Supporters of Dimensions Splash

Letter to the Elected Mayor and Council Manager
signed on behalf of SoDS

Mr Meredith, Mr Robinson

Last night, by invitation, I attended the Scotia West Residents' Association meeting, and was able to put the Community's case for keeping Dimensions Splash Pool open to Councillor Mohammed Pervez. Hopefully, he will report to you concerning the community’s case.

May I first state that while the Supporters of Dimensions Splash (SoDS) group does consist of many of the members of the Hands off Haywood High Community Group, it also represents many other sections of the community who had no interest in the School campaign. We are not jumping on any bandwagon to attack the Council, but rather are presenting the views of a large part of our Community with respect to an issue that directly affects our locality. SoDS has not, nor ever will, resort to personal attacks on individuals. Mr Mayor, you yourself stated "the HoHH campaign is a positive campaign". The SoDS campaign will be in the same vein.

We would like to contend the Council's assertion that the Dimensions Splash Pool is an Optional Leisure Facility. The history of Dimensions makes clear the fact that originally the pool was not popular, as the Community would have liked a "proper" swimming pool. However, the Community's views have changed over the last twenty odd years. The Splash Pool is now considered to be a unique attraction in the North of the City, even within the City as a whole. It is used primarily by parents and very young children, by disabled people, and by the elderly. The perception of many is that the City Council, by deciding to close the Splash Pool, is launching a direct attack on these three vulnerable groups. This is, by any standards, disastrous PR.

Stoke-on-Trent is a City of water. There are numerous canals and water-filled marl holes. Children in Stoke need to be able to swim. Yes, there are other facilities in the City, but parents are loath to take their very small children for various reasons. Some of the more obvious are:

the lack of specialist "baby friendly" changing facilities
the depth of the water
the air temperature around the pools
the more boisterous swimmers around in full-sized pools

Dimensions caters for all these concerns. It is a fun place for small children to overcome their fear of water and to learn to swim. The fact that it is a fun place does not preclude it from being considered as a serious learning facility.

Yes, there is a pool in Shelton that caters for the disabled. By all accounts, this is often crowded and is considered to be cold and dirty. Some people have also commented on the depth of the water - there is no very shallow water to cater for the less confident. Dimensions, once again, meets this need.

Dimensions is situated in an area of considerable deprivation within the City. It is a subsidised facility that has low usage costs. To force people on low incomes to travel to other facilities - Tunstall baths do not meet the needs of many - will inevitably lead to less uptake of swimming as a form of exercise, at a time when central Government is desperately trying to promote any form of exercise. Existing private facilities in the City, with their relatively high admission prices, do not cater for the under-8s, so a whole section of the population is excluded from "fun" swimming. Less proficient swimmers may be prevented from enjoying themselves due to the nature of other Council-run facilities, that is full-sized baths. Another private pool is under construction in Tunstall. As a private concern, it is inevitable that admission prices will be high, thus excluding many from a poorer background from gaining a necessary life skill and a much-needed confidence boost from a young age.

Very serious concerns have been expressed about the perceived lack of consultation with the Community about the budget plans. Cllr. Pervez has explained that proper procedures were followed, and that draft budget plans were released to Councillors on 23rd January 2008. We do not contest this. What we object to is the fact that the budget proposals, with the Dimensions closure well hidden inside, only truly entered the public domain one week before the Council budget vote. This was the first time that the public knew of any plans to shut the Splash Pool. There was absolutely no consultation on an extremely contentious issue. None at all. Not one word.

The decision to close the Splash Pool has been made on grounds of a budget shortfall. Could you please make public the accounts for the Splash Pool, and for Dimensions as a whole, for, say, last five years? Some reports say that the Splash Pool provides more than half the revenue of Dimensions. The Community does not know what figures to believe. A comparison with the viability other Council-run pools in the City would also be useful.

We also wonder how much promotional work has been done on behalf of Dimensions over the years. Proper PR, as you are aware, would increase footfall in the pool. Increased usage leads inevitably to increased revenue. If no promotions have happened, the question arises “Why not”?

A further question arises if the pool is closed: what will be the impact on usage of the rest of the complex. Do families that use the complex split their custom between the pool and other facilities? If the pool closes, will the same families still use the other parts of the building? Has there been any research on this topic. Closing the pool could conceivably cause Dimensions as a whole to become non-viable.

