidence to support their scheme that stands up to any sort of scrutiny. We are being told by Labour that services will need to be cut because of the cut in funding from central government – surely the taxpayers money earmarked for the new pool should be spent on keeping frontline services. The gap appears to be about £6m – if the Council refurbished Temple Cowley Pools for £3m, then the £6m it saves by not building the new pool can fund the gap and keep our frontline services intact.

The ideal is surely an accessible facility that provides an environment for both the general public and the aspiring elite to exercise and train. Temple Cowley Pools has done that since 1987, when it was completely rebuilt including a new competition swimming pool. And it can not only support the public and the swimming club, but also diving – the City Council has no idea how many people would use the diving pool if they fixed it. Why build a new 25m pool somewhere else when what is there at the moment can continue, and also include diving – is Andrew saying that elite swimming is ok, but diving of any sort is not?
It’s always unfortunate when Andrew tries to divert onto making personal points, and misrepresent what has been said, rather than talk about the matter that is really important – why has the Labour-controlled City Council committed so much of our money into a venture without proper consultation or talking to the people that use the current facilities about what they want? There is no reason to close the existing Blackbird Leys pool. There is no reason to close Temple Cowley Pools. The only evidence of demand for a new pool in Blackbird Leys is that the Swimming Club is threatening to close if the Council doesn’t spend our money on building it. The Council has been unable to provide any evidence to support their scheme that stands up to any sort of scrutiny. We are being told by Labour that services will need to be cut because of the cut in funding from central government – surely the taxpayers money earmarked for the new pool should be spent on keeping frontline services. The gap appears to be about £6m – if the Council refurbished Temple Cowley Pools for £3m, then the £6m it saves by not building the new pool can fund the gap and keep our frontline services intact. The ideal is surely an accessible facility that provides an environment for both the general public and the aspiring elite to exercise and train. Temple Cowley Pools has done that since 1987, when it was completely rebuilt including a new competition swimming pool. And it can not only support the public and the swimming club, but also diving – the City Council has no idea how many people would use the diving pool if they fixed it. Why build a new 25m pool somewhere else when what is there at the moment can continue, and also include diving – is Andrew saying that elite swimming is ok, but diving of any sort is not? SaveTCP
  • Score: 2

2:36pm Thu 2 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

SaveTCP wrote:
It’s always unfortunate when Andrew tries to divert onto making personal points, and misrepresent what has been said, rather than talk about the matter that is really important – why has the Labour-controlled City Council committed so much of our money into a venture without proper consultation or talking to the people that use the current facilities about what they want? There is no reason to close the existing Blackbird Leys pool. There is no reason to close Temple Cowley Pools. The only evidence of demand for a new pool in Blackbird Leys is that the Swimming Club is threatening to close if the Council doesn’t spend our money on building it. The Council has been unable to provide any evidence to support their scheme that stands up to any sort of scrutiny. We are being told by Labour that services will need to be cut because of the cut in funding from central government – surely the taxpayers money earmarked for the new pool should be spent on keeping frontline services. The gap appears to be about £6m – if the Council refurbished Temple Cowley Pools for £3m, then the £6m it saves by not building the new pool can fund the gap and keep our frontline services intact. The ideal is surely an accessible facility that provides an environment for both the general public and the aspiring elite to exercise and train. Temple Cowley Pools has done that since 1987, when it was completely rebuilt including a new competition swimming pool. And it can not only support the public and the swimming club, but also diving – the City Council has no idea how many people would use the diving pool if they fixed it. Why build a new 25m pool somewhere else when what is there at the moment can continue, and also include diving – is Andrew saying that elite swimming is ok, but diving of any sort is not?
Well, the nearest Diving Pool is a short walk and an certainly within easy cycling distance from the OX1 postcode area and Saturday morning lessons are available for your children/grandchildr
en/nieces/nephews.

Having checked, you can definitely get there with just one change of bus from the Lye Valley area of Oxford too, or for the lady mentioned in this article who according to an earlier Oxford Mail article lives in Iffley, it's a gentle walk or cycle down the tow path - I'm sure you agree it's never too late to start a new fitness interest!

Personal points are very important. Just think how many times the board members have appeared in a photo opportunity in The Oxford Mail, published the official corporate view of the SaveTCP group or even expressed, as an elected figurehead of the campaign, how the opening of a beautiful new pool an additional 4 minutes away by car, or by direct bus, will affect their lives personally (then travel 40 miles to protest about something else).

