Free Swimming in Haringey to end in September

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on July 27, 2010 at 19:17

Fascinating, John, that you draw a parallel with road safety. The figures for deaths and serious injuries in road accidents remain horrifying. With children at very high risk.

Of course parents have (and should have) the major responsibility for supervising their children. And this means not just talking to children about road safety but setting a good example themselves when they're out. (Learning-at-parents'-side has got to be the most effective way.) Then with teenagers - talking about whose car they don't get into.

But what if this doesn't happen?

Are you saying, John, that schools have no part to play? Or that in the interest of "handing power back to the people" councils should stop school crossing patrols?

I don't think even Mary Whitehouse wanted to ban the Tufty Club which ran on TV for decades.

There are also some worrying questions about families from other societies who settle here, but have little or no experience of big city traffic. Just over six years ago I raised this issue with Haringey. I'd done some phoning around and was concerned that a number of key agencies (then) had no figures about accidents and ethnicity.

Going back to swimming, as a councillor, my Tottenham Hale ward includes a stretch of the River Lee. Deaths from drowning are thankfully few. But when they happen everyone is shocked and upset - and especially when it's a child.

I simply don't accept that we ought solely to expect parents to teach swimming and water safety.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John D on July 27, 2010 at 21:32

I didn't draw that parallel - James W did.

And I don't think the Tufty Club could be regarded as salacious or offensive.

As I said to Liz, it was a genuine question, not a snipe.

And as I also said, it's now up to the Councillors to decide whether to put money into free swimming. I think they should. No doubt you will promote this in the Council yourself.

Permalink Reply by John McMullan on August 7, 2010 at 10:39

My personal thoughts are that if the only reason someone will use a facility is because its free then its a total waste of time. If they don't want to swim they won't.

To paraphrase:
My personal thoughts are that if the only reason someone will use a facility is because it's free then it's a total waste of time. If they don't want to read books, they won't.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Liz on July 27, 2010 at 12:27

Do the Council pay for lessons on how to cross the road safely ?
No, but TFL do!
Think you'll find there's lots of public money spent on road safety campaigns John.

By the way, Will has a point. As far as I know, lessons in schools for children have not been cut and the mention of the Haringey school swimming programme implies that lessons for school children are the norm and that learning will be rewarded with free swimming. What is cut here is kids not having to pay at swimming pools not lessons or school swimming programmes. Let's not get carried away.

Also, this is not Haringey's fault. The money for this scheme was one of the first things pulled by the coalition back in June. The fact that it has been carried through to the autumn means that they are funding it for as long as they are able but I think they fact they have a massive shortfall in funding for primary places and that the DOE is refusing to even talk to Haringey about it is probably a bigger headache for the council for now...and should it be for us too?

No sympathy for the over 60s losing their free swimming by the way?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Liz on July 27, 2010 at 12:59

Free swimming for under threes will continue for the time being be sure to take advantage of it.

Sadly as you must know , many households in Tottenham live on less than £10 a day and Tottenham constituency is near the top for child poverty. Arranging your finances may be just a bit trickier if you have very little to arrange in the first place. Free activities level that football field just a little, perhaps? I also read an interesting article the other day that suggests that in a true Big Society, all those people paying and giving heaps of time to ferrying kids to private lessons should consider ploughing some of that surplus time and cash into volunteering/donating to run kids sports and activities clubs, then everyone in the community benefits. Worth consideration at least.

btw Weren't you arguing before that this was not about lessons being axed now you seem to be saying that swimming shouldn't be taught at all by the state, not even in schools? Sorry if I misunderstand but I'm not sure why swimming lessons at school should be the state bringing my children up. What's the difference between learning to swim at school and learning French? Both useful skills and hardly abdicating responsibility to let qualified teachers do it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Liz on July 27, 2010 at 13:41

Re CRB, You may not need to rant about it. I For people with low contact with children, I believe the coalition have halted the measures proposed by the former government and I'm sure that the Big Society policy makers must recognise this as an issue. I actually believe that there a quite a few myths around CRB checks and volunteering but having undergone a few in my time, they are hardly a problem, although I recognise that they may not be failsafe and some people feel uncomfortable with them

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John D on July 27, 2010 at 18:16

Thanks Liz. It was a genuine question about crossing the road, neither rhetorical nor a sneer.

And no - I didn't have free swimming lessons when I was a kid. National Dried Milk and orange juice, yes :-)

Just to add to the confusion - this poster is currently on display at Turnpike Lane tube stn.

Note for the hard of understanding - it's about swimming LESSONS :-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by StephenBln on July 27, 2010 at 21:06

Well we were fortunate enough to have Free Swimming Lessons in Tottenham/later Haringey schools ..Was that a snear I heard?

They were part of our Free Education and considered to be worthwhile by the then government. Tory BTW. oh - but they were 'decent 'chappies in those days..

Be ashamed of yourself for even considering it..

Oh and Will, it's always the same with bad ideas - they always tend to get misunderstood..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John D on July 27, 2010 at 21:22

Be ashamed of yourself for even considering it..

Considering WHAT for God's sake ?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Liz on July 27, 2010 at 22:30

That's a different scheme, the Take the Plunge scheme for non swimmers to get them started. The lessons take place over six weeks and are on offer at Park Road, Northumberland Park and Tottenham Green swimming pools.After completing the six-week course, people are encouraged to continue to learn to swim - with additional lessons starting at £1 a class, depending on the time of the class.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mr Growbag on July 27, 2010 at 13:30

I suppose an equally valid question might be why free casual swimming for children was introduced in the last year at all. Free leisure swimming for kids is a "nice to have", not an essential and certainly not a human right.

It's clear that the government last year was aware of the massive debt that needed to be cut. I'm not sure I'm being overly cynical when this seems to me like a politically charged initiative, designed to make the last govt appear generous, and the new lot stingy and mean by introducing 11th hour pre-election handouts that were always going to be totally unsustainable given the country's finances.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Liz on July 27, 2010 at 14:18

Well, a pre-election handout is one interpretation, but the LGA reporting of it implied that it was part of the government’s aim to get people more active in the run up to the 2012 Olympics as part of the Olympic legacy. This press release dated 2008 welcomes the fact that over 60s were also included and suggests it doesn't go far enough. So this was proposed quite a long time before the election, 2 yrs in fact - was the Labour government so far gone in the final term that all its long term planning was simply to make any subsequent government look stingy?

This article from the Guardian makes for an interesting read on the issue.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page