Roz - if over 5,000 people sign a petition in support of retaining Forest Hill swimming pools in Dartmouth Road, it means just that. By no permutation can this mean that 82% of the population support moving the pools to Willow Way. (Using your figures) 82% of the population have expressed no opinion.
I'm not a statistical wizard but do know that interpretation is something that can be done very creatively. I would have thought that given that it is probably impossible for 82% of the local population not to have encountered the petition which, whatever one's opinion of the matter, has itself been an extremely successful venture, then a considerable number must have consciously decided not to sign it.
I would therefore feel comfortable in concluding that a significant proportion of the 82% 'non signees' were in fact also expressing an opinion and perhaps very strongly. I don't think its correct to suggest that they were not.
I think it is highly unlikely that the petition has been seen by 30,000 people. Nowhere near that number of leaflets were printed and it is difficult to imagine that a small gorup of activists have managed to speak to 30,000 individuals. So the idea that 82% of the population have actively chosen not to sign the petition is possibly the most misleading thing I have seen on this thread.
It is my belief that most council officers, most elected representatives, and most residents would prefer to see a pool on the Dartmouth Road site. Despite this most people voting for one of the two options that the council have provided will end up voting for swimming at the earliest opportunity and therefore for the Willow Way site, despite there being little desire to move the pool. Unfortunately residents are not allowed to express their view on site and on timescale independently.
The petition attempts to get round this by allowing people to express a view on an early return to swimming on the Dartmouth Road site - I think it is a shame that some people actively oppose this option and try to pretend that they represent the majority.
But the biggest shame is that rather than discussing the issues of where and when a pool should be built, that both sides (including me) end up quibbling over statistics and methodology.
Misleading perhaps, which is why I said' significant proportion of'.
Plenty of quibbling going on already about the formal consultation process, Michael! If thats not over statistics and methodology I don't know what! There have been claims for significant public support of the retention of the pools on the existing site ( the people have spoken?!) and I for one see no reason to be prevented from discussing the merits of such claims. You are however probably correct in saying the desirable state is to retain swimming on Dartmouth Road and its certainly more preferable for my family but what I still find lacking in this debate is a grasp of whats going on on the public spending front and the issues that Councils have to deal with. Many councils country wide are cutting their budgets drastically as the squeeze on public expenditure hits home hard and is destined to get much worse over coming months. Cuts in income lead to reduced gearing ratios and more expensive borrowing. I know of one Council which has suspended all its Building Schools projects as a result , perhaps indefinitely. And thats a key service impacting on school places provision.
My concern here is that we need to face economic reality and weigh up very carefully whether a pool in the wrong place is less or more desirable than no pool at all within the forseeable future. Given the situation I am very doubtful whether the Council will have the means to deliver any sort of pool anywhere in the next decade. However the debate seems instead to focus on political skullduggery and vote catching in the Mayors Office rather than the need to justify expenditure for a facility which is not an essential service.
Someone below mentioned consideration of short term gain issues taking precedence; if this is the general thinking, I don't actually for a moment think that the Mayor is trying to get a pool on WW asap to win votes in FH. He knows as we all do that Labours influence has dropped significantly in FH therefore there is nothing to be gained. If he wanted to boost his chances here he would be promoting Dartmouth Road. But then he lives here and regardless of what people think, this is probably means a more visibly stricter stance from his office.
Hmm, but Labour's influence has dropped in FH largely due their fumbling with our pools.
Pools are significant factors in local elections.
If they get the basic facilities back then locally the slate will be clean and responsibilities met as far as I'm concerned.
never had any one contact me or ever come accross anyone asking my thoughts or to sign a petition to get the pools re opened or moved!!!
The pools were horrible and needed an overhaul but this has turned into a huge mess, it seems that there are no decent swimming pools in or around SE23
There has been a petition in the Dartmouth Arms for a while. Dont know if its still there - but Ive been stopped and asked by people to sign outside WH Smiths on Sat mornings a couple of times over the past month or so.
