Leeds council bosses urged to explain savings estimates from planned bowling greens closures
Council bosses have been urged to explain how they calculated estimates for savings that would be made from shutting bowling greens in Leeds.
The controversial plans, to shut down 30 sites across the city, has been met with anger and frustration from enthusiasts.
.jpeg?crop=3:2,smart&trim=&width=640&quality=65)
They argued that green closures would unfairly penalise older people who rely on the facilities to exercise and meet friends.
But Leeds City Council said the move would save the authority £140,000, as it attempts to tackle a multi-million pound black hole in funding.
This week, that figure has come under scrutiny from bowlers who have been analysing data relating to the plans.
Rob Earl is the secretary of Kippax Bowling Club, one of the sites that is not on the list of proposed closures, having joined three years ago. He said: “The club has been running since 1928. It has served the community for a long time.
“In my opinion, it’s important for bowlers to be custodians for the clubs that have been around for a long period of time. You have to look after these things as best you can for the next generation.”
The 45-year-old has argued that closing bowling greens could add to the cost of adult social care, rather than reducing it. He has submitted requests under the Freedom of Information Act asking for further details relating to the proposal.
Mr Earl also criticised the council, arguing that its “statutory obligation” is to provide services that ensure the welfare of residents, but said that it is instead “penalising one group for the benefit of another”.
“I feel obligated to be a voice for the club,” explained Rob. “While it’s easy to say that Kippax isn’t on the list of potential closures, we have to be cognisant that if greens do close, there will be less income and that will affect the leagues.
“There will be questions about our ability to run competitive fixtures. You can’t rest on your laurels - Leeds City Council could plan more budget cuts in coming years.”
Mr Earl said that he has contacted the council with his concerns, but has yet to receive a formal response. He attended a consultation meeting on the proposed closure at the John Charles Centre for Sport, where he asked for clarity on figures put forward by the authority.
“I have pointed out that the council hasn’t broken down the figures and explained how they’ve arrived at these savings,” he said.
“Is it the labour costs? I haven’t been able to get an answer to that question. In Kippax, the maintenance teams are there around once a week - and there’s no way that it’s for more than 90 minutes. “I’ve worked it out and it just doesn’t add up.”
He added: “I’ve also spent hours going through the public expenditure data. If you ask the council how much they’ve put into actually growing the game across the city, I’m pretty sure the answer would be zero.”
Leeds City Council was asked to comment.
Also to criticise the plans was Peter Fawcett, a retired gardener and qualified groundsman, who described the move as “wrong and very short sighted”.
He said: “Public parks are where these bowling greens are, and they [would] just [become] a tip. Parks are for the public, not to make a profit.
“They are essential for heath, wellbeing and a lifeline to the over 60s. I earnestly urge Leeds councillors to stand up and vote against this hastily proposed measure that will save little money, but do much damage to many people's existence.”