Losing it in Leith?

Last night was the Leith Ward hustings.  All six candidates standing for Council were in attendence, with most managing to not to lose the plot as they were asked questions from Leith voters, including Splashback.

Candidates for the three seats are as follows:
Chas Booth (Green)
Adam McVey (SNP)
Rob Munn (SNP)
Gordon Munro (Labour)
Nicola Ross (Con)
Marjorie Thomas (Lib-Dem)

Below is a collation of the tweets which we have compiled for all the Splashback supporters who couldn't make it - to let them know what happened.

A fuller response will be made next week...  Enjoy the sunshine: a good weekend to go swimming!

All change for Leith?

Workers on Leith Walk construct the old tramline circa 1905

It's election time! and tomorrow night Leith Links Community Council  kicks off the hustings period for all the candidates standing for Council in the Leith Ward, at the Leith Community Centre, Kirkgate from 7pm - (further details here)

On the 22 December last year, we asked the Council to keep to their promise to keep Leith Waterworld open until the Commonwealth Pool opened (i.e. March), allowing them time to 'investigate all the options' which might allow LWW to stay open.  All parties, bar the Greens, voted for closure on 8 Jan.

On the 3 February, we again presented a deputation requesting that the sale be put on hold for six months to see if a community bid might be viable.  This time all parties (bar the Tories...) found it somewhat easier and more palatable to be positive, and so voted to delay the sale of Leith Waterworld.  Splashback's response was lukewarm - we were well aware that would mean a lot of hard work,  which for us as activists and volunteers means a lot of unpaid work, but our goal remained and remains to see Leith Waterworld reopen.

We argued that day, that we were not 'the' community, but just one element (albeit the only element who seemed to want to look deeper into whether closure was the only option).  The Council, Edinburgh Leisure, the social enterprise sector, other interested parties, us, and the wider community would all have to be engaged and required to pull together if a community bid is to be successful... We have been working so far to that end.  To date we have had no contact from the Council, and no concrete offers of support (a name (not even an email address!) of someone else to contact is not quite enough, is it?).  We are serious, are they?

Please do come tomorrow night and add your voice to the campaign to re-open Leith Waterworld.  We will be asking questions of all the parties, and hope that their responses might interest you.

I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that "eyeball to eyeball is best" as Ewan Aikten does - that's getting a little bit too intimate with our politicians - a straight answer will do!

Today's Evening News article - "Waterworld hot topic in May's poll'.

a springboard?

Dear friends and supporters

Yesterday Splashback! handed in the petition with 6200 signatures to Lord Provost George Grubb, following our deputation in support of the Green's motion to delay the sale of Leith Waterworld for six months to allow a potential credible community bid to be developed.

The petition was addressed to the Council , and asked: 
 

We, the undersigned, are dismayed by the decision to close Leith Waterworld. We believe this would be a hammerblow to Leith, and to children, families and people with disabilities from across the whole of Edinburgh. We believe the £300,000 required to keep the pool open each year is an investment in the health and wellbeing, confidence and future of our community.

We demand the Council reviews the 2005 decision to close the unique facility and investigate all possible avenues for retaining the amenity and keeping the pool open for the Edinburgh public for the future.

The motion was carried with a minor amendment by the administration by 45 votes to 11.  Finally after two months of campaigning, here (in the pic) are the Councillors standing up for Leith, as they make their decision to support the possibility of a community bid.  NB the Big Society Tories sitting down in the top left!

Splashback is delighted that the pool has a reprieve for six months.  A community bid was never our first choice for the pool, but we believe it is one of the options that could safeguard the future of the pool for our community and city...

'Delay to Leith Waterworld a success but not a result' STV article


'Stay of execution for Waterworld' Edinburgh Evening News article

'Campaigners hope to break down 'brick wall' to save Leith Waterworld'  STV article

Petition D-day

Green MSP for Lothian, Alison Johnstone, will support Splashback! campaigners tomorrow, Thursday 2 February, as they hand in the petition of over 6,200 signatures to the City of Edinburgh Council. 

The petition, which calls for the Council to “investigate all possible avenues for retaining the amenity and keeping the pool open for the Edinburgh public for the future”, demonstrates overwhelming public support for the campaign to save Leith Waterworld. Over 5,000 signatures were added in person outside Leith Waterworld before it closed on 8 January, with over 1,100 added online.

The pool might have closed on 8 January, but we continue to fight for its future as an amenity for Leith and the whole of Edinburgh. Though Councillors voted, on 22 December, to uphold the decision to close, we feel the demand made by the petition is still current, and ask Councillors to consider the options.

We are handing in the petition at the Full Council Meeting, where Green councillor Steve Burgess is tabling a motion to delay the sale of the Waterworld site (closing date 8 February) to allow the possibility of a community purchase.  

