SEAN O'NEIL: Who is new Perth leisure centre actually for?
I have a question for Perth and Kinross Council.
Who is the new proposed leisure centre at Thimblerow actually for?
The swimmers don't want it. The curlers don't want it. The indoor sports community doesn't want it.
Our Olympians don't want it. And the public doesn't want it.
Nobody wants this £61 million project.
Well, nobody except a handful of councillors and some unelected officers and their boss.
This week, the Perth and Kinross Community Sports Network (PKCSN) slammed the council consultation on the future of Bell's Sports Centre as 'misleading'.
They are a campaign group representing a dozen local sports groups and backed by nine national sporting bodies.
PKCSN want Bell's reopened as an indoor sports venue and are opposed to their inclusion in the PH2O plans which leaves them with less facilities.
The council wants to turn Bell's into an unheated arena with artificial pitches.
And the campaigners are angry with the council's public consultation as it only offered up one option on the future of Bell's, the unheated one.
There was no proposal to reopen Bell's in its previous guise, before it was flooded when the council opted not to close the floodgates on the North Inch despite storm warnings.
PKCSN's concern is that people opted for a yes vote as they were afraid it was that or nothing.
It's a valid concern when you read some of the comments left on the consultation.
I think the consultation led people exactly where the council wanted them to go.
The Bell's consultation typifies one of the main issues surrounding this whole PH2O Thimblerow leisure centre fiasco.
It doesn't seem like any other options are getting a fair crack at the whip.
Questions are being written to suit the answer, not the other way around.
In the Bell's consultation, for example, the council had already written a report that the public should only be asked about an unheated future for the facility.
Is that really a consultation?
When you've already decided the outcome you want the most.
It's a slight improvement on having no consultations at all I suppose, which had been the council's and Live Active Leisure's (LAL) modus operandi up until that stage.
Then there's car parking.
The council's desire is to build their unwanted new leisure centre, with no dedicated leisure pool, on the most popular car park in Perth.
This will obviously reduce the number of car parking spaces in the city centre.
But hold on a second it won't, because the council are buying Kinnoull Street car park and that totally negates the loss of Thimblerow.
The people of Perth will now have the ability to park in a car park they always had the ability to park in.
And that's totally how maths works.
But wait, there's more.
Unfortunately, the council's incredible Kinnoull Street coup hasn't quite offset the loss of Thimblerow spaces enough to justify the depleted numbers at peak shopping times.
But that's okay, because there's also now the 1,324 spaces at St Catherine's Retail Park.
This is incredible for two reasons and again shows how information is presented to suit the answer and not the question.
The council do not own the car park at St Catherine's Retail Park.
So on one hand, the loss of Thimblerow doesn't matter because the council are replacing it with a car park that already exists but they didn't own (Kinnoull Street).
But on the other hand, the loss of Thimblerow doesn't matter because people can just park at this car park that already exists and the council still doesn't own.
That's not even the most baffling element of St Catherine's Retail Park car park being included in the figures.
This is an out-of-town retail park.
The council's whole argument for building this leisure centre that nobody wants at Thimblerow is because it will, somehow, attract more footfall to the city centre.
And yet, the way they are counteracting the loss of the most popular car park in the city centre is by telling shoppers they can park at the out-of-town retail park.
Anyone even mildly aware of high street discourse over the last decade will know out-of-town retail parks are considered one of the main reasons behind high street decline, with the availability of free car parking a key factor.
I would say make it make sense, but I suspect they don't want it to.
So I'll ask it again.
Who is this new Perth leisure centre at Thimblerow actually for?
Because it's not the shoppers either.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
10-06-2025
- Daily Record
New calls to scrap proposed PIP reforms after U-turn on Winter Fuel Payments
Nearly 3.7 million people on PIP will see changes to the disability benefit start from November next year. Labour backbenchers have called for a UK Government U-turn on planned disability benefit reforms, after Chancellor Rachel Reeves restored Winter Fuel Payments to the majority of pensioners in England and Wales. Proposed changes to Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) are set to come into force from November next year. Ms Reeves' £1.25 billion plan unveiled on Monday will see automatic payments worth up to £300 given to pensioners with an income less than £35,000 a year. The U-turn will see an estimated 9 million people born before September 22, 1959 receive the one-off payment this winter. Shortly after winning the general election in July, the Labour Government announced its decision to remove the universality of Winter Fuel Payments and only issue the money to those on means-tested benefits, such as Pension Credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for PIP. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the UK Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' The Pensions Minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), replied that the numbers of people receiving PIP is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work Green Paper, the UK Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so PIP claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. The Green Paper states: 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the PIP daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future.' Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the Winter Fuel Payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on PIP and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' On Monday, Rachel Reeves said the UK Government would 'crack on' with reforms to PIP. Asked whether there would be more U-turns on PIP or the Child Benefit cap, the Chancellor told Channel 4 News: 'There are 9 million people of working age who are economically inactive. We need to reduce that number. 'We need to provide much better support for people who are sick and disabled to help them back into work. 