The situation has now arisen that there is an impasse. As we see it, there are currently few alternatives for the future of Dimensions Splash Pool:

it closes, and is filled in - not acceptable to the Community, especially when the decommissioning costs are announced - our estimates are around the £1 million mark.
it is sold to the private sector - absolutely not acceptable to the Community due to likely admission price hikes, and the loss of a community facility.
it continues in its existing form - not acceptable to the Council.
private donations are made to keep the pool open – apparently not acceptable to the Council.

In the interests of the entire City, both Council and Community, may I request that there is a "stay of execution" on the closure of the Pool while alternative solutions are explored. For instance, it might be possible that a Community Interest Company be formed to take over the Dimensions complex. This is but one suggested solution - there may be, probably is, a better one. The City Council and the affected Community need to, and must, work together to find a solution that is acceptable to both parties.

Please, Mr Mayor, do not announce the closure of the Splash Pool for the end of the financial year. Please delay for three to six months to give us all time to negotiate and reach a proper solution.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill - is not Jaw Jaw better than War War?

Yours sincerely,

on behalf of SoDS

From our local MP, Joan Walley

Dimensions is a well loved facility that is affordable and local. It is valued by all who use it. It at least breaks even and contributes towards the overheads of the gym and other facilities including the football pitches at the back. It needs investment, but we should be assessing how to secure that. We should be accessing primary care funds to help with running costs on health grounds.

Many people are introduced to sport through the pool and are signposted on to other sports.

It is appreciated by people with disability.

It is incomprehensible that a decision has been made to close it in isolation from the wider sports and health agenda affecting this constituency and Stoke on Trent as a whole. This decision flies in the face of the detailed work currently being carried out by Sport England to assess what investment is needed in our sport facilities. It flies in the face of the efforts by the primary care trust to support people with disability, to encourage people with ill health to improve their health. It flies in the face of supporting families.

Whatever reasons there were that led Stoke on Trent Council to delete the line in its budget which funds Dimensions Splash Pool they should be reconsidered pending the outcome of the Sport England Review and recommendations for future investment.

At the very least I am asking the Council to listen to the views of local councillors, and the people who use and value the pool. To listen to the people who use the linked facilities at Dimensions whose budgets benefit from the income from the pool. To take account of the appraisal that praises the contribution the splash pool to teaching swimming.

Yes, improvements are needed to Dimensions. But they could be considered under the Sports strategy action plan that will follow the main recommendations of the Sport England Survey.

I understand that there may be an unwillingness to change the decisions to close the pool because the Council may be afraid of losing face to go back on a decision already made. But real leadership is about understanding that we can't always get it right on every occasion. That lots of
people, including Sport England and residents' associations and local people and people who visit the pool from wider afield all care enough to improve participation in sport and help Stoke on Trent raise its life chances, that in the fullness of time a change of mind now will be long forgotten compared to the benefits that will result if we invest in health and well being by finding a way to keep Dimensions splash pool open and find the extra funds for improved provision.

Government's Local Area Agreements are all about joining up delivery of services to achieve long term outcomes. Dimensions should feature in this

When I was a councillor over 20 years ago in London there was a similar proposal to save money and close the Brockwell Lido in London. It was in my ward and as the local councillor I led a campaign which resulted in essential work being done, asbestos removed, and finally 20 years later, it has been upgraded to one of the finest leisure pools in the country. I could not sit back then and see my fellow councillors write it off and I cannot sit back now without doing all I can to save and improve sport and leisure facilities in my constituency.

I have asked the Council Manager and Elected Mayor for meeting to understand all the issues and I have asked the council manager to provide me with the detailed discussions and information relating to Dimensions. It is never too late and on behalf of my constituents I ask for support to find a way forward.

Yours sincerely,

Joan Walley, MP
Stoke-on-Trent North

See Joan's letter to the Council Manager here

Spacer

Extracts from a letter from a member of the
Scotia West Residents' Association
to Councillor Mohammed Pervez

I really hope you will take our concerns forward and fully consider at least a delay to this decision until it can be properly discussed with the community. The splash pool is a service whose loss will affect the most vulnerable people in our community and the people who are most voiceless. Closing the splash pool will disrupt the routine of a lot of people and it would be harder to get them back - as you said yourself it took a long time for people to start coming to the pool in the first place but now it is well used for classes.

If the health and water-confidence factors haven't been included in your considerations to date, it may well be because the council didn't fully realise what a valuable asset it was for small children, the disabled and the elderly - this is why there should have been a proper research process carried out (which appeared to be about to start in another part of the council). If you really don't think this will have a significant effect on people's health, then I don't think you have asked enough people. We all know that the limitations with public transport make it virtually impossible to get around the city if you have mobility problems and this will deprive a lot of people in our area of vital social contact.