Don't forget, as you band about the figures - £6m isn't a great deal of money. Looking at Rightmove, it would barely cover the first half dozen properties for sale in Iffley. The Westgate carpark has the capability of earning the council over £11m a year in parking fees.

What could be better than spending less than a single years income from car parking from a single car park in central Oxford than on a beautiful new pool in a small corner of Blackbird Leys park in the heart of East Oxford?
[quote][p][bold]SaveTCP[/bold] wrote: It’s always unfortunate when Andrew tries to divert onto making personal points, and misrepresent what has been said, rather than talk about the matter that is really important – why has the Labour-controlled City Council committed so much of our money into a venture without proper consultation or talking to the people that use the current facilities about what they want? There is no reason to close the existing Blackbird Leys pool. There is no reason to close Temple Cowley Pools. The only evidence of demand for a new pool in Blackbird Leys is that the Swimming Club is threatening to close if the Council doesn’t spend our money on building it. The Council has been unable to provide any evidence to support their scheme that stands up to any sort of scrutiny. We are being told by Labour that services will need to be cut because of the cut in funding from central government – surely the taxpayers money earmarked for the new pool should be spent on keeping frontline services. The gap appears to be about £6m – if the Council refurbished Temple Cowley Pools for £3m, then the £6m it saves by not building the new pool can fund the gap and keep our frontline services intact. The ideal is surely an accessible facility that provides an environment for both the general public and the aspiring elite to exercise and train. Temple Cowley Pools has done that since 1987, when it was completely rebuilt including a new competition swimming pool. And it can not only support the public and the swimming club, but also diving – the City Council has no idea how many people would use the diving pool if they fixed it. Why build a new 25m pool somewhere else when what is there at the moment can continue, and also include diving – is Andrew saying that elite swimming is ok, but diving of any sort is not?[/p][/quote]Well, the nearest Diving Pool is a short walk and an certainly within easy cycling distance from the OX1 postcode area and Saturday morning lessons are available for your children/grandchildr en/nieces/nephews. Having checked, you can definitely get there with just one change of bus from the Lye Valley area of Oxford too, or for the lady mentioned in this article who according to an earlier Oxford Mail article lives in Iffley, it's a gentle walk or cycle down the tow path - I'm sure you agree it's never too late to start a new fitness interest! Personal points are very important. Just think how many times the board members have appeared in a photo opportunity in The Oxford Mail, published the official corporate view of the SaveTCP group or even expressed, as an elected figurehead of the campaign, how the opening of a beautiful new pool an additional 4 minutes away by car, or by direct bus, will affect their lives personally (then travel 40 miles to protest about something else). Don't forget, as you band about the figures - £6m isn't a great deal of money. Looking at Rightmove, it would barely cover the first half dozen properties for sale in Iffley. The Westgate carpark has the capability of earning the council over £11m a year in parking fees. What could be better than spending less than a single years income from car parking from a single car park in central Oxford than on a beautiful new pool in a small corner of Blackbird Leys park in the heart of East Oxford? Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

6:26pm Thu 2 May 13

SaveTCP says...

Oh dear Andrew, no attempt to address the central point – Labour-controlled City Council ignoring what the people of Oxford have demonstrated that they want?

The diving pool is the only publicly funded one in Oxfordshire – why should users be forced to spend additional money on top of their Slice card, when the reason is that Labour has deliberately not maintained Temple Cowley Pools?

In terms of travel time, it’s people’s choice how and where they go. You may or may not be incorrect on travel times etc, but that’s irrelevant.

Why is our Labour-controlled City Council wanting to spend £13m of our taxpayers money on a facility in a place where there is no evidence of demand, when thousands of people are perfectly content with the current locations?

And you may think that £6m is not much money, but most of Oxford would likely disagree with you – especially those people from the less affluent areas in East Oxford such as Cowley and Rose Hill. And your geography has gone a bit awry as well – the proposed new pool may have been in the heart of somewhere if the Labour plan to concrete over everything down to Abindon had happened. Instead it would be in the middle of a residential 20 mph zone with single carriageway access, outside the ring road. Hardly the heart of East Oxford.

