Southwark Council's "Free swim and gym" details unveiled

[BrandNewGuy]

"'Free swim and gym' was one of the flagship pledges in Southwark Labour's 2014 election manifesto.

A pilot scheme offering free access to leisure facilities for under-18s and over-60s was introduced last year.

Next week Southwark's cabinet will rubber-stamp the arrangements to extend free swimming and gym access for borough residents aged 19 to 59 with effect from late July this year.

According to a report to be presented to cabinet by Cllr Barrie Hargrove, the council will offer free access to gym and swimming for all Southwark residents all day on Fridays and during the afternoons and evenings on Saturdays and Sundays until closing time.

Southwark Council officers who live outside the borough will also be eligible for the offer.

In his foreword to the cabinet report, Cllr Hargrove cites the swimming baths opened in Grange Road by Bermondsey Borough Council in 1927.

"Built in this part of London under the guidance of Bermondsey MP Alfred Salter, he was later heard to remark by responding to complaints by his detractors about the cost of this initiative that he only wished he could make the use of the swimming and bathing facilities free for residents," wrote Cllr Hargrove.

"So I cannot overstate the degree of pride I feel on helping to lead on this initiative being delivered by Southwark Council to provide free access to swimming and gym facilities in our borough."

The launch of universal access to free swimming and gym use will be timed to coincide with the start of the school summer holidays at the end of July this year.

The cost of the new scheme has been built in to the council's new contract for the management of its leisure centres.

The contract is currently held by Fusion and a new deal is due to be approved by cabinet next week.

Last week the council confirmed that The Castle ? the long-awaited new leisure centre at Elephant & Castle ? will open in April this year."

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/8634

[Angelina]

This is very very exciting and really positive news - thanks!

[El Presidente]

waste of money

[BrandNewGuy]

Maybe, but the Council has made health and well-being a priority for the borough, which can only be a good thing. How it works in practice remains to be seen, of course, but I support the principle that people shouldn't have to pay just to keep fit.

[se22cat]

Southwark council in spending money on something which will improve lives shock.

[cella]

This is excellent and offers free sessions to the under 60s - those over 60 have had this for a while. The only concern is if Fusion are allowed to keep the contract. The statement is non committal as to whether they will continue. If they are allowed to they will need to significantly up their game and respond to customers in a different way. For instance, will they cope with large numbers of people all accessing free sessions at the same time on Fridays and parts of the weekend?

[edhistory]

> Southwark Council officers who live outside the borough will also be eligible for the offer.

Officer class only, or PBI as well?

[Blah Blah]

It's an excellent idea that will enable people on low and no incomes to genuinely improve their fitness and health. The long term benefits of that will far outstrip any cost. Savings to potential treatments by the NHS alone are worth considering. Obesity and poor cardiovascular health opens up a person to a whole raft of medical conditions that are an expense not only to the NHS to treat, but also to local support services funded by the council.

We don't do enough preventative healthcare in the UK. This is a positive step towards that.

[Alexthecamel]

Really impressive.

[ruffers]

Credit where it's due, this is a great idea.

[edhistory]

How much is Southwark Council paying the franchise holder(s) for each swim?

[Penguin68]

Actually, it's a very good idea if it's taken up by those who otherwise wouldn't exercise. The net benefit to 'society' by offering inducements to stay healthy is based on the conversion rate to healthy activity by members of that society. To pay Fusion to open the facilities free for 2 days (Friday and half Saturday and Sunday) pays back only when the societal health improves through take-up and the costs of coping with unhealthy people drops.

I hope that some monitoring of usage will be made, to check at least how many users, over time, have increased their levels of usage (and not just changed the days when they exercise) and how many new users (and not just those transferring from other, paid-for, gyms) there are.

I believe that the 'silver' (over 60s) usage has increased - will that translate down to the younger cohort?

It is a good idea, but monitoring its success is vital. And (probably) to be successful that means additional expense on (effective) publicity. 'Build them a field and they will come' maybe, but only if they know about it!

[edhistory]

Would that hold at ?10 compensation per session?

John K

[ironjawcannon]

I learnt recently at Dulwich leisure centre that Fusion have lost the contract and another company are taking over.

[BrandNewGuy]

As the article said, the contract is due for renewal/change at the same meeting. Watch this space...

[Ladygooner]

According to Fusion website, over 60's can join Fusion for ?1 and then just pay ?1 per session - can't see this cost being a barrier to those who want to keep fit?

[BrandNewGuy]

Indeed ? it's younger poeple they're after.

[Blah Blah]

Those on low incomes would struggle to even find a few pounds a week to go swimming.

[BrandNewGuy]

Hence the free provision proposed. Then no excuse :-)

[El Presidente]

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Actually, it's a very good idea if it's taken up

> by those who otherwise wouldn't exercise.

This is exactly right. And even then the cost benefit of a programme like this is much more complex than simply saying it will reduce pressures on the NHS. Running or walking round the park would have the same effect.

Making things free is good PR (as evident from the largely uncritical welcome here). But is not a sustainable policy at a time when councils have less money to spend. It's not to see it's not a nice idea with some value. But it's about priorities - ultimately I think it takes resources away from other services that are better value and more important.

[BrandNewGuy]

El Presidente Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Penguin68 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Actually, it's a very good idea if it's taken

> up

> > by those who otherwise wouldn't exercise.

>

>

> This is exactly right. And even then the cost

> benefit of a programme like this is much more

> complex than simply saying it will reduce

> pressures on the NHS. Running or walking round the

> park would have the same effect.

>

> Making things free is good PR (as evident from the

> largely uncritical welcome here). But is not a

> sustainable policy at a time when councils have

> less money to spend. It's not to see it's not a

> nice idea with some value. But it's about

> priorities - ultimately I think it takes resources

> away from other services that are better value and

> more important.

But is the cost that great? It's not much more than the loss of revenue that would have accrued during those hours under the current regime.

Yes, running or walking would also be beneficial, but in the same way simply providing libraries doesn't get people reading ? 'nudging' them by means of reading schemes, book clubs, live readings etc does. Which is how I see this scheme.

And even good ideas might also be good PR :-)

[Blah Blah]

Exactly. The gyms and swimming pools would still be open whether people were using them or not. They don't cost more to run because more people are using them. And the range of classes, activities on offer is wide ranging, so most revenue streams won't be affected at all. I would imagine Saturday and Sunday evenings are very much off peak anyway and many of the people taking advantage of the offer wouldn't go if they had to pay - so it's not really lost revenue at all. I think the cost is negligable.