In addition (and I know I made this point several times at the meeting but I think it is worth putting in writing), this will be a very significant breach of trust with those people who do take the time to get involved in community engagement. I can't see any justification at all for this decision being left out of consultation procedures and the elected mayor's promise of "constant engagement". As someone who has moved here and started a business here, I have assumed good faith, that councillors and the council want to involve the community more but that there have been past factors that have damaged the relationships between people and local government. I have seen improvements in the last year in the steering groups and residents associations, which have supported processes of debate and discussion, for example with Slater Street where people have been able to engage and speak on behalf of other more vulnerable members of the community in a process which will ultimately, hopefully, improve Middleport. I have tried to persuade other people to get involved with these bodies as they have seemed the only effective way to create transparent systems and ensure that we could use what little time we have to understand decision-making.

For the many people like me who have no interest in political groupings, dislike party politics and find the ballot box system meaningless and sometimes deeply damaging, we need the chance to contribute to an ongoing process of discussion and engagement in which we can trust our representatives, whoever they are, to seek out and listen to a wide spectrum of opinion and to take that forward into the work of local government. I really can't see that there was any democratic process in this decision which is far more than just a cost-saving cut. It is perfectly obvious and becoming increasingly so how popular the splashpool is and how important it is to sections of our community whose views deserve to be taken into account. If I didn't feel particularly personally affected by its closure, the complete lack of consultation has drawn me into the campaign as it is the only way people can have their voice heard when they have not been asked before the decision was made.

An element of my professional work is to try and encourage people to get involved in groups like the residents association and make sure they have their say on decision-making in the most effective way, rather than having to complain all the time, and I hope that the presence of the paper has provided one opportunity for communication which any councillor, officer or resident can use. Our Scotia West newsletter was produced by all of us using our skills as volunteers because we identified it as a way that people who can't make meetings could become involved in the work of the residents association. Putting together the grant application and doing the writing, design and print work for the newsletter series is time-consuming at a point when none of us have time at all to spare. Matching volunteer labour with small grant funding is a highly cost-effective benefit of encouraging community engagement.

It is somewhat insulting to be asked to get involved in other consultation exercises when you decided that Dimensions was not something that could be discussed with residents associations, let alone the thousands of users of the pool. It makes the residents associations just look like a token for scoring points and not a meaningful structure for engagement at all. This in the light of obviously hard work and time commitment by yourselves and officers, as well as the useful discussion we had about the PCT, is not an impression I want to be feeling.

Rushing through this particular decision when there is so much founded protest really will make me wonder whether there is really any point giving up my time to support a system in which decisions are being made behind closed doors by people who are paid for their time, with no effective engagement with the people who will be adversely affected by those decisions. We all know that is the prevailing attitude amongst many people who are more experienced than me and it will be a real shame if the mistakes made endlessly over past decades are repeated again now when there is a lot of money and opportunity to improve our city. As you heard, there is a lot of goodwill towards supporting the splashpool and working constructively towards a solution and I hope you and Mark Meredith will take up that offer. This could transform a conflict into an opportunity to involve a lot more people in making a difference to their community.

Thanks for your time in reading this lengthy email.

A letter from a member of the community to the
City Council "comments" e-mail

It's with amazement that I learn you are planning to close the pool at Dimensions and I write to tell you of my experiences there and to ask you to reconsider.

I should say I am not in the habit of sending such e mails and in fact this is the first occasion I have ever written to local government.

I have a 5 year old daughter, and, when she was a baby, friends of mine took their babies to Dimensions, and tried to persuade me to do likewise. I wouldn't as my memories of public pools were of noisy, crowded pools with teenagers throwing themselves in the water, and of changing rooms which were cold, cramped and smelly.

I was assured Dimensions was not like that and so was persuaded to try. I wasn't completely convinced so visited first without my little girl.

I could not have been more surprised or impressed.

I found the pool, changing rooms and general environment to be warm, so there was no mad rush to get children out of the pool and into warm dry clothes before they became cold. The pool itself it absolutely delightful and so incredibly well designed. There may not be facilities for serious swimmers, but everyone else is catered for with imagination, and safety issues have obviously been considered within the design. The baby and toddler sessions are a welcome opportunity to swim with your little ones without having to worry about more boisterous swimmers.

