BEST VALUE REVIEW PROGRAMME

All local authority departments are subject to Best Value reviews. They were introduced to help ensure the public was being provided with efficient and effective council services. Derby City Council's Best Value Review programme began in 2000 and, like other local authorities, it has a duty to improve the services it provides by 2005 and to report annually on its progress.

Derby City Council is to spend £40,000 on external consultants to review its sport and leisure department which covers sports centres and facilities, sports development, community centres and play schemes, and health and fitness initiatives in the city. The council runs six leisure centres: Shaftesbury Sports Centre, in Shaftesbury Crescent, Normanton; Queen's Leisure Centre, in Cathedral Road; Moorways Leisure Complex, in Moor Lane, Allenton; Springwood Leisure Centre, in Springwood Drive, Oakwood; Lancaster Sports Centre, in Chapel Street; and Derby College Sports Centre, in Prince Charles Avenue, Mackworth.

A report on the Best Value Review by council officers was submitted to a council cabinet meeting earlier this month but Labour's former cabinet member for recreation, Councillor Martin Repton, has hit out at the proposal by the new Tory and Liberal Democrat ruling alliance, calling the review a total waste of resources. The review would see external consultants work with chief officers in the council's leisure department to determine in what ways money could be saved. Leisure and cultural services cabinet member Councillor Paul West said two firms were in the running for the contract to conduct the review.

Mr West said Mr Repton's claim was 'a bit rich'. He added, "I think I can justify the review by Mr Repton's inactivity and ineffectiveness as a cabinet member. He may have looked at a few ways of saving a few pounds here and there, but I would not say he looked at effective savings. The review will be worth it as long as we act on it." Mr Repton said many internal reviews of spending had been carried out during his nine years in charge, but the leisure services budget was very tight. Under Labour, the budget for 2003/04 was increased by 16.9 per cent to £8m a year to avoid service reductions and fund part-time workers' holiday pay and pay for security guards.

The report said the review would consider a range of options, including the possible redevelopment of sports facilities. Mr Repton said the phrase was a 'euphemism for cuts'. "If there were easy ways of making savings they would have been done," he said. "The conclusion I drew was that to make any savings you would have to effect the viability of the leisure centres or introduce controversial charges, for example for summer play schemes." But Mr West denied the council was considering either reducing the quality of the service or raising leisure centre admission charges.

Andrew Flack, the council's director of education, said since 2000 Best Value reviews had been carried out across the council each year. In February 2002, the council's education department was criticised by Government inspectors after it carried out a best value review of its schools' computer service. The review did not cover curriculum support and the inspectors felt that the review had not been carried out properly.

Once again we have outside experts auditing services for so-called "best value" and then advising on how to cut costs, whilst no doubt charging a fat fee for the service. Meanwhile we see parks, where there has been an incident of iron fencing falling on a child recently, and other public buildings not being regularly maintained. This ends up with buildings being demolished or sold on because they become too expensive to maintain. The knock-on effect of this is that fewer people avail themselves of the facilities, thus perpetuating the belief that they are not required.

One example I am aware of where questions of funding are a constant issue is Moorways athletics stadium. This once proud stadium, suitable for full international matches, appears to have suffered at the hands of the city council. This has resulted in damaged and missing seating not being maintained or replaced and the security of the site being compromised on a regular basis by the vandals in our midst. These vandals regularly gain access through insecure fencing and gates causing problems for athletes.

Poor maintenance may even have been responsible for an incident at a recent British Athletics league match. We had a pole vault competitor narrowly escape serious injury when he fell through the bed on to concrete after a four-metre vault. Another incident resulted in major repairs to Moorways swimming pool after structural problems caused major concerns. On the good side, the disabled athlete is now being catered for with access lifts and some repairs have been made to the track.

However, the positioning of the trackside lift has raised concern amongst athletes, since it obstructs a walkway and rows of seating. Thanks must go to the small crew of dedicated ground staff and management who try hard to maintain facilities. When will the city council realise it needs to invest in facilities suitable for all? What we need in Derby is a strategy of promoting a wide range of physical activities and giving children and adults the opportunity to use those facilities in safety.

Who knows, we may find future world champions out there that may not be aware of the facilities that are available to them because of lack of promotion and funding. We also need to see Derby promote its sports facilities such as Moorways more actively, as other cities such as Sheffield and Nottingham do, rather than accepting the defeatist attitude that we are second best, so why bother? K. Winson