Death by a thousand cuts?
and club sponsor - First Step Finance - were staging a protest match. A far cry from the traditional bowls setting of peace and pleasantries, Chapel Street’s disgruntled members were on song to voice their anger over the proposals by Manchester City Council to close the club’s crown green, as part of its cost-cutting exercise, to slash more than £80m off its budget under the Government’s austerity measures. The pensioner bowlers played for most of the day on the artificial green and invited the council to turn up to justify their decision on the cuts, and to react to claims by the club’s members that cutting services like this were not only unnecessary but represented a case of the council simply picking soft targets that they expected the least resistance from. Chapel Street Bowling Club, which is
likely to either close or be amalgamated with nearby Greenbank Park, is not the only club facing the axe under Manchester City Council’s proposed cuts. The plans to save the estimated £7,000 a year that the council says it costs to maintain each surface will mean that either Fog Lane Park’s green, or the two at Ladybarn Park in nearby Didsbury, will also be scrapped, along with Clayton Park and Delamere Park in Gorton, while Highbank Park and Didsbury Park are set to have one of their two pavilion buildings mothballed.
The
council has also revealed that one of every two bowling greens in Brookdale Park,
Newton Heath; Debdale and Delamere Parks in Gorton; Hollyhedge Park in Sharston; Didsbury Park; Platt Fields in Fallowfield; and Highbank Park will be turned into either playing areas or flower beds, which paints a bleak picture of a city that has, for generations, enjoyed a rich bowling heritage. Whilst the protest proved a brave move by the club, and one claiming the support of John Woodcock, conspicuous by their absence were council representatives who steadfastly stayed away, offering no comment on or reaction to the bowlers’ pleas. Instead, the club has been challenged to suggest a series of solutions to the council, which it will consider. A date of 5 June was set as the deadline for those proposals to reach the council. Since the protest, Manchester City Council have offered this statement by Councillor Mike Amesbury, Executive Member for Culture and Leisure; “We are working to maintain the best possible public access to bowling greens within
the constraints of our reduced budget. We have brought forward proposals to provide facilities for bowling clubs in a more efficient and sustainable way. These are only proposals at the moment and consultation continues. In most cases there will be little or no change to existing provision.” Yet, the future of Chapel Street’s crown
green remains in doubt. The resolute stance of the members has sought to raise the issues of a sport that seems in mortal danger of dying out across swathes of the UK, due largely to the double whammy of running costs and dwindling member numbers. This begs the question whether it is a viable sport in such testing economic times, taking into account the high levels of maintenance needed to achieve the standard of surfaces it demands. Running in parallel with the maintenance quandary are the financial constraints and concerns over shrinking support. Numbers continue to fall, even in the south, in one of the hot spots for
“Allowing clubs to be turned over for development would deprive many older people of their only activity and would break up the social networks that build up around the sport”
John Woodcock, MP for Barrow-iin-F Furness
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148