The changing rooms are such a treat ... not at all what I expected. There are large changing rooms available with room to move about, baby changer and playpens. The floor isn't wet and they don't smell of urine. This is wonderful for Mums with babies as every need seems to be catered for.

Needless to say, I took my little girl swimming the very next day and the only regret I had was that I hadn't listened to friends and taken her to Dimensions sooner.

Since then we have swum at Dimensions virtually every week for the last 5 years and the facilities have never ceased to impress me ... and as someone who has stayed in luxurious hotels around the world I'm not easily impressed!

We have had 2 birthday parties for our daughter at Dimensions, and on both occasions have had exclusive hire on a Saturday evening. These have been well arranged in advance with our various requests professionally dealt with. The staff on the night have been amazing. Never has entertaining 30 plus children been so easy and pain free! The staff were friendly and knew exactly what they were doing, making them the most stress free parties I have ever held. Such was the high standard of your staff that I think virtually every parent commented to me on how good they were. In fact other parents were so impressed that they have copied the idea and had exclusive hire for their child's party and all have said how good the staff have been to deal with.

While I'm on the subject of staff at Dimensions I wonder if you have any idea of what a wonderful group of people you have there?

In 5 years of attending I can honestly say every last member of staff I have ever dealt with has been not just efficient and helpful but always so friendly ... and I don't mean in a forced American way but rather they are genuinely nice people who must enjoy their work to be so helpful and welcoming to visitors. That applies to them all ... the reception staff, life guards, swimming teachers cafe and bar staff etc. My husband and myself often joke that there must be something in the water there to make them so good. My husband owns a large company and so knows just how difficult it is to employ good staff who will provide a good service but your staff at Dimensions consistently do this.

What you have at Dimensions in both the facilities and its staff is truly unique. So how ironic that it should be threatened with closure!!

I, of course, have no idea what is behind the ridiculous decision to close it but have noticed there's much new development going on in the vicinity so wonder whether you have plans to develop the site. Whatever the reasons behind it you should be holding Dimensions up as a Shining Beacon of what the City council can achieve, not planning to close it!

I accept the pool has probably got to the age where it needs some money spent on it to maintain it so can I suggest that you do just that? Surely the aim of any City Council is to provide good, and if they are able to excellent, facilities for the public it serves. Dimensions is doing exactly that so please think of the needs of the public you serve and keep this excellent facility open.

Thank You

A letter from an economist
who specialises in valuing socio-economic impacts of programmes
and has worked for the UK Government, the World Bank and the United Nations.

I do not understand how Councillor Pervez can say that the pool is not good value for money. The financial and economic calculations do not stack up - it is very easy to prove how Dimensions provides more economic benefits to Stoke than costs.

Firstly, it must be made clear that Dimensions is not simply an “optional leisure pool”, the big slide and rapids teach children that swimming is fun, improving their confidence in the water and it makes them enjoy the water and want to do sport, rather than sit around at home on Nintendo DS’s. Thousands of our children in Stoke are much better swimmers now because they spent their early years at Dimensions.”

Then there are the social benefits for disabled users, aqua-tots helping mother and babies bond, the clear benefits of fighting obesity and less obvious, but still very important is the fact that Dads spend quality time with their young kids, all helping family cohesion, which in turn is proven to lead to better outcomes for children.

Stoke has a relatively low level of educational achievement but research has demonstrated that sport and active recreation within the curriculum and as part of the extended schools programme impacts upon results. Government has therefore increased the demands on schools to provide for sport both during school time and after school, from primary level through to the age of 16. Why don’t City schools use the main pool at Dimensions? Any class of 10 year olds would love to go if that was an option for extended school activities – it might not be formal teaching but its activity and its fun.

These socio-economic benefits could and should be valued by the Council when determining their budget.

I don’t understand how the Council seem to have ignored Dimensions when it meets many of the goals set out in their own 2007 Sport and Physical Activity Strategy. The report says “Stoke has one of the least active populations in the country…. Sport and active recreation are seen as a key element in crime prevention. It provides positive diversionary activities for young people, and supports community integration and cohesion”.

It is inconceivable to me that an immensely popular family orientated recreation facility, with 170,000 visits per year, would be closed when a few simple measures could keep it open.

The necessary calculations are not rocket science, it is simply a matter of valuing the costs and benefits of the pool to the citizens of Stoke On Trent.

There are a number of simple options for cost recovery that the Council should consider.

