Can we believe what we are told?

Home Forums Wrexham.com Forums Wrexham Forum Can we believe what we are told?

  • Author
    Posts
  • #54441

    jimbow
    Participant

    This is the reply from the Leader of WCBC I received to a question on disabled parking. QUOTE:-although the difficult budget position has resulted in detailed scrutiny into all service areas,we have determined that protection of vulnerable groups will be a priority in our work. UNQUOTE.

    Is the closure of Plas Madoc not going to affect vulnerable groups?
    I can understand that some services have to be subsidised,but where charges for entrance to Leisure Centres etc are made, I expect with good management that those centres give a return or at least will break even.
    How you can lose so much money at Plas Madoc is beyond me.

    #66613

    jimbow
    Participant

    Mr.Isted made reference to Plas Madoc Leisure Centre losing £700k last year which is £13,461 per week and £500k this year which is £9,615 per week.If these figures are correct,I do not have much hope for the future if this is an example of how WCBC manage the business.

    #66612

    BenjaminM
    Participant

    If punters are not using the facility in numbers sufficient to achieve a return or even a break even figure, there seems to me to be only two options available.
    1. Maintain the subsidy for the facility and withdraw it from other areas for which the Council has statutory responsibility, or,
    2. Increase the price of admission to cover that deficit. This too, would likely meet with strong resistance. Option 2 however, has a down side insofar that increased prices would likely to result in lower attendance figures (as has been clearly demonstrated by the closure of Public Houses)………….which brings us back again to option1.

    Assuming the figures quoted in the above posts are correct, I can see very little point in prolonging the time to inevitable closure, sad though it is.

    Unfortunately, hand on heart, I feel that in this instance, WCBC have taken the pragmatic approach.

    #66608

    NJones
    Participant

    @jimbow 11642 wrote:

    This is the reply from the Leader of WCBC I received to a question on disabled parking. QUOTE:-although the difficult budget position has resulted in detailed scrutiny into all service areas,we have determined that protection of vulnerable groups will be a priority in our work. UNQUOTE.
    .

    From experience- Disabled parking badges don’t cost the authority anything apart from administrative costs (couple of staff and cost of badges). They are obliged to manage the scheme on behalf of the Welsh Assembly Government so its not an area they can cut.

    #66614

    jimbow
    Participant

    @njones 11650 wrote:

    From experience- Disabled parking badges don’t cost the authority anything apart from administrative costs (couple of staff and cost of badges). They are obliged to manage the scheme on behalf of the Welsh Assembly Government so its not an area they can cut.

    My letter to the Leader of the Council was not about parking badges.My question to them was about charging for disabled parking,which would bring in around £85,000 per annum.The Council in my opinion had fulfilled their obligations to the disabled person in providing them with a suitable place to park.

    #66615

    jimbow
    Participant

    @benjaminm 11648 wrote:

    If punters are not using the facility in numbers sufficient to achieve a return or even a break even figure, there seems to me to be only two options available.
    1. Maintain the subsidy for the facility and withdraw it from other areas for which the Council has statutory responsibility, or,
    2. Increase the price of admission to cover that deficit. This too, would likely meet with strong resistance. Option 2 however, has a down side insofar that increased prices would likely to result in lower attendance figures (as has been clearly demonstrated by the closure of Public Houses)………….which brings us back again to option1.

    Assuming the figures quoted in the above posts are correct, I can see very little point in prolonging the time to inevitable closure, sad though it is.

    Unfortunately, hand on heart, I feel that in this instance, WCBC have taken the pragmatic approach.

    I would not disagree with your comments.My only hope is that if WCBC decide to build a new arena that it does not haemorrhage money as Plas Madoc has done.

    #66617

    Metalhead
    Participant

    I go by the rule that if I read it on the internet then it’s probably true, don’t think they are allowed by cyber law to post anything on it that isn’t.

    #66609

    Adam
    Participant

    @benjaminm 11648 wrote:

    If punters are not using the facility in numbers sufficient to achieve a return or even a break even figure, there seems to me to be only two options available.
    1. Maintain the subsidy for the facility and withdraw it from other areas for which the Council has statutory responsibility, or,
    2. Increase the price of admission to cover that deficit. This too, would likely meet with strong resistance. Option 2 however, has a down side insofar that increased prices would likely to result in lower attendance figures (as has been clearly demonstrated by the closure of Public Houses)………….which brings us back again to option1.

    Assuming the figures quoted in the above posts are correct, I can see very little point in prolonging the time to inevitable closure, sad though it is.

    Unfortunately, hand on heart, I feel that in this instance, WCBC have taken the pragmatic approach.

    Option 3: identify how the neighbouring profit-making facilities, both public and private, are able to do so and then determine whether suitable changes can be made to existing facilities. If the conclusion is that facilities must be rebuilt to accommodate these changes then they need to be clearly laid out for the public to have faith that a clear analysis has taken place.

    #66610
    Alunh
    Alunh
    Participant

    lllll

    #66611
    Alunh
    Alunh
    Participant

    @jimbow 11651 wrote:

    My letter to the Leader of the Council was not about parking badges.My question to them was about charging for disabled parking,which would bring in around £85,000 per annum.The Council in my opinion had fulfilled their obligations to the disabled person in providing them with a suitable place to park.

    I can understand why you draw this conclusion Jim, though I don’t agree with you. I also appreciate that when we are in a phase of austerity, people will question the logic of cutting A and preserving B. I actually agree with Benjamin on this one about Plas Madoc. There is nothing new about the question mark over this facility and I remember seeing ‘confidential’ reports years ago which identified the horrendous economics of what was a prime attempt to offer a social facility at huge loss. No doubt there are some creative maths in the figures and I expect that you will find things allocated to the finances that the layman would find mystifying.

    On the disabled front, unlike Plas Madoc, this is a scheme that ensures that a direct advantage is always given to individuals who are disadvantaged. I have no gripe with this sort of safety net, unlike say passing out free alcohol to alcoholics and so on. More relevantly, it might be good if the authorities policed the scheme better to ensure that Mobility badges were not handed out like confetti.

Content is user generated and is not moderated before posting. All content is viewed and used by you at your own risk and Wrexham.com does not warrant the accuracy or reliability of any of the information displayed. The views expressed on these Forums and social media are those of the individual contributors.
Complaint? Please use the report post tools or contact Wrexham.com .

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.