You’ve obviously been following this issue intently, so you must well remember the meeting held in the Town Hall in August 2010 where the Council’s Executive Director, Tim Sadler, admitted that if he had a choice he would put the proposed new pool right next to the designated transport hub – Temple Cowley. But they decided they couldn’t consider a new pool there because.... there already was one. That’s Labour City Council logic for you. If they’d spent £3m then the City would have a well-used, appreciated and accessible facility that wouldn’t need replacing for at least 25 years.
Oh dear Andrew, no attempt to address the central point – Labour-controlled City Council ignoring what the people of Oxford have demonstrated that they want? The diving pool is the only publicly funded one in Oxfordshire – why should users be forced to spend additional money on top of their Slice card, when the reason is that Labour has deliberately not maintained Temple Cowley Pools? In terms of travel time, it’s people’s choice how and where they go. You may or may not be incorrect on travel times etc, but that’s irrelevant. Why is our Labour-controlled City Council wanting to spend £13m of our taxpayers money on a facility in a place where there is no evidence of demand, when thousands of people are perfectly content with the current locations? And you may think that £6m is not much money, but most of Oxford would likely disagree with you – especially those people from the less affluent areas in East Oxford such as Cowley and Rose Hill. And your geography has gone a bit awry as well – the proposed new pool may have been in the heart of somewhere if the Labour plan to concrete over everything down to Abindon had happened. Instead it would be in the middle of a residential 20 mph zone with single carriageway access, outside the ring road. Hardly the heart of East Oxford. You’ve obviously been following this issue intently, so you must well remember the meeting held in the Town Hall in August 2010 where the Council’s Executive Director, Tim Sadler, admitted that if he had a choice he would put the proposed new pool right next to the designated transport hub – Temple Cowley. But they decided they couldn’t consider a new pool there because.... there already was one. That’s Labour City Council logic for you. If they’d spent £3m then the City would have a well-used, appreciated and accessible facility that wouldn’t need replacing for at least 25 years. SaveTCP
  • Score: 1

10:18pm Thu 2 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

SaveTCP wrote:
Oh dear Andrew, no attempt to address the central point – Labour-controlled City Council ignoring what the people of Oxford have demonstrated that they want?

The diving pool is the only publicly funded one in Oxfordshire – why should users be forced to spend additional money on top of their Slice card, when the reason is that Labour has deliberately not maintained Temple Cowley Pools?

In terms of travel time, it’s people’s choice how and where they go. You may or may not be incorrect on travel times etc, but that’s irrelevant.

Why is our Labour-controlled City Council wanting to spend £13m of our taxpayers money on a facility in a place where there is no evidence of demand, when thousands of people are perfectly content with the current locations?

And you may think that £6m is not much money, but most of Oxford would likely disagree with you – especially those people from the less affluent areas in East Oxford such as Cowley and Rose Hill. And your geography has gone a bit awry as well – the proposed new pool may have been in the heart of somewhere if the Labour plan to concrete over everything down to Abindon had happened. Instead it would be in the middle of a residential 20 mph zone with single carriageway access, outside the ring road. Hardly the heart of East Oxford.

You’ve obviously been following this issue intently, so you must well remember the meeting held in the Town Hall in August 2010 where the Council’s Executive Director, Tim Sadler, admitted that if he had a choice he would put the proposed new pool right next to the designated transport hub – Temple Cowley. But they decided they couldn’t consider a new pool there because.... there already was one. That’s Labour City Council logic for you. If they’d spent £3m then the City would have a well-used, appreciated and accessible facility that wouldn’t need replacing for at least 25 years.
I neither work for the council nor vote socialist.

Do remind me which the official party of the SaveTCP group is... You are always clear which party your community shouldn't vote for, but never overly clear which party they should vote for. I suspect Ms Seeger's promulgation the day before the election was a not so subtle hint.

It is useful to know that you consider the travel times to the beautiful new pool that will be built in BBL "irrelevant". With direct buses from Rose Hill, Littlemore, Sandford, Lye Valley, Iffley Road and of course route 1 & 5 to the pool and the travel times being "irrelevent" the only worry you have left is the money.

£1M, £6M, £8.75M...