With 170,000 users per year the obvious thing is to put 35 pence onto the price of a ticket, raise an extra £60,000 per year. Problem solved.
Even better for our community would be to improve the café and party facilities because people do not spend much when they’re there. Increase average spend by 50 pence per person (which is actually a very low target), and you’ve made £85,000, then entrance prices can remain the same.
Charge for parking, which would be a green and progressive solution enabling local people in Burslem and Tunstall to walk and enjoy Dimensions at the same price whilst most people would still be willing to pay a pound to park
Put in a private food franchise such as Starbucks to raise funds

The options are endless but they require clarity of thought and a willingness to listen to the people of Stoke. Most importantly are any of the 29 Councillors that voted for the closure willing to realise that this might have been a mistake?

I urge all kids and parents to sign the petition, we have to believe that local democracy is still alive and kicking in Stoke.

The Council are treading on thin ice if they include the one off cost of refurbishing the pool in their financial evaluation because this must be offset by the one-off cost of demolishing the pool, which is likely to exceed £160,000.

They have not released figures on how much decommissioning the pool will be but independent experts have said it could be over £500,000. [Note: other credible figures that we have heard are more in the region of £1 million!]

I would like to know how many of the 29 Councillors voting for it’s closure regularly use the pool with their families or actually visited the pool before the decision was made.

Comment from a pool user ...

A lady, who is a pensioner, is a weekly user of the pool for muscle toning classes and the jacuzzi. She's been going for ten years and doesn't think that it has been noted in the media how much therapeutic benefit the splash pool has for the elderly & disabled. Tunstall pool is unsuitable for her needs and she can not get to Fenton. She has signed the petition.

The Sentinel did have a throw-away line in its 6th March article: "There are quite a few adults with both physical and mental disabilities who use the pool regularly as part of their therapy. If it closes it will be really devastating for a lot of people".

So, vox populi, the voice of the people, is making itself extremely clear:

The Council, by even considering this closure, is targeting three extremely vulnerable groups - the very young, the disabled, and the elderly.

Hang your collective heads in shame!

Dimensions petition form available here

Please download, get it signed, and return it to:
Live & Learn Land
187-189 Hamil Road
Burslem
ST6 1AP

A letter from a member of the community to the Elected Mayor

Dear Mr Meredith,

Closure of Dimensions

I am shocked and dismayed that Dimensions swimming pool is to be closed by Stoke-on-Trent City Council, simply to save the £60,000 running costs. I regularly use the pool with my three kids and think that the facilities are excellent, promote family cohesion, help fight obesity and make this city a healthy place to live.

This represents a badly thought out decision by the Councillors and the Council Officers - £60,000 running costs represents just an average of 55 homes council tax for the year. The facility should be saved because it helps make Stoke-on-Trent a better place to live for families whatever their income.

Stoke-on-Trent is the only city in the Midlands that is suffering depopulation; losing excellent family facilities such as Dimensions will only contribute to the sense that the City is not a vibrant, healthy place for young families to live.

I wonder whether the Councillors and Council Officers have actually visited the pool at the weekend and witnessed the hundreds of young families enjoying themselves? I would be very happy to take them.

It is not an over-statement for me to say that Dimensions is one of the best things about Stoke. It is not simply a “splash pool”. Its got a teaching pool which is regularly used, but could be used even more with some planning, a giant scary slide, rapids and whirl pools that teach kids more about water safety than a normal pool. It’s exciting; a place Stoke’s children really want to go to. It was surely built with the intention of a regular subsidy; swimming pools are public goods with numerous benefits for society that a good council should pay for.

Water World is not a viable substitute; it is three times more expensive and is not a suitable venue for under eights. It is crowded and there are huge queues at the weekends.

Dimension’s location in the heart of Stoke means that local families that can’t afford to travel far can access it. The pool helps meet government goals of fighting obesity and providing more sport and recreation facilities in the heart of the community. Secondary benefits will be children that have the confidence and motivation to get involved in other sports not just hanging out on street corners with Alco pops.

At the weekend there are often large numbers of Dads in the pool with their kids, providing essential bonding for Dads during the weekend, which is proven to improve the behaviour of children, particularly boys in their later life. Were surveys done of users at weekends to understand how much users cherish Dimensions?

There is a general feeling amongst many parents in Stoke-on-Trent that the Council is now completely dysfunctional, that even when £2.3 billion is being provided to help regeneration it will not be spent wisely. This has been clearly demonstrated by the decision to close Dimensions Pool without really understanding how widely it is appreciated by families.

