Lidos are good for people's health and well-being.

South Lakes Labour members recently voted to support the campaign call for the restoration of the currently derelict Grade 2 Listed Lido at Grange-over-Sands which LibDem controlled South Lakeland District Council has left to rot since they closed in in 1993. That this is a disgrace is incontestable, that the Lido could be restored for swimming with additional facilities is provable, and that it could therefore be a major attraction on Morecambe Bay is credible.

Outdoor swimming has become hugely popular and Lidos are seeing booming business across the country - Ponypridd Lido in Wales, which opened in March this year, has seen more than 64,000 visitors already (an average of more than 500 per day). Most Lidos were built in the 1920s and 1930s to help promote good health and well-being for working people, a role they can still perform today, along with boosting local economies, providing employment, supporting social inclusion and community, and attracting both day and longer stay visitors. A restored Grange Lido would become another really good reason to come to the Morecambe Bay area.



The campaign group Save Grange Lido has set up a petition calling on SLDC to abandon its planned infilling of the Lido with concrete (which would make it just a flat extension of the existing Promenade). It is known that people are willing to travel considerable distances to swim in Lidos, and Grange is the only remaining coastal Lido in the north of England. It would be a tragedy if it was destroyed. 

The petition is now approaching 10,000 signatures (currently 9417), and the target is to hit 10,000 ahead of the presentation to SLDC. There is also a paper version in many shops in Grange, and surrounding villages which so far has almost 500 signatures. A petition with more than 1,000 verified local signatures (i.e. those of people who live, work or study with the SLDC area) will be discussed at a full meeting of the Council.



With the coming of the Eden Project to Morecambe the focus will be on regenerating tourism in the whole bay area, to the benefit of communities both sides of the county border. If readers could please share the petition and encourage signatures that would be wonderful, the local signers guarantee the debate at Council, those from further afield demonstrate support for restoration of the Lido as a tourist attraction with a wider catchment area. Thank you.

https://www.change.org/p/south-lakeland-district-council-save-grange-lido

Petitions that get results...

Following on from yesterday's post about the use of petitions, I was pleased to receive a response from my local authority, South Lakeland District Council, in respect of a petition on care2.com that I signed back in June of this year.  The petition "Stop housing discrimination against homeless people with pets" called for a rethink in the way that homeless people with pets are dealt with, and a copy of the petition was sent to each local authority.

The response from Cllr Graham Vincent, the council's Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, thanked me for raising the issue and explained the council's position,  insofar as housing homeless persons meant they often had to share accommodation (I presume this means hostels) and that having pets in such places was not appropriate so the pet was kennelled overnight (presumably at the council's expense.) He also referred to families escaping domestic abuse and that having pets housed with children is not always appropriate.

Cllr Vincent went on to explain that the council was currently revising their housing strategy and that this issue would be looked at as a part of that review, and that he will raise the matter at the regional Homelessness Forum to see if there are other options which may be better.

I have to say that I am delighted to have the reply from Cllr Vincent, and his assurance that he will look at this again.  I shall respond to him and make some comments and suggestions which I hope he may find of use.

Whilst I understand the reasoning behind the council's stance, I do feel very strongly that where a homeless person has been sleeping on the street and their only companion has been a dog, that it is wrong to separate person and dog as part of the rehousing issue. The dog is a vital part of the well-being of that person, possibly their only friend or companion, and once parted both will suffer.

The same can apply to families - if children are forcibly separated from their pets due to homelessness / rehousing, it can simply add to their trauma. Maintaining the continuity and stability of the good things in a child's life is essential when they are faced with domestic violence or abuse issues, as it will help them to cope with the huge changes they are going through.

If the current method of housing homeless persons does not allow for them to keep their pets then we really need to be rethinking how and where we rehouse people.  It's difficult enough being homeless without the distress of losing a loyal and trusted companion also.  I look forward to hearing how my local authority will progress this issue and hope they will be brave enough to consider some alternatives to the status quo.