I'm guessing you've never even held £1m+ cash in your hands. It's quite disappointing really - even brand new notes smell a bit like sick and used notes always leave you feeling a bit grubby.
[quote][p][bold]SaveTCP[/bold] wrote: Oh dear Andrew, no attempt to address the central point – Labour-controlled City Council ignoring what the people of Oxford have demonstrated that they want? The diving pool is the only publicly funded one in Oxfordshire – why should users be forced to spend additional money on top of their Slice card, when the reason is that Labour has deliberately not maintained Temple Cowley Pools? In terms of travel time, it’s people’s choice how and where they go. You may or may not be incorrect on travel times etc, but that’s irrelevant. Why is our Labour-controlled City Council wanting to spend £13m of our taxpayers money on a facility in a place where there is no evidence of demand, when thousands of people are perfectly content with the current locations? And you may think that £6m is not much money, but most of Oxford would likely disagree with you – especially those people from the less affluent areas in East Oxford such as Cowley and Rose Hill. And your geography has gone a bit awry as well – the proposed new pool may have been in the heart of somewhere if the Labour plan to concrete over everything down to Abindon had happened. Instead it would be in the middle of a residential 20 mph zone with single carriageway access, outside the ring road. Hardly the heart of East Oxford. You’ve obviously been following this issue intently, so you must well remember the meeting held in the Town Hall in August 2010 where the Council’s Executive Director, Tim Sadler, admitted that if he had a choice he would put the proposed new pool right next to the designated transport hub – Temple Cowley. But they decided they couldn’t consider a new pool there because.... there already was one. That’s Labour City Council logic for you. If they’d spent £3m then the City would have a well-used, appreciated and accessible facility that wouldn’t need replacing for at least 25 years.[/p][/quote]I neither work for the council nor vote socialist. Do remind me which the official party of the SaveTCP group is... You are always clear which party your community shouldn't vote for, but never overly clear which party they should vote for. I suspect Ms Seeger's promulgation the day before the election was a not so subtle hint. It is useful to know that you consider the travel times to the beautiful new pool that will be built in BBL "irrelevant". With direct buses from Rose Hill, Littlemore, Sandford, Lye Valley, Iffley Road and of course route 1 & 5 to the pool and the travel times being "irrelevent" the only worry you have left is the money. £1M, £6M, £8.75M... I'm guessing you've never even held £1m+ cash in your hands. It's quite disappointing really - even brand new notes smell a bit like sick and used notes always leave you feeling a bit grubby. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 2

7:16am Fri 3 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

It doesn't look like the promulgation of change of allegiance has helped the Greens in the Rose Hill & Iffley Wards.

Whilst it pains me to say it, as I'm not a socialist, it appears the people of Oxford approve of the City Council and the scheme to build a new pool in the heart of East Oxford.

It's funny how some people think that the heart is in the absolute centre of the individual. At 6'4", my heart, is almost 5'0" off the ground. Pro Rata - that's not far off the pool being at either Iffley Sports Ground or Blackbird Leys Park.
It doesn't look like the promulgation of change of allegiance has helped the Greens in the Rose Hill & Iffley Wards. Whilst it pains me to say it, as I'm not a socialist, it appears the people of Oxford approve of the City Council and the scheme to build a new pool in the heart of East Oxford. It's funny how some people think that the heart is in the absolute centre of the individual. At 6'4", my heart, is almost 5'0" off the ground. Pro Rata - that's not far off the pool being at either Iffley Sports Ground or Blackbird Leys Park. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

7:48am Fri 3 May 13

SaveTCP says...

The dispiriting thing about these messageboards is the way correspondents have an ability to take irrelevance to new heights. Stay on the point Andrew.

The frequent direct bus services into Blackbird Leys only go along one route, from the city centre along Cowley Road. So people who currently use Temple Cowley and get there using another bus service would have to change – it will cost more money and take longer. That means they will go less frequently or not at all if the Labour City Council shut Temple Cowley Pools. Coming the other way, people from Blackbird Leys at the moment have a frequent and direct bus route into Temple Cowley.

Your political affiliation and where you work are irrelevant to the point at hand, which is that the Labour controlled City Council isn’t listening to the public, has no interest in listening to the public, and has produced no evidence to close Temple Cowley Pools (or build the proposed new swimming pool in Blackbird leys) that stands up to scrutiny.

