Green Party Councillor Sarah Hopewell, East Herts District Council Executive Member for Wellbeing, explains why there’s a funding crisis affecting two swimming pools at Fanshawe and Leventhorpe Schools.
I am deeply saddened by the pending closure of two gym and swimming facilities in East Herts, and I know there are lots of questions as to why and how this has happened. The short version is that both Leventhorpe and Fanshawe pools – owned by Leventhorpe and Chauncy Schools respectively – have had central government money for the pools withdrawn, meaning they can no longer afford to operate.
The government funding came from the Department for Education (DfE), and it was ringfenced specifically for school use of the pools.
Since the pending closure of the pools – especially Fanshawe – became public knowledge, there have been lots of questions, particularly around the district council’s role, why the council can’t plug the funding gap, why there has been huge investments elsewhere and what other funding sources were explored. I’ll now try and address these as best as I can.
How much was the government DfE money, and why can’t replacement funding be found elsewhere?
The DfE funding was to pay for 40% of the pool time, and it was to cover running and maintenance costs. Pools of this size cost in the region of £80 per hour to run and maintain. Consider how many school hours there are per year, and this gives a sense of the total. The loss of this money was significant, and not something either the school, district, or county council can cover with existing finances. Unfortunately, current funding for schools is extremely limited and heavily ringfenced for education. Alternative funding pots available for schools (and councils) to apply to are very limited. Both schools have been in discussions with relevant government departments to see whether there were any opportunities available, and councillors have also lobbied our MP to raise our concerns.
As to the broader funding landscape, cuts to government funding, coupled with cost of living increases means that there is much greater demand on the funding pots that do exist. Grant giving trusts and foundations which used to receive 100 applications per quarter are now receiving in the region of 700 – 800 applications per quarter. One charitable trust recently received over 1,000 applications and could only fund 25 projects. Many of the larger funding pots are now closing (there is a spreadsheet here if of interest).
Coupled with that, East Herts is not, by funders’ standards, considered an area of deprivation, making it very low on any priority list. We have been supporting the Ward Freman Pool group, who set up as a charity, to submit applications to the lottery, to the Benefact group, and to several smaller charity pots. Unfortunately, these applications were all unsuccessful, despite a highly compelling case.
If a charity (or charitable incorporated organisation) were to set up for Fanshawe or Leventhorpe, they would be also eligible to apply to charities, but again, our experience with Ward Freman shows this is not straight forward. We are also awaiting the budget announcement next week to see what possible opportunities – including the hoped-for reopening of the Community Ownership Fund – will be made available for potentially both pools. If anything is made available, we will of course be looking to see if we can apply.
Swimming is a critical life-skill. Do you not feel that’s worth investing in?
Learning to swim is an essential life skill. Swimming is also a great physical activity, good for mental wellbeing, and is accessible across the ages. And of course, keeping the population fit and active saves huge costs for the NHS and related services.
I make no attempt to justify the ins and outs of government funding. The compartmentalisation and ringfencing of funding pots is a massive challenge, and it doesn’t allow for any wider systems thinking. As councillors, we absolutely know the value of physical activity. At the same time, councils have had cuts in government funding to the tune of a 40% reduction in the past 10 years. They have simultaneously been capped in how much they can raise council tax, making it impossible to deliver anywhere near what was possible even a few years ago. To add to this, each year councils must prove that they can finance themselves that year – even though they are not told how much money they will be getting from government until right near the end of the budgeting process, making spending decisions an even bigger challenge.
Right now, thanks to a combination of global events and spending decisions of the previous administration, East Herts District Council is in a dire financial situation. All the low-hanging fruit has gone, and there remains only tough options, each of which will impact negatively on residents or businesses. There sadly simply isn’t the option available for the district council to plug the gap left by the DfE funding cut. Our main, and only, option at this stage is to look at an alternative operational model.
If there’s no money, why did the council recently invest so much in Hartham and Grange Paddocks, but not in Fanshawe and Leventhorpe pools?
Back in 2016 under the then Conservative-led administration, a review of all five East Herts District Council-operated leisure facilities took place. Of these, two – Grange Paddocks and Hartham – are owned outright by East Herts District Council, while the other three (Fanshawe, Leventhorpe, Ward Freman) are owned either by the schools or by County Council, with East Herts District Council providing operations. All five facilities were noted as being older and needing investment. However, the administration at the time felt it would be difficult to justify spending significant capital costs on facilities which they did not own, and which did not necessarily have a guaranteed future if DfE funding came to an end. The DfE funding has always been decided annually for a year at a time, making long-term planning challenging. As a result of these factors, the then-administration chose to commit investment to the two facilities that the council owned outright, whilst leaving the door open for consideration of capital investment over the following years should anything significant change. Full details on this decision are in the council papers here, item 218.
At the time of these decisions, many councils were choosing to borrow to invest in assets that could generate council money, in the hope that this additional income would off-set some of the loss of central government funding. There have been lots of examples elsewhere of councils doing this – some with success, some which then led to major issues for those councils resulting in effective bankruptcy (see Woking council and their investment portfolio as an example of the latter Explainer: The Woking case, and what happens when councils go bust – CityAM). It was this decision-making process that also contributed to the decision of the then-administration to spend on BEAM, with the aim of this then generating revenue to address the funding gap.
