chem1st Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16656288 Why not temporarily rent a public field/park? Value for money Paul Edgar, a qualified fitness instructor, said it costs him £1,000 to work across four parks in Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Gateshead. He does not think they represent value for money. "The lighting is poor - parts of the park are totally dark in the winter. There's glass sometimes, there's rubbish I have to clear away. "I'm trying to do a positive thing… but I'm getting penalised for that," he said. But Tony McKenna, head of leisure services at Newcastle City Council, defended the charges. He said the council had a duty of care to everyone who used parks. "We just think we've got to take a sensible approach. We've developed the charge with the personal trainers to make sure it's affordable and equitable. We don't think it's a particularly high charge." I could 'buy to let' a public park and charge children to play football. The council/private sector is missing out on some money here! 50p an hour each? Five a side for a fiver! How much should we charge our children to use the public parks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16656288 Why not temporarily rent a public field/park? I could 'buy to let' a public park and charge children to play football. The council/private sector is missing out on some money here! 50p an hour each? Five a side for a fiver! How much should we charge our children to use the public parks? You could charge for coaching them, since that is what is being reported. The fees are for coached fitness sessions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 20, 2012 Author Share Posted January 20, 2012 You could charge for coaching them, since that is what is being reported. The fees are for coached fitness sessions. And the council charges the coach. Suppose they charge a coach who does not charge the children, or one whom charges them only for travel to and fro competitions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 And the council charges the coach. Suppose they charge a coach who does not charge the children, or one whom charges them only for travel to and fro competitions? They choose not to, presumably because there would be a massive outcry if the council were charging people to use public spaces. They only charge people who are trying to make a profit out of using public spaces - licences for ice cream vans, fees for professional coaches and fitness trainers, and so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strix Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 the fees are for rental for him to carry on a business I'm in two minds about this, as I think people should be encouraged to use the open spaces they've paid council tax to maintain (so in effect they're paying twice for using that land), but where do you draw the line? What should or shouldn't be allowed free of charge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 If you are carrying out business and making a profit, it is only right and proper that the council should charge for this. After all, shops pay business rates, market stall holders pay rent. Voluntary and charitable groups don't get charged, as far as I know. That is also right and proper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 The fitness instructors are effectively using public spaces as their business premises. If they can make a contribution to the upkeep of the public space, and still make a profit from their customers, everybody's happy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 There is a utilitarian argument, in that helping people exercise and keep healthy is also a good for everyone. The business of the fitness instructor has benefits beyond his own profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgksheff Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 My existence gives all instructors a resource. Let them pay me to access that market. Eh? May be right but who cares? Councils spend money to maintain open spaces including sports areas. The best example is Football Pitches. The have to be maintained and marked out to specified costs and users pay a (very subsidised) fee to use them. Why shouldn't any other professional user be charge as well? Why doesn't he have the confidence in his business to contract a space for his use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 20, 2012 Author Share Posted January 20, 2012 They choose not to, presumably because there would be a massive outcry if the council were charging people to use public spaces. They only charge people who are trying to make a profit out of using public spaces - licences for ice cream vans, fees for professional coaches and fitness trainers, and so on. What if a European pitches a tent? Europeans are welcome to come here, but we have not enough accommodation for our own, let alone them, they are not sleeping rough for a profit. Perhaps during the hours of darkness we should allow them to pitch tents, and during the day our children can play fussball? Between change over times, dogwalkers could be allotted a 1 hour time slot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.