Dimensions has not been well managed, we never use the café there because the management is inefficient and the food mediocre. Last year I went to four children’s parties there, but didn’t even buy one coffee. This doesn’t mean the centre should be closed, rather that it’s management changed and the staffing revitalised. A new franchise café that took an extra £3 per adult (a coffee and muffin) attending one of the many children’s parties held at the weekend would raise £1000’s (based on 4 parties per weekend).

I do not accept that £160,000 needs to be spent on the pool, the facilities are in much better condition than other pools in Fenton or Shelton. A case can always be made for refurbishment, but I would prefer it to stay open as it is, rather than a refurbishment used as the reason to close it.

I would ask that the Council reconsider their decision and instead reduce some of the £1.25 million to be on “members ward funds” by Councillors, which given the millions already to be spend by the new North Staffs Regeneration Partnership seems like unnecessary doubling up – can Councillors really spend £20,000 wisely in their wards? I would appreciate an answer to this letter to explain why this incomprehensible decision was made.

Yours faithfully,

Spacer

Dimensions petition form available here

Please download, get it signed, and return it to:
Live & Learn Land
187-189 Hamil Road
Burslem
ST6 1AP

Spacer

A letter from a member of the community to the Elected Mayor and Council Manager

Mr Meredith, Mr Robinson,

Please take note of the following extracts from the City Council's Corporate Plan, dated February 2008.

"4. Listening to Local People
Engaging with our customers, listening to people and empowering communities is a major part of determining the council’s priorities. We use a
wide range of methods to understand what matters to our residents and businesses including market research, public forums, and strong community
engagement via our neighbourhood management teams. We are also doing a lot of work to encourage people to feel part of their community, take pride in
their neighbourhoods and get involved in decisions that affect their lives. As a learning organisation we are committed to reviewing our customer feedback".

"11. Consultation
Our Elected Mayor and Executive Members Board are fully involved in the star chamber process, which is participatory for scrutiny committee chairs and
vice chairs, and play a key part in designing, monitoring and delivering outcomes for Stoke. Their views are taken into account by the Executive
before final recommendations are made to full Council in February each year. Consultation takes place within the council via the Overview and Scrutiny
Process, but also with a wide range of stakeholders in the business community, with residents and service users, employees and unions.
Our key performance targets (national indicators) have also been widely consulted on with members, and will be considered and approved at our
Executive Members Board. They underpin the priorities of the Council, and will guide all of our resourcing decisions".

May I emphasise the following: "Engaging with our customers, listening to people and empowering communities is a major part of determining the council’s priorities" and "Consultation takes place ... with residents and service users ..."

With respect to your decision to close the splash pool at Dimensions Leisure Centre, may I enquire with which customers did you engage, to which people did you listen, which community did you empower, and with which residents and service users did you consult?

It is all very well to print fine sounding documents, but the Council has to adhere to its words, which, in this case, it patently has not.

It may be all very well to close a community facility to save money, but when, in juxtaposition, you advertise the day before for four journalists, at excessive salaries, to be employed by the Council, to probably mislead the people, a bitter taste is naturally left in the collective mouth of the community.

Gentlemen, may I suggest that you get your spending priorities right. Stop employing people to propagandise for the Council, and keep facilities that are well used by the community. If the Council were truly performing to the expectations of the people, there would be no need for extra staff in the Information Department.

Yours sincerely,

A letter from a member of the community to The Sentinel

While I accept that a smaller than normal increase in the Council Tax is welcome to everyone, I cannot help but wonder if anyone in the Council has any common sense whatsoever. To set aside £292,000 for Public Relations is idiotic, and a total waste. A massive amount of money to pay for a team of head spin doctors, not quite so senior spin doctors, and junior spin doctors, who will all put forward what the citizens of Stoke-on-Trent might consider to be a somewhat distorted view of the City (and who are, incidentally, all being paid salaries that the average citizen can only dream about).

I have an idea for consideration by the Council. Why not clean up your act so that both insiders and outsiders get a good, honest, impression of the City? After all, the truth can always be told twice; distortions of the truth are not always so easy to perpetuate. With honest, open government, you would negate the need for spin. Nothing infuriates the electorate more than being taken for fools. We can see what is happening, even if your press releases and other propaganda tell us otherwise.

As an afterthought, by not spending this enormous amount of money on falsification, you would be able to keep community facilities such as Dimensions Splash Pool open.

Think about it - it would go down very well with the electorate. May is not that far away.