Kingston Council has demolished its iconic Kingfisher Leisure Centre

Tonight, at the Corporate and Resources Committee of Kingston Council, the council will admit that the estimated costs of replacing the Kingfisher (not taking into account demolition costs which have also soared) have already gone up from £40 million to £53 million and "may" rise further

What will this mean for the residents of Kingston? 

Will we ever see a new pool in the main town centre of our Borough and, if we do, at what cost?

What services will be cut and how tall and dense will new development on The Cattle Market become in order to subsidise this vanity project?

And will all Kingston residents have access to and be able to afford any new facilities? Pricing will have to cover not only development costs but also the cost of interest on borrowing and repayment of the debt the council takes on to build the centre. It will also need to generate a profit for any company tasked with managing it. This doesn't point towards a facility that will be accessible and affordable to eveyone.

MY QUESTION TO COUNCIL TONIGHT

CONTEXT

" The estimated cost of replacing The Kingfisher Leisure Centre has now risen from £40 million to £53 million and is likely to rise further. 

The planning application that the council approved for a new leisure centre has no affordable pricing agreement and no community use agreement for the facilities that it may contain.

Meanwhile, the council is predicting that, during this financial year, it will spend £4 million less on its small sites programme than forecast and delay £1.6 million of spending on vital lift compliance work in the Cambridge Road Estate. The council risks having less money in its Housing Revenue Account than the minimum needed to look after its housing and the council is at risk of failing to deliver vital housing services to its most vulnerable residents. And lastly, overspending on the schools' budget has increased even further and the deficit may rise to a staggering £15 million by the end of the current year given the council has breached the maximum deficit permitted under the safety valve agreement on a like for like basis.

The council states that it is also having problems recruiting and retaining staff.

My question is:

"How can Kingston Council justify spending so many resources - both in terms of money spent and the use of its employees' time and focus - on a major development growth agenda, including development of an exorbitantly expensive vanity project on the Kingfisher site that is already soaring in cost, when there is evidence that the council is increasingly unable to provide even the most basic services to its existing residents, and in particular the most vulnerable residents in the Borough?"