Labour talks about how having to cut the city council budget because of the cut in government grant. Keeping Temple Cowley Pools open and scrapping the idea of spending over £13m on a swimming pool in a place where there’s no evidence of demand would enable the council to save at least £6m and keep all the current services. For reasons unexplained they don’t want to. And they don’t want to engage with the public and talk about what they are doing, or share whatever information they have. As Cllr Benjamin asked Cllr Coulter at the last council meeting – “What are you afraid of?”. For those who weren’t there, the video and this exchange is online, under Agenda Item 17.
The dispiriting thing about these messageboards is the way correspondents have an ability to take irrelevance to new heights. Stay on the point Andrew. The frequent direct bus services into Blackbird Leys only go along one route, from the city centre along Cowley Road. So people who currently use Temple Cowley and get there using another bus service would have to change – it will cost more money and take longer. That means they will go less frequently or not at all if the Labour City Council shut Temple Cowley Pools. Coming the other way, people from Blackbird Leys at the moment have a frequent and direct bus route into Temple Cowley. Your political affiliation and where you work are irrelevant to the point at hand, which is that the Labour controlled City Council isn’t listening to the public, has no interest in listening to the public, and has produced no evidence to close Temple Cowley Pools (or build the proposed new swimming pool in Blackbird leys) that stands up to scrutiny. Labour talks about how having to cut the city council budget because of the cut in government grant. Keeping Temple Cowley Pools open and scrapping the idea of spending over £13m on a swimming pool in a place where there’s no evidence of demand would enable the council to save at least £6m and keep all the current services. For reasons unexplained they don’t want to. And they don’t want to engage with the public and talk about what they are doing, or share whatever information they have. As Cllr Benjamin asked Cllr Coulter at the last council meeting – “What are you afraid of?”. For those who weren’t there, the video and this exchange is online, under Agenda Item 17. SaveTCP
  • Score: 0

12:40pm Fri 3 May 13

Scaramucia says...

And I thought this story was about a nondescript singer that hardly anybody has heard of leaving a political party. But as you had to bring up the swimming pool, it is disgusting that the above American thinks that she has the right to interfere in our local community, especially when she is setting out to deprive our community of a brand new facility that would replace the aging and possible health risk that now exists. Shame on her, and you.
And I thought this story was about a nondescript singer that hardly anybody has heard of leaving a political party. But as you had to bring up the swimming pool, it is disgusting that the above American thinks that she has the right to interfere in our local community, especially when she is setting out to deprive our community of a brand new facility that would replace the aging and possible health risk that now exists. Shame on her, and you. Scaramucia
  • Score: -114

1:28pm Fri 3 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

It would appear that the councils are listening to what the majority of the voters want, simply not what the SaveTCP community (who recently made clear are distinct separate community within East Oxford) want.

Rose Hill & Iffley (the home of Ms Seeger) have just returned a Labour councillor.

The Labour & Co-operative party have achieved 82% of the vote on the Leys - where the beautiful new pool will be built.
It would appear that the councils are listening to what the majority of the voters want, simply not what the SaveTCP community (who recently made clear are distinct separate community within East Oxford) want. Rose Hill & Iffley (the home of Ms Seeger) have just returned a Labour councillor. The Labour & Co-operative party have achieved 82% of the vote on the Leys - where the beautiful new pool will be built. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

9:33pm Fri 3 May 13

SaveTCP says...

Hmm, two for the price of one, eh? There’s absolutely no need to make personal abusive comments on this messageboard. Anyone is entitled to their opinion, wherever they come from. However, if you read or watch Ms Seeger’s speech, you may understand a bit more. She lives in Oxford, and she uses Temple Cowley Pools. No-one is trying to deprive a community of anything; but the Council has at no point been able to justify what it is proposing, and spending over £13m on a swimming pool when you can build a complete leisure centre for £5m simply doesn’t make sense. Better to spend the money on refurbishing (and not depriving several communities) Temple Cowley Pools and spend the rest keeping the services that Labour are taking away from the whole of Oxford. The Blackbird Leys community recently were asked what facilities they would like – a new swimming pool didn’t feature.

And Labour listening? Not likely. In the City By-Elections, Labour kept both seats. But, in Churchill only 1 out of 9 people voted for them. In Rose Hill, slightly better. But only slightly.