Unfortunately, in the six years between 2017 and 2023, there continued to be no capital investment in the school pools. Lots of external factors, including inflation, the cost of energy, the cost of Covid-19, and the cost of other capital projects, meant budgets continued to be squeezed, further limiting any opportunity for new capital investment. This has meant that not only do they now not have the DfE funding available, but both pools also need significant upgrades to have a reasonable long-term future.
OK, but didn’t you just agree a further £6 million to spend on BEAM?
Yes. The new administration arrived after the redevelopment of BEAM (formerly Hertford Theatre) was well underway. The project was first discussed in 2016 under the Conservatives, and funding agreed in 2018, with work starting in 2022. Already being 75% complete by May 2023, it was too late to cancel the project, and too late to redesign any aspects in a way that would’ve significantly reduced the costs. The options before us were to either stop and mothball (not a realistic option as this would incur huge additional costs and prevent any revenue), partially finish but not build the studio (again, a challenging one, but ultimately not a good option in the longer term), or stump up the cash to get the project completed so that it could begin to pay for itself and hopefully generate revenue in the longer term. Of the three, the third option was the only one that at that stage made any sense if we were to stand any chance of the project recouping its costs. You can see the full papers and discussion that took place on this decision here.
So where did all the money for these projects come from in the first place?
Over a period of many years, East Herts District Council received capital money from the sale of council houses under the Right to Buy Act. Money from the sale of council houses by law could not be spent on new council homes, and it could not be spent on revenue. It had to be spent on capital projects. The Conservative administration at the time chose to invest in Grange Paddocks, Hartham Leisure Centre, BEAM (formerly Hertford Theatre), and the new Northgate End multi-storey carpark in Bishops Stortford, as part of a wider scheme to develop Old River Lane including a new theatre (now on pause).
But if you knew the DfE money was always at risk, why weren’t alternative plans put in place?
When the review of leisure facilities took place, there were also discussions with Chauncy and Leventhorpe about a longer-term future. At the time, the then-Head of Chauncy was keen that free swimming be retained for school children. It is difficult to develop an alternative viable model that still allows for this to happen without DfE funding. And, not knowing for sure if, or when, the DfE funding would end, it would be difficult to arrange a contingency plan with another business for another option at an unknown time at the future.
In discussions with Leventhorpe, the school was open to the idea of providing more sessions for community use during school time. However, visitor numbers to the facility naturally began to reduce once Grange Paddocks was refurbished and reopened, again making it difficult to identify a long-term sustainable alternative model.
So the last DfE funding is for this academic year, doesn’t that mean it’s available until the summer of 2025? Couldn’t the pools stay open until then?
The DfE was clear that this would be the final instalment, and that no further money would be available for any further costs associated with the pools. As such, any costs associated with demobilisation and decommissioning would need to come from this year’s DfE grant. Both schools worked hard to explore how long they could retain the pools with the existing grants, but in the end, without any additional money being made available, and without the option of taking decommissioning costs from any existing budgets, they felt that they could only keep the pools open until the end of term. The remaining DfE funding will then be used to decommission and secure the sites.
I still don’t understand, why not put capital in the pools now to bring them up to standard so they can then be managed by another arrangement?
Unfortunately, there just isn’t any money left. I know this is frustrating and difficult, and I feel it too. While I can appreciate the rationale behind investing in Grange Paddocks and Hartham, and the reasoning behind investing in BEAM, I really struggle to think that building the new Northgate End Carpark in Bishops Stortford to the initial tune of £16m (later increasing to £20m+) could have been justified. The spend on this could easily have covered the cost of all pool refurbishments and many other community ventures. Here is a brief announcement which explains the decision at the time: Town centre multi-storey set for 13 June opening | East Herts District Council
So, you’re not prepared to reopen the pools?
Ultimately, the pools are owned by the schools, and any decision as to their future rests with them. Of course, naturally the schools do not want to see their pools closing, but they simply cannot keep them open and lose thousands and thousands of pounds each year. Likewise, the district council is required already to find £2m in savings next year alone, whilst still delivering all statutory services. There just isn’t the option of picking up this cost.
As councillors, we would love to help find a future for the pools via another solution, and I would encourage any person or business who feels they may be able to help, either towards the capital repair costs needed, or towards achieving a financially sustainable operational model, to get in touch. You can contact me via email at sarah.hopewell@eastherts.gov.uk.
More about Councillor Sarah Hopewell:
Councillor Sarah Hopewell is Executive Member for Wellbeing at East Herts District Council. Sarah graduated from Bath University in 2005 and spent the first 9 years of her career in a variety of community support worker roles working in housing, mental health and drugs/alcohol. When working as a drug and alcohol support worker she studied for an MSc in Addiction Psychology and Counselling. Since then, she has spent five years working as a Research Assistant at the University of Cambridge and four years as a Research and Evaluation Officer in Public Health at Hertfordshire County Council. She now works at Campaign for Better Transport and is a Councillor for Castle Ward on Hertford Town Council.