Major changes to Haringey's sport & leisure services announced

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by sphamilton on February 10, 2011 at 11:14

The Council talked about handing the management of Tottenham Green leisure centre over to Aquaterra a few years ago (they're a not for profit charitable trust and run Islington's leisure centres, among others, and do so pretty well AFAIK). I wish they had, to be honest.

Completely agree that it's a shambles. I've asked on two separate occasions in the last month for a membership form, only to be told, vaguely, that they don't have any and I should come back 'some other time'. It's always grubby, there's always some form of refurbishment going on but somehow it's never going on in the pools (probably some of the most popular facilities). My last complaint about cleaning went unanswered. It's also the only local authority pool I've swum in in London where pop radio is habitually playing in the background - as I go swimming to clear my head and relax, this pisses me off enormously, and I keep asking for it to be turned down. It seems to be entirely for the benefit of the lifeguards, and adds to the dishevelled, charmless atmosphere of the place.

I was also extremely annoyed the other day, passing the door to the Shokk gym just inside the turnstiles - which was expensively kitted out as a youth gym only a couple of years ago, but which has seemed permanently shut for the last year  - to notice that the equipment has been removed. It appears now to be just another function room, suitable for religious meetings (one seemed to be starting up as I passed).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mr Growbag on February 10, 2011 at 12:00

I've not been back to TGLS since, a few years ago, I cut my foot open on broken glass on the bottom of the pool, providing me with an entertaining 3 hours in North Middlesex Hospital waiting for a tetanus jab.  The pool seemed entirely unconcerned (and didn't even close the pool, despite being told that there was broken glass in it!)

 

At the time a staff member said that someone had broken a glass bottle by the sauna, and that must have gone into the water when it was being cleared up.  Unsuprisingly when I wrote to them to complain they denied this outright, although they did very generously offer me a free swim.  Funnily enough I never took them up on it...

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Liz on February 10, 2011 at 11:47

I have no doubt that what you say about T Green is true and that some kind of solution needs to be sought. 

but, Will, I said there is a danger of asset strippers if the council chooses badly how to solve their problems, I am certainly not 'up in arms'; you talk about polarising arguments but you assume that anyone who expresses scepticism about the value of privitisation in all cases means that they only support one other option i.e. total public ownership. You got frustrated in another post about generalisations so don't fall into the trap

The option that sp discusses below i.e. a not for profit trust that manages the site is one of the options we need to put on the table and make sure that the benchmark for success is set high for whoever takes on previously council run assets, because actually the council don't 'own' them in the way one might own a house or business; they keep them in trust  for the community whose taxes pay for their upkeep and running. Decisions made as to where they go next must be made in the best interests of the community and that ensures that money that goes into the centre through charging for services etc, remains within the community to further invest in their sports and leisure servies and is not sucked out and is never seen again.

As far as I can see, what Cllr Dogus is proposing for leisure services is eminently sensible but we must be vigilant that they make the right decisions re those external operators and oppose anything that may look like a land grab. As you know there are some that are already questioning their decisions re Veolia and waste management and we have the salutary lessons of Wards Corner and the recent decision re Bull Lane to remind us that councils are not always on the side of the community groups they are now courting

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sphamilton on February 10, 2011 at 11:52

I agree - not all options are equal, and I'd be much happier with one like Aquaterra which ploughs profits back into the centres, and into offering discounted sessions for low-income groups.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sphamilton on February 10, 2011 at 12:03

Will - the Clissold Pool is managed by GLL, not Aquaterra. And a swim at Tottenham Green appears to have gone up to £4.50, which is comparable to pretty much any other council-run leisure centre I've used in recent years, but for a less pleasant experience.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sphamilton on February 10, 2011 at 12:11

They manage a lot of London leisure centres and appear also to be a charitable social enterprise, saying that surpluses are reinvested in the communities where they are generated: http://www.gll.org/aboutus/

I don't have any particular axe to grind for either it or Aquaterra, btw, other than the fact that I moved to Haringey from a borough where Aquaterra managed leisure facilities pretty well to one where they strike me as appallingly managed.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stuart on February 10, 2011 at 20:45