As for your glorious 82% in Leys, this just highlights how detached the local authorities are from the people. You are talking about a County election, nothing to do with the City. Even then, do the sums – 6 out of 7 people did NOT vote for Labour. At least that’s better than the last full City elections last May – where only 1 out of 8 people voted for Labour. This may be the democratic process, but only dictatorships then take it upon themselves to claim to represent everyone. With this lack of engagement, any authority should be making sure that when they invest huge sums of someone else’s money that will deprive thousands of people of services that they very carefully find out what those people actually want. And Labour, in Oxford, have not done so.

It simply doesn’t make sense to spend over £13m of taxpayers’ money on a facility in a place where there’s no evidence of demand (and real evidence of great demand for other things) when £3m spent on existing facilities where people want and use them will enable the City Council to bridge their funding gap and retain vital frontline services.
Hmm, two for the price of one, eh? There’s absolutely no need to make personal abusive comments on this messageboard. Anyone is entitled to their opinion, wherever they come from. However, if you read or watch Ms Seeger’s speech, you may understand a bit more. She lives in Oxford, and she uses Temple Cowley Pools. No-one is trying to deprive a community of anything; but the Council has at no point been able to justify what it is proposing, and spending over £13m on a swimming pool when you can build a complete leisure centre for £5m simply doesn’t make sense. Better to spend the money on refurbishing (and not depriving several communities) Temple Cowley Pools and spend the rest keeping the services that Labour are taking away from the whole of Oxford. The Blackbird Leys community recently were asked what facilities they would like – a new swimming pool didn’t feature. And Labour listening? Not likely. In the City By-Elections, Labour kept both seats. But, in Churchill only 1 out of 9 people voted for them. In Rose Hill, slightly better. But only slightly. As for your glorious 82% in Leys, this just highlights how detached the local authorities are from the people. You are talking about a County election, nothing to do with the City. Even then, do the sums – 6 out of 7 people did NOT vote for Labour. At least that’s better than the last full City elections last May – where only 1 out of 8 people voted for Labour. This may be the democratic process, but only dictatorships then take it upon themselves to claim to represent everyone. With this lack of engagement, any authority should be making sure that when they invest huge sums of someone else’s money that will deprive thousands of people of services that they very carefully find out what those people actually want. And Labour, in Oxford, have not done so. It simply doesn’t make sense to spend over £13m of taxpayers’ money on a facility in a place where there’s no evidence of demand (and real evidence of great demand for other things) when £3m spent on existing facilities where people want and use them will enable the City Council to bridge their funding gap and retain vital frontline services. SaveTCP
  • Score: 0

11:09pm Sat 4 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

SaveTCP wrote:
Hmm, two for the price of one, eh? There’s absolutely no need to make personal abusive comments on this messageboard. Anyone is entitled to their opinion, wherever they come from. However, if you read or watch Ms Seeger’s speech, you may understand a bit more. She lives in Oxford, and she uses Temple Cowley Pools. No-one is trying to deprive a community of anything; but the Council has at no point been able to justify what it is proposing, and spending over £13m on a swimming pool when you can build a complete leisure centre for £5m simply doesn’t make sense. Better to spend the money on refurbishing (and not depriving several communities) Temple Cowley Pools and spend the rest keeping the services that Labour are taking away from the whole of Oxford. The Blackbird Leys community recently were asked what facilities they would like – a new swimming pool didn’t feature.

And Labour listening? Not likely. In the City By-Elections, Labour kept both seats. But, in Churchill only 1 out of 9 people voted for them. In Rose Hill, slightly better. But only slightly.

As for your glorious 82% in Leys, this just highlights how detached the local authorities are from the people. You are talking about a County election, nothing to do with the City. Even then, do the sums – 6 out of 7 people did NOT vote for Labour. At least that’s better than the last full City elections last May – where only 1 out of 8 people voted for Labour. This may be the democratic process, but only dictatorships then take it upon themselves to claim to represent everyone. With this lack of engagement, any authority should be making sure that when they invest huge sums of someone else’s money that will deprive thousands of people of services that they very carefully find out what those people actually want. And Labour, in Oxford, have not done so.

It simply doesn’t make sense to spend over £13m of taxpayers’ money on a facility in a place where there’s no evidence of demand (and real evidence of great demand for other things) when £3m spent on existing facilities where people want and use them will enable the City Council to bridge their funding gap and retain vital frontline services.
You really don't like it when people have an opinion that differs from the formal opinion of the distinct SaveTCP community leadership do you?