'These are important reforms that we are going to crack on with, because we need to ensure that as a government we support people to do fulfilling work to help lift families out of poverty and give everybody who can work the dignity of a secure job paying a decent wage.' There are currently 3.7m people across Great Britain in claim for PIP, however, the UK Government expects that figure to rise to 4m by the end of the decade and has proposed a raft of new measures to make the benefit sustainable for future generations. Proposed PIP changes and online consultation Proposed package of reforms to overhaul the welfare system, include: Ending reassessments for disabled people who will never be able to work and people with lifelong conditions to ensure they can live with dignity and security. Scrapping the Work Capability Assessment to end the process that drives people into dependency, delivering on the UK Government's manifesto commitment to reform or replace it. Providing improved employment support backed by £1 billion including new tailored support conversations for people on health and disability benefits to break down barriers and unlock work. Legislating to protect those on health and disability benefits from reassessment or losing their payments if they take a chance on work. To ensure the welfare system is available for those with the greatest needs now and in the future, the UK Government has made decisions to improve its sustainability and protect those who need it most. These include: Reintroducing reassessments for people on incapacity benefits who have the capability to work to ensure they have the right support and are not written off. Targeting PIP for those with higher needs by changing the eligibility requirement to a minimum score of four on at least one of the daily living activities to receive the daily living element of the benefit, in addition to the existing eligibility criteria. Rebalancing payment levels in Universal Credit to improve the Standard Allowance. Consulting on delaying access to the health element of Universal Credit until someone is aged 22 and reinvesting savings into work support and training opportunities through the Youth Guarantee. DWP also launched an online consultation on the new proposals to coincide with the publication of the Green paper. The consultation can be completed by anyone and is open until June 30, 2025 - you can find full details on here. It's important to be aware that the proposed reforms announced by the DWP will not directly affect disability claimants in Scotland currently claiming devolved health-related benefits - unless funding for the Scottish Government is impacted by planned changes by Westminster.
North Wales Chronicle
09-06-2025
- North Wales Chronicle
Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut
Ms Reeves' £1.25 billion plan unveiled on Monday will see automatic payments worth up to £300 given to pensioners with an income less than £35,000 a year. It followed last year's decision to strip pensioners of the previously universal scheme, unless they claimed certain benefits, such as pension credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments, known as Pip. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' The pensions minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions, replied that the numbers of people receiving Pip is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work green paper, the Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so Pip claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the Pip daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future,' the document noted. Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the winter fuel payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on Pip and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' Conservative former work and pensions secretary Esther McVey had earlier asked whether the Chancellor, 'now that she and the Government have got a taste for climbdowns', would 'reverse the equally ridiculous national insurance contribution (Nic) rises, which is destroying jobs, and the inheritance tax changes, which is destroying farms and family businesses'. Mr Bell said: 'This is a party opposite that has learned no lessons whatsoever, that thinks it can come to this chamber, call for more spending, oppose every tax rise and expect to ever be taken seriously again – they will not.' Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey pressed the Government to make changes to the two-child benefit cap, which means most parents cannot claim for more than two children. 'It's the right thing to do to lift pensioners out of poverty, and I'm sure that both he and the Chancellor also agree that it's right to lift children out of poverty,' the Salford MP told the Commons. 'So can he reassure this House that he and the Chancellor are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible?' Mr Bell replied: 'All levers to reduce child poverty are on the table. 'The child poverty strategy will be published in the autumn.' He added: 'If we look at who is struggling most, having to turn off their heating, it is actually younger families with children that are struggling with that. 'So she's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this Government, we cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty.'
South Wales Argus
09-06-2025
- South Wales Argus
Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut
Ms Reeves' £1.25 billion plan unveiled on Monday will see automatic payments worth up to £300 given to pensioners with an income less than £35,000 a year. It followed last year's decision to strip pensioners of the previously universal scheme, unless they claimed certain benefits, such as pension credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments, known as Pip. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' Nadia Whittome (James Manning/PA) The pensions minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions, replied that the numbers of people receiving Pip is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work green paper, the Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so Pip claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the Pip daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future,' the document noted. Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the winter fuel payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on Pip and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' Conservative former work and pensions secretary Esther McVey had earlier asked whether the Chancellor, 'now that she and the Government have got a taste for climbdowns', would 'reverse the equally ridiculous national insurance contribution (Nic) rises, which is destroying jobs, and the inheritance tax changes, which is destroying farms and family businesses'. Mr Bell said: 'This is a party opposite that has learned no lessons whatsoever, that thinks it can come to this chamber, call for more spending, oppose every tax rise and expect to ever be taken seriously again – they will not.' Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey pressed the Government to make changes to the two-child benefit cap, which means most parents cannot claim for more than two children. 'It's the right thing to do to lift pensioners out of poverty, and I'm sure that both he and the Chancellor also agree that it's right to lift children out of poverty,' the Salford MP told the Commons. 'So can he reassure this House that he and the Chancellor are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible?' Mr Bell replied: 'All levers to reduce child poverty are on the table. 'The child poverty strategy will be published in the autumn.' He added: 'If we look at who is struggling most, having to turn off their heating, it is actually younger families with children that are struggling with that. 'So she's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this Government, we cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty.'