My experiences of the Park Road pool are pretty similar to those on here at the Tottenham Green one. So we took a chance and checked out Clissold - and have never been back to Park Road since. It's very well run, always clean, showers always work, staff are helpful and there's a full-size training pool which always has plenty room for kids to swim in (with a movable floor so they can make it deeper/shallower as necessary). If that's the GLL experience, the sooner they take over more council-run centres, the better.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Liz on February 10, 2011 at 15:29

Will, I have been on this site since the early days and this gross exaggeration really must be retracted: 

can't think of a single case on here where a public V private discussion has taken place with the starting point being a neutral stance. Or where people will recognise that the current situation is such a shambles. I appreciate scepticism - but at least it should be qualified - not the council is selling off all our sports centres to private operators so we must all sign a petition now etc....!

"a single case on here" Let us take this very post which I believe has taken a neutral stance since it has reproduced a counci press release without comment and where by and large the contributors are comfortable with the proposal. This is what we usually do with announcements from the council. No sign of a petition.

"people will recognise that the current situation is such a shambles" I think you will find plenty of examples of people pointing out that council handling of a situation is a shambles, HOL is hardly a love-in with the council. 

"not the council is selling off all our sports centres to private operators so we must all sign a petition now etc" this situation has never happened in the history of the site. We have allowed people to post petitions to oppose land grabs at Down Lane, Finsbury Park and Wards Corner, which is an entirely different situation as you are aware as a Ward's Corner campaigner.

As a website, we have run petitions on traffic in Harringay, polls on advertising on Harringay bridge and surveys on improving the area of Harringay but, no, the website doesn't fire up a petition at the very mention of private operators on public spaces 

As you proved yesterday with railways, you are perfectly capable of conducting a discussion without resorting to exaggeration and sweeping generalisations. No one could really come up with an argument to counter your assertions that the railway had improved since privitisation. So why are you going back to lazy arguments about "on here everybody thinks"? In an online community of over 3,500 people, I think you'll find it unlikely that everyone thinks the same.

To return to the issue, it is not so far been expressed that the council should keep the leisure centres in-house, it is which operators we, as a community, would prefer to run them and why. The council continuing is not one of the options on my particular table. Let us stick to discussing the most sensible options such as the ones sp is providing for us.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Germana on February 10, 2011 at 21:29

Hi all, I am generally generally not a big fan of privatisation of essential services and critical infrastructure, but leisure centres are not part of that category. I have used the Clissold Leisure centre and the London Fields Lido a lot as I used to live in Hackney - they run by the same company GLL (I think it's a non profit). While I can't say things have always been perfect (and the Clissold Centre refurbishment has cost a huge amount of money, not sure whose fault it was) they both seem to be very well run compared to what I now hear about Haringey's council run services.

So if this is one way for the Council to cut costs, and given that the Tottenham centre costs pretty much the same as the Clissold Centre (so not much benefit from being Council-run from that perspective) , I think it might be a good idea to hand them over to the private and non profit sector.

The only problem may be that the private/non profit sector may not be interested in e.g. the Tottenham Green centre which from what I hear is always half empty, and may not make them enough money to be viable. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sphamilton on February 10, 2011 at 21:35

With a deep clean and a relaunch, even if there isn't currently money for refurbishment, I think the Tottenham Green centre could be made an awful lot more appealing and pull in more customers. Sorting out basic stuff like making sure they have details of classes and membership forms available all the time, rather than occasionally, would help too: actually marketing the place, in other words.

AFAIK the Clissold Centre ran over budget on Hackney Council's watch - don't think the GLL contract was awarded until the place was completed.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on February 10, 2011 at 22:44

These comments about Tottenham Green Leisure Centre are worrying.

Can I suggest that Centre users who have concerns put their complaints and suggestions into an email. The Director is Mr Mun Thong Phung ( Mun.Phung@haringey.gov.uk) The "cabinet member" responsible is Cllr Dilek Dogus.( Dilek.Dogus@haringey.gov.uk )

From time to time when residents complained to me about the Centre,  I've found senior staff willing to listen, investigate and put things right.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sphamilton on February 10, 2011 at 22:50

Alan - thanks, I just might do that.

• ▶ Reply