Splashback! supports this motion, and the possibility of having time for a credible community bid to develop. The campaign will be presenting a deputation at the Full Council Meeting saying so. There are 11 community-run swimming pools in Scotland; we believe every chance should be given to this potential outcome for the Leith Waterworld site.

Under the surface - intro

On the 23 December 2011, just after the deputation, and the vote in Full Council to bring the closing date forward to the 8th January we submitted three Freedom of Information requests to the City of Edinburgh Council.

Splashback has now received answers from the Council to our three requests, and in the spirit of openess we would like to share these with you... see below for 'Under the surface' - Parts I, II, III...

Under the surface - part 1

Think of this one like a swan - on top serene, whilst underneath frantically scrurrying away

In the Chamber on the 22 Dec Splashback requested that a proper Equalities Impact Assessment be carried out, as per the £9m funding agreement between Edinburgh Leisure and CEC, looking at the impact of closure on different user groups.  In the amendment to the Chamber, put forward by the SNP/Lib Dem administration, it was stated that "that a draft Equalities Impact Assessment had been submitted to the Council and was currently being assessed.'

So the next day we asked to see all correspondence between CEC and El regarding the EqIA, and here is what we received.

Some things we'd like to draw your attention to:

1. Unless we have been given incomplete information, the first mention in this financial year (eight months after the funding agreement was signed off) the 1st mention between EL and CEC was the day after we visited Councillor Brock (also Vice-Chair of EL )at her 7 Dec surgery to request the EqIA. (p1)

2. On the 8 Dec, the Chief Exec of EL is quoted (regarding the closure) as saying, "Given that it is clearly a done deal – it seems a futile too spend a lot of time on the EqIA." (p3)

3. The Head of Sport at CEC wrote on 15 Dec (7 days before the motion)"I have told them [the Splashback campaign group] that it wasn't required at the time when the decision was taken. However in discussing with Cllr Brock, she feels having an EqIA would be helpful at this point..." (p13)

4. An unnamed official notes, “I attended the Splashback public meeting last night with Cllr Brock. The meeting itself was very civilized” (p20) Thank you!

5. An unnamed EL staff member writes on the 19 Dec, “Got to say it is all too late for my liking... an EqIA needs to be built in, not bolted on (etc.etc.etc) (p23)

6. CEC Head of Sport writes on 19 Dec, “ I don't think that splashing around in LWW will actually have that much of a positive impact on health... kids maybe active but it is a leisure/fun pool and not necessarily increasing heart rats in the same way that doing 10 lengths of a traditional 25m pool would... " Ummm, FOI Reply Re EQIA

Under the surface - part II

Under the surface - part II:

Think of this one, like the Titanic - we know it's down there, but we can't get it out!


Much was made in the Chamber on the 22 Dec of the amount of subsidy required to keep Leith Waterworld open, the high staff costs and the high energy costs...

So the next day, we asked CEC for a full breakdown of these costs.  EL has refused us these on two occasions in the run-up to the motion. We presumed Councillors had sight of these, given the decision on the future of the pool was being taken by them... apparently not - "this information is not held by the Council".  We have still been unable to get a full breakdown of the operating costs from EL.



FOI Reply Re Operating Costs

Under the surface - part III

Under the surface - part III
Think of this like an iceberg - we can see some of whats there, but aren't sure what size it is underneath!

Following the decision to bring forward the closure of LWW on 22 Dec, our minds turned to what might be there if it was sold and no longer a leisure pool.

We asked to see “all correspondence between CEC and Tesco (or a party acting on Tesco’s behalf) regarding the Leith Waterworld site, either received or sent over the last year (1 December 2010 – 22 December 2010).  We were interested to receive the following response

In this instance, the Council is applying Commercial Interests and the Economy,Section 33 (1) (b) disclosure would (or would be likely to) prejudice substantially the commercial interests of any person or organisations.We believe that it would significantly harm and substantially prejudice the company concerned with regard to any future tenders they pursue"

Not a refusal on the basis that there isn't any correspondence but a refusal that it might prejudice commercial interests - We have, of course requested a review of this, citing public interest, which as the Scottish Information Commissioner notes, over-rides this exemption.

FOI Re Tescos

Fit for purpose?

Questions regarding Edinburgh Leisure are being asked in today's Scotsman; which featured a letter penned by a member of the Splashback campaign, in response to David Bellak, a pensioner concerned with Edinburgh Leisure's price rises:



Dear Editor

DAVID Bellak’s letter regarding the 33 per cent increase in price rises for pensioners using Edinburgh Leisure’s (EL) facilities (14 January) highlights a worrying trend in sports provision in the capital city. 

Crèche facilities at leisure centres have been withdrawn. Last spring, Edinburgh Leisure axed free swimming for primary-aged children. 

Since April 2010, Edinburgh schools no longer use EL services. Why? Last weekend Leith Waterworld, Edinburgh’s only leisure pool, closed because the savings would contribute to the bailout of the £7 million over-budget refurbishment of Royal Commonwealth Pool (RCP).
In doing so, Edinburgh Leisure disregarded one of the requirements of its funding agreement with the council to undertake an equalities assessment into how any closure might affect certain user groups, in Leith Waterworld’s case specifically the under-fives, children attending on their own and the disabled...

More... 




More media on the campaign to save Leith Waterworld in the last couple of days:

The Edinburgh Evening News reported on the inauguration of the Homeless Itinerant Bathing Society (Edinburgh Branch) in its Monday 16 Jan edition:

CAMPAIGNERS who battled against the closure of Leith Waterworld are planning to tour other pools en masse to inspect their facilities.

Waterworld closed its doors to the public on Sunday, but now the families who led the fight to keep it open have formed themselves into the Homeless Itinerant Bathing Society (Edinburgh).  From this weekend, campaign members will get together each Sunday to visit a pool to undertake a “swim inspection” before reporting their findings to the city council.

More...



And STV reported on the formal complaint made to City of Edinburgh Council...

The campaign group Splashback has lodged a lengthy complaint about the conduct of Councillors while deciding the fate of Leith Waterworld which the group had hoped to save.

On Thursday, December 22 Splashback made a deputation to the City of Edinburgh Council at a Full Council meeting in a bid to prevent the leisure facility closing earlier this month.  The deputation failed to save LWW and the pool closed its doors on January 8.  Campaigners were “unhappy” with what they viewed as the “wrong decision” but were additionally disappointed by the behaviour of some Councillors present and as such Splashback submitted a complaint letter with eight specific objections.

More...

Breaking the waves

Photo taken at City Chambers, shortly after the Splashback deputation, 22 Dec 2011

 An official complaint (see below for full text) has been lodged with the City of Edinburgh Council, which refers to the Councillor's Code of Conduct 


15 January 2012

Dear Sir/Madam

I am writing with a complaint about the behaviour of Councillors within the Full Council meeting, on 22 December, as both a member of, and on behalf of, the Splashback campaign, who made a deputation that day regarding the closure of Leith Waterworld.

I would like to raise several points, which I believe go against the recommendations of the Councillor's Code of Conduct, prepared and published by the Scottish Government in December 2010.

"The Scottish public has a high expectation of councillors and the way in which they should conduct themselves in undertaking their duties in the Council. You must meet those expectations by ensuring that your conduct is above reproach."

1.  We are very concerned that the formal decision on 1st February 2007 (on an all-Party basis) which stated that Leith Waterworld would remain open up until the new facilities at the refurbished Commonwealth Pool were open to the public was  not honoured and that an ‘Act of Council’ was not upheld. We believe that this sets a very dangerous precedent.

2.  We are very concerned that Edinburgh Leisure had not completed an EqIA regarding the closure of LWW, as per their funding agreement, prior to the decision being made in the Chamber on 22 Dec to close the pool on 8 January 2012.

3.  We wish to complain that Cllr Brock stated in the Chamber that a draft EqIA had been received, and indeed the amendment put forward by herself likewise states "that a draft EqIA has been submitted to CEC and is currently being accessed".  We have an email from EL on January 12 which states that "I can confirm that the Council have been finalising the EQIA over the last few days since we sent it to them last week." This would seem to contravene both the information provided by Cllr Brock in the Chamber, and indeed point 7 on the amendment.  We believe this contravenes the Code's advice on Honesty.

4.  We wish to complain that a decision was made in Chamber on 22 Dec to close the pool, without due regard to the Council's statutory obligations under the Equalities Act.

5.  During the course of the debate, Cllr Cardownie stated "If I had known that my words were going to be taken literally, I wouldn't of said them in the first instance". Cllr Cardownie was referring to his written amendment tabled in February 2007, and voted on by Full Council, which promised "That Leith Waterworld would remain open up until the new facilities at the refurbished Commonwealth Pool were open to the public."  We believes this comment directly contravenes the Code's advice on leadership: "You have a duty to promote and support these principles by leadership and example, and to maintain and strengthen the public's trust and confidence in the integrity of the Council and its councillors in conducting public business."

6. We wish to complain that the amendment was put forward by Cllr Brock (Leith Walk ward and Vice-chair of EL) and seconded by Marjorie Thomas (Leith ward and Board member of EL). The Code of Conduct has the following advice on,

"Appointments to Partner Organisations

3.17     You may be appointed or nominated by the Council as a member of another body or organisation. If so, you will be bound by the rules of conduct of these organisations and your responsibility for any actions taken by you as a member of such an organisation will be to the organisation in question. You must also continue to observe the rules of this Code in carrying out the duties of that body.

3.18 If you become a director of a company as a nominee of the Council you will assume personal responsibilities under the Companies Acts. It is possible that a conflict of interest may arise for you between the company and the Council. In such cases it is your responsibility to take advice on your responsibilities to the Council and to the company. This will include questions of declarations of interest.

5.3 You may feel able to state truthfully that an interest would not influence your role as a councillor in discussion or decision-making. You must, however, always comply with the objective test (“the objective test”) which is whether a member of the public, with knowledge of the relevant facts, would reasonably regard the interest as so significant that it is likely to prejudice your discussion or decision making in your role as a councillor."

We believe that the tabling of this motion by Cllr Brock and Cllr Thomas contravenes the objective test.  We believe the Cllrs were acting in best interest of EL, rather than their constituents.

7. We wish to complain about the lack of respect shown to the Splashback campaigners whilst they delivered their deputation to full council - We have photographic proof of Councillors on their smartphones tweeting throughout our deputation.  We believe that a Councillors job is indeed to report to constituents on events in the Chamber, however if the Consituents are in the Chamber they need to listen and engage with the points raised.  We believe that this contravened the Code of Conduct's advice on Respect,

"You must respect all other councillors and all Council employees and the role they play, treating them with courtesy at all times. Similarly you must respect members of the public when performing duties as a Councillor."

8.  Finally we also note that the Code of Conduct states that "Political group meetings should not be used to decide how councillors should vote on such applications, or on individual staffing matters such as the appointment or discipline of employees. It is a breach of this Code to comply with political group decisions on such matters where these differ from your own views."

We are well aware and have been advised that some of the parties met to discuss and agree their voting intentions prior to the deputation.  Again we wish to complain.

I would like the City of Edinburgh Council to look into each one of my 8 points and reply to each in a written response, with the 10 working days, as set out in the section of "how we deal with your complaints."

Yours faithfully

Freeeeeeeeee Leith Waterworld!

Check the expiry date!

The last weekend of Leith Waterowrld before the Council/Edinburgh Leisure locks the doors on Sunday 8 January.  The Councillors voted against the motion put forward by Cllr Alison Johnstone on 22 December to give Leith Waterworld a stay of execution, at least until the Commie was "open to the public" (as promised by SNP Cllr Cardownie in 2007, and agreed by full Council) and to give them time to undertake and scrutinize the impact closure would have of various user groups.

Just because the Cllrs have given up on Leith Waterworld, it doesn't mean we have.  Splashback! will continue to oppose closure, and highlight the lack of due process within the Council's decision making. The closing date for the sale has been set for February 8th. 

• We will be making an formal complaint to the Council, regarding behaviour in the Chamber on 22 Dec which we believe contravenes the Councillor's Code of Conduct.
• We have submitted requests to the Council for the full operating costs of Leith Waterworld under the Freedom of Information Act.  Edinburgh Leisure  refused to release these to us.
• We have submitted further FOI requests regarding the sale of the ground lease
• We are looking into potential breaches of due process in regards to the Council's obligations under the Equalities Act 2010, and Energy Performance of Buildings (Scotland) Regulations 2008
• We will continue to collect signatures, and hand our petition into the Council shortly.
• We will contnue to man the SUB outside Leith Waterworld this weekend during opening hours - please do drop by and see us!
• We'll be going for a swim tomorrow!

Swimming against the tide

 

Following today's decision in the Council Chambers to force through the closure Leith Waterworld...

"We are very disappointed and astonished that the Council have not been able to meet their commitment to the people of Edinburgh to keep Leith Waterworld open until the Royal Commonwealth Pool is fully reopened to the public.  We are extremely concerned that the administration have not followed due process, particularly in relation to fostering equality in the city.

Cllr Brock did not want to go into details today.  Is she, or indeed the council, in possession of the full facts?  This SNP/Lib Dem administration is making decisions about service provision for children and the disabled in Leith based on innuendo and rumour.  Over the three weeks the administration have refused to engage with the campaign and provide full and fair information.  Cllr Brock has repeatedly provided different and misleading details on the costs and the lack of consultation with the community.

There was no substantive debate on the issues in the Chamber, simply ad hominem attacks on Councillors who listen to their communities.  SNP Cllr Cardownie’s statement that he would not have made his promise to the people of Edinburgh in 2007 if he knew it would be taken literally is beyond belief. 

Can any commitment he, or Cllr Brock, now makes be relied on?  This is symptomatic of the disconnect that exists between this administration and the people of Edinburgh. 

This is the not the end.  We will continue to oppose this closure until the doors are locked.  We will now enjoy Christmas with our families and will consider all our options."