When someone points out that an individual, who has chosen to seek attention and publicly announce that they have left a political party for the third time on the days leading to a local election, lives in an area that subsequently chose to return the party that the individual left - it is most certainly not personally abusive.

The indignant reaction simply evidences that the SaveTCP community leadership is now spinning in an out of control manner in a desperate bid to silence the people who want East Oxford to benefit from a brand new pool.

It won't be long now, the doors will close for the final time, the new pool will open and demolition agents will make the the current site safe.
[quote][p][bold]SaveTCP[/bold] wrote: Hmm, two for the price of one, eh? There’s absolutely no need to make personal abusive comments on this messageboard. Anyone is entitled to their opinion, wherever they come from. However, if you read or watch Ms Seeger’s speech, you may understand a bit more. She lives in Oxford, and she uses Temple Cowley Pools. No-one is trying to deprive a community of anything; but the Council has at no point been able to justify what it is proposing, and spending over £13m on a swimming pool when you can build a complete leisure centre for £5m simply doesn’t make sense. Better to spend the money on refurbishing (and not depriving several communities) Temple Cowley Pools and spend the rest keeping the services that Labour are taking away from the whole of Oxford. The Blackbird Leys community recently were asked what facilities they would like – a new swimming pool didn’t feature. And Labour listening? Not likely. In the City By-Elections, Labour kept both seats. But, in Churchill only 1 out of 9 people voted for them. In Rose Hill, slightly better. But only slightly. As for your glorious 82% in Leys, this just highlights how detached the local authorities are from the people. You are talking about a County election, nothing to do with the City. Even then, do the sums – 6 out of 7 people did NOT vote for Labour. At least that’s better than the last full City elections last May – where only 1 out of 8 people voted for Labour. This may be the democratic process, but only dictatorships then take it upon themselves to claim to represent everyone. With this lack of engagement, any authority should be making sure that when they invest huge sums of someone else’s money that will deprive thousands of people of services that they very carefully find out what those people actually want. And Labour, in Oxford, have not done so. It simply doesn’t make sense to spend over £13m of taxpayers’ money on a facility in a place where there’s no evidence of demand (and real evidence of great demand for other things) when £3m spent on existing facilities where people want and use them will enable the City Council to bridge their funding gap and retain vital frontline services.[/p][/quote]You really don't like it when people have an opinion that differs from the formal opinion of the distinct SaveTCP community leadership do you? When someone points out that an individual, who has chosen to seek attention and publicly announce that they have left a political party for the third time on the days leading to a local election, lives in an area that subsequently chose to return the party that the individual left - it is most certainly not personally abusive. The indignant reaction simply evidences that the SaveTCP community leadership is now spinning in an out of control manner in a desperate bid to silence the people who want East Oxford to benefit from a brand new pool. It won't be long now, the doors will close for the final time, the new pool will open and demolition agents will make the the current site safe. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

12:53pm Sun 5 May 13

SaveTCP says...

Andrew – you’ve clearly missed your vocation as a master (or mistress?) of spin. You have a great ability to replay in your own words what people have said in a way that is not exactly the original meaning. Very admirable – hope you are using your talents in a positive way somewhere other than these messageboards. And overplaying our reaction – nice try. As anyone reading the previous posts can see, the personal abuse was nothing to do with how people voted. So let’s come back to and stick to the point. Someone has been prepared to express a view about a local issue with which they are very much involved.

Anyone is entitled to whatever opinion they wish to hold. However, if the Labour-controlled City Council want to spend £13m of taxpayers money, they should have evidence to back up their policy. And all the evidence they have put forward in public has been challenged and found to not stand up to scrutiny. None of it. Even repeatedly asserting that the facility was built in the 1930s, when they know it was built in 1987, after Blackbird Leys and Ferry. We don’t try and silence anybody – on the contrary. We simply ask what evidence there is for closing Temple Cowley Pools. There isn’t any, otherwise you wouldn’t be trying to divert attention away from the key points.

