I thought I would take the opportunity to provide some information for people as there is much talk in Penarth about these so called ‘rival’ meetings. I should add that I am not personally involved in either of these meetings so I have no reason to favour one over the other. In my opinion both are flawed: - THE PEOPLES MEETING – organised by local resident Nicki Page There is no doubt that Nicki is passionate about the Pier and its Pavilion and has run a long standing campaign against the way she believes it is being mis-managed Nicki says she has invited key people from PACL, council, funders and politicians to her meeting to answer questions from the public. Clearly people will be assuming that decision makers and influencers will be there on Monday evening. Given the wall of silence and lack of engagement with the public to date I am of the opinion that none will be in attendance which then begs the question as to what the meeting will achieve and what the outcome will be? Yes it is important for everyone to be able to express their views and this is something I have been campaigning for. However I have seen no evidence from Nicki that she has any workable proposal to take forward that could lead to the re-opening of our cinema PENARTH RESIDENTS PIER CAMPAIGN – organised by Cllr Philip Rapier In Cllr Rