Cross post from http://www.save-glasbury.org/index.php
Redbridge Councilors plan to close the Glasbury House Outdoor Education Centre. Since the Centre opened in 1963 some 60,000 young people from Redbridge have experienced the unique life-affirming (and for some, life changing) challenge and adventure that Glasbury offers.
If the Centre closes, this asset for the people of Redbridge will be lost forever. 1,000s of Redbridge young people will have this opportunity taken away from them.
All the schools that use Glasbury House agree that the quality offered by the Centre cannot be found elsewhere from commercial providers.
Redbridge Council are about to withdraw funding of around £255K and have issued redundancy notices to the staff. The Centre management have identified over £115K of saving that they can make in the coming financial year. However, they need more time to make the Centre fully sustainable. Once the Centre is closed and the house and land sold there will be no going back.
Despite the difficult financial climate for the Council the revenue commitment of around £140K for a year is small in comparison to the irretrievable loss to future generations of young people in the borough.
Schools in Redbridge have been asked to make a contribution of £1K each towards the shortfall to help keep the Centre open. Will your local school contribute?
Please join the petition – don’t let Glasbury go
More on the Glasbury Centre here.
well, the £50,000 being wasted on Town Centre
ReplyDeleteOlympic "celebrations" would much better spent
on Glasbury House and would be much more in keeping with the Olympic ethic, than a pointless town centre jamboree giving away , balloons, pencils and other trash.No doubt the
rest of the money could be raised by NOT tarting up the borough for the Queen's visit.
One has to ask why is it that money can always be found for "glory" projects, but closure is always the answer for important front line services.
This shocking proposal is clear evidence that the current leadership of Redbridge Council is not to be trusted with assets that belong not to them, but to all of us; nor are they fit to govern.
ReplyDeleteBy strange coincidence I received earlier today the response to an inquiry that I made last week of the council's Director of Finance & Resources. It was an attempt to obtain the estimated savings that would result from scaled pay reductions for all staff earning more than £20,000 together with scaled reductions in allowances paid to all councillors. The response was to the effect that it would take up to 5 days to obtain the information and he was not prepared to give this time to it. On the face of it I was being told, in effect, to get lost. But it also gave me (probably unintentially) the clear message that Redbridge (unlike many other authorities) had not even explored the effects of pay reductions - some of which have been put into place elsewhere.
In Redbridge, rather than implement pay reductions, they prefer to close services, or increase prices beyond reason, for services to children and young people, the old and inform, and the frail and vulnerable. There is another dimension to this saga. For most of the period of following the acquisition of Glasbury House its management was vested in Education. At some stage this was traansferred to Leisure that also took responsibility for community education. Redbridge Leisure is that part of the council that has intoduced parking charges to Hainault Forest Country Park and to other parks; overseen the demise of two of the borough's three swimming pools; attempted (unsuccessfully) to sell off allotment sites; and various other plans clearly not in the public interest. It has turned itself into "Redbridge Vision", made library staff redundant, formulated plans for reduced opening hours for libraries, and now comes along with this proposal. All of this comes on the watch of one officer.
Vision? More like a dreadful nightmare.
I can only agree with you, Morris.
ReplyDeleteThis Council and it's current Leadership are now proven to be Not Fit For Purpose.
How can they expect people to vote for them again in the next elections when they are responsible for crass, cruel and vindictive actions such as this?
They are not worthy of our vote - and that is the only language they understand.
Ref. Morris's point.
ReplyDeleteSomeone must have garnered some figures together in order to make the case for closure, so there must be some info somewhere. Doesn't FoI apply in this case?
If the facilities at Glasbury are as good as I remember and that "the quality offered by the Centre cannot be found elsewhere from commercial providers" then could it not be "privatised" and expand its client base into other Boroughs and Adult/Corporate schemes? Whatever your personal views are on firms of city accountants having "paint ball" weekends for "team bonding", they do make money!!
Are alternative sources of funding available as part of "Olympic Legacy"? Are there Government schemes available (perhaps Lee Scott could find out for us?)
It seems far too early to make a decision on closure and sell-off but all funding angles have been exhausted.
This must be stopped at all costs. I agree - withdraw funding for Olympics fun and games in the town centre and do NOT put up giant screens - we can watch it on TV at home. Do not spend money on tarting up the Borough for The Queen - Her Majesty would, I am sure, far prefer the money to be spent on our young people. We are no longer the London Borough of Redbridge, but The London BOrough of Sainsbury's and Pound Shops. Let them dig in their pockets and help fund Glasbury
ReplyDeleteRon. To paraphrase Oscar Wilde just a little:
DeleteThese decisions are made by people who know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
I have just remembered how keen the Council was to involve children in the original Big Conversation.
ReplyDeleteWhat an opportunity to ask them again (in their schools)! They will definitely be affected by the decision. They should have a say.
annesevant
Trying to save Glasbury House Outdoor Education Centre is of great importance but in doing so decrying the Olympic celebrations in Ilford is frankly childish. In excess of 250,000 people use Ilford Town Centre a week, the majority of which are Redbridge residents who deserve to celebrate this once in a lifetime event and comparing the monies being spent on the celebrations to a going concern like Glasbury House is ridiculous. Also telling people to stay home and watch and not patronise their local shops is dangerous advice in the current climate! Shame on you!!
ReplyDeleteYou destroy your case by your anonymity. Some of us are prepared to criticise whilst being open about who we are.
DeleteI guess you are either a councillor or a council officer. So, whatever you are (even if neither of those), then shame on YOU!!!
Sounds to me like Anon has a ton of crap memorabilia to shift ...
DeleteLeft over from 1948 do you think Weggis?
DeleteMy head on the block or guillotine!: 'The majority of which', when referring to us, residents, how belittling!
ReplyDeleteI think a more grammatically correct expression would have been, 'the majority of whom'.
If I am wrong, Morris can have a go! (or anonymous could be brave !)
annesevant
This Council appears to lack Vision. It certainly does not understand strategic vision and clearly doesn't consider the very real benefits that have been accrued and been enjoyed by many both in Redbridge and probably beyond. If the Council were to respond to questions asked about the way things are financed and in particular the impact of certain financial adjustments then people might be able to understand how and why things are judged. Glasbury might need to be managed differently. It might need partnership focus and investment by someone other than the Council. There is too much shallow thought and easy option. That is what this current ruling party are all about. They certainly are not for the public - despite all their protestations about listening and engaging. The antics of Me, me, me and ***ff the rest.
ReplyDeleteGlasbury is one of the council's most valuable assets in a sense beyond that of simple cash. It needs to be marketed beyond the educational field (although this should remain its primary purpose).
DeleteCentral council management should revert to Children's Services (the current successor to Education) and the Glasbury management should be wholly involved in decisions about its strategic management and direction. It is NOT primarily a "leisure" facility and should be removed from the myopic competence of "Vision" - an organisation with the same origins as the failed Redbridge Homes.
Anon feb 24
ReplyDelete"In excess of 250,000 people use Ilford Town Centre a week, the majority of which are Redbridge residents who deserve to celebrate this once in a lifetime event and comparing the monies being spent on the celebrations to a going concern like Glasbury House is ridiculous."
Just like Council Officers anon quotes figures, (250,000)for which there is no verification,
and anyway there is nothing to stop BID still spending the £100,000 they proposed.
Yet another one of the band whose motto is "Short Term Gain For Long Term Pain"
Morris is right. Glasbury is more than about money it is about offering something to local young people in terms of their individual and collective development. Whether money is set aside for the Olympic's is not really anything to do with monetary movement. My view is that Glasbury should not feature on any reduction/closure proposal but someone should be encouraging external partners to support it and save it from extinction. There are all sorts of heritage, lottery and the like organisations tat might be influenced by the opportunity. I am not sure I agree with myopic, Morris. That suggests some Vision albeit restricted.
ReplyDelete