Crystal Palace Pools have just opened again after closing for the asbestos problems they had (though Ive not been yet, and they're in Bromley not Lewisham) - and for me thats closer than the next best option (which I have been using) of Ladywell Leisure Centre - which is a 25 minute bus ride away.
Not sure where you are but I get 75 to Penge Sainsbury then either walk ( about 10 mins ) or get 358 , 227, 194 or one or two others.
Or get 194 from Sydenham Road .
As I say no idea where you are and possibly Ladywell could be more convenient for you but really impressed with Beckenham
Thanks Brian. I can easily get to Penge, so a 10 mins walk is not too bad. I've been to Beckenham before and it's a really nice pool. If I have to put myself out, I'd rather go there than Ladywell, which is horrible and smelly from my memory of a few years back.
For me the downsides of the Bridge is that its smaller and there is less opportunity to do laps. Its hard enough at Ladywell (with the timetable forever changing and limited lane swimming) - but at least with a 33m pool you get a little bit longer before dodging people at each end.
Thought you might like to know St. Dunstan's School Pool is open to the public most weekday evenings - Tuesday to Friday, 8:30 to 10:00 (I think). ?4 a go which does seem a lot to me, but the convenience may suit Perry Vale/Blythe Hillers.
I wonder if Sir Steve & his cronies are beginning to worry about the responses they are receiving to the "consultation" document and are trying to get different responses by other means?
I have just had a telephone call from a company acting on behalf of LBL wanting to ask some questions about Forest Hill Pools. However they said before continuing they had to ask if I rented my property from the council or the housing association (something about making sure they were receiving answers from a cross section of the community). As soon as I told them I didn't they didn't want to go any further!!
A number of people have received calls and this was always intended to be part of the process of consultation. Clearly they are having difficulty getting input from people in social housing and have already met their quota of those in private accommodation, so they are not interested in your view. The council will have set targets for both groups to make sure their consultation represents all parts of Forest Hill, Perry Vale and Sydenham.
All of this is part of the standard process for telephone surveys and there is nothing sinister in the methodology, only in the options that are being put to people and the lack of information available to people surveyed by phone.
A friend of mine was phoned by the telephone survey team and asked whether she had any children aged 9-14 in her household who they could interview.
Children of this age simply aren't in a position, nor should they be placed in a position, to answer questions on issues such as this which will determine the spending of millions of pounds of taxpayer's money.
In general and local elections, we require that all adults should be over the age of 18 to take part because we believe they are too immature to fully weigh the options. Why is it any different here?
Just wondered if you could give me a quick ring today or get in touch about this idea that the council are phoninh kids as part of this consultation. Sounds bizarre. I might ask the council whether this is true.
Surely the first question these 'tele-survey' people should be asking is whether you have responded to the survey yet? I dont remember the quesionnaire asking if you lived in Council owned accomodation, so how would they know if this section of the community is fully represented?
In any case, I fail to see why socially housed people's views should be any less or more important than someone who rents from the private sector or has a large mortgage that they may be struggling to keep? What has this got to do with making swimming available for public use in Forest Hill?
Under 14s are the only group likely to see a pool built in their lifetime, and more seriously they are more regular swimmers than any other age group.
Their views should be taken seriously, but they should have all the facts at their disposal, and I do not think the telephone survey does this. Pupils at Forest Hill School recently made a short news report for the BBC about the pools which can be viewed at http://www.foresthillsociety.com/2009/04...eport.html
Getting the views of all sections of society is important rather than having 90% of responses from 2 year olds living in social housing. This is one aspect of good practice in survey methodology even if, when you get the call, it all seems a bit suspicious.
One for the conspirators - Do you think that the council renamed the ward from Horniman to Forest Hill when the boundaries were redrawn in 2002 just so that they could say that Willow Way was in Forest Hill? (Forest Hill ward used to be located on the other side of the tracks and is now part of the Perry Vale ward)
Search
Help