As to votes, well 1 in 6 people voted for Labour in Rose Hill/Iffley last Thursday. This is worse than the 1 in 4 who voted for them at the election last year – and let’s remember, the vote on Thursday was not the consultation the Council should have carried out before committing so much of our money, it was a City by-election hidden behind the County elections. So it’s not possible to argue that the election was a vote on a single policy, that of closing Temple Cowley. The only interpretation is that it is a swing of opinion away from the Labour City Council and their policies, including their wish to close Temple Cowley Pools.
Andrew – you’ve clearly missed your vocation as a master (or mistress?) of spin. You have a great ability to replay in your own words what people have said in a way that is not exactly the original meaning. Very admirable – hope you are using your talents in a positive way somewhere other than these messageboards. And overplaying our reaction – nice try. As anyone reading the previous posts can see, the personal abuse was nothing to do with how people voted. So let’s come back to and stick to the point. Someone has been prepared to express a view about a local issue with which they are very much involved. Anyone is entitled to whatever opinion they wish to hold. However, if the Labour-controlled City Council want to spend £13m of taxpayers money, they should have evidence to back up their policy. And all the evidence they have put forward in public has been challenged and found to not stand up to scrutiny. None of it. Even repeatedly asserting that the facility was built in the 1930s, when they know it was built in 1987, after Blackbird Leys and Ferry. We don’t try and silence anybody – on the contrary. We simply ask what evidence there is for closing Temple Cowley Pools. There isn’t any, otherwise you wouldn’t be trying to divert attention away from the key points. As to votes, well 1 in 6 people voted for Labour in Rose Hill/Iffley last Thursday. This is worse than the 1 in 4 who voted for them at the election last year – and let’s remember, the vote on Thursday was not the consultation the Council should have carried out before committing so much of our money, it was a City by-election hidden behind the County elections. So it’s not possible to argue that the election was a vote on a single policy, that of closing Temple Cowley. The only interpretation is that it is a swing of opinion away from the Labour City Council and their policies, including their wish to close Temple Cowley Pools. SaveTCP
  • Score: 1

5:32pm Sun 5 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

Oh yes, I'm very good at picking poorly written text apart and repackaging it in a clear and understandable format.

It's why it is so important for groups like you own to ensure that the leadership remains completely focused, keep a tight reign on their board and don't engage in any activities that could be seen as compromising the overall corporate aims of the body.

Although it does surprise me, after all this time, that the SaveTCP group still manages to publish content that is gaff prone and open to interpretation. I can only hope that the contributors don't prepare contracts or legal documents as part of their other lives.

Still...

It did cause me smile a little when after all the bluster about leaving Labour to join the Greens - the Greens are now seeking to engage with Labour to deliver a rainbow alliance at county level.
Oh yes, I'm very good at picking poorly written text apart and repackaging it in a clear and understandable format. It's why it is so important for groups like you own to ensure that the leadership remains completely focused, keep a tight reign on their board and don't engage in any activities that could be seen as compromising the overall corporate aims of the body. Although it does surprise me, after all this time, that the SaveTCP group still manages to publish content that is gaff prone and open to interpretation. I can only hope that the contributors don't prepare contracts or legal documents as part of their other lives. Still... It did cause me smile a little when after all the bluster about leaving Labour to join the Greens - the Greens are now seeking to engage with Labour to deliver a rainbow alliance at county level. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 0

6:53pm Sun 5 May 13

SaveTCP says...

Unfortunately that's not what your good at, but nice try again. Your attempt at diversionary tactics thinly veiled this time. So keep your focus Andrew.

It simply doesn't make sense for the Labour-controlled City Council to spend over £13m on a 25m non-Olympic swimming pool in a place where there's no evidence of demand when £3m will refurbish and improve two facilities in a place where people want to use them.
Unfortunately that's not what your good at, but nice try again. Your attempt at diversionary tactics thinly veiled this time. So keep your focus Andrew. It simply doesn't make sense for the Labour-controlled City Council to spend over £13m on a 25m non-Olympic swimming pool in a place where there's no evidence of demand when £3m will refurbish and improve two facilities in a place where people want to use them. SaveTCP
  • Score: 0

9:27am Tue 7 May 13

EricTheRed says...

ohh pass the popcorn im loving this tearing to shreds of SaveTCP arguments!
ohh pass the popcorn im loving this tearing to shreds of SaveTCP arguments! EricTheRed
  • Score: 0

9:27am Tue 7 May 13

EricTheRed says...

ohh pass the popcorn im loving this tearing to shreds of SaveTCP arguments!
ohh pass the popcorn im loving this tearing to shreds of SaveTCP arguments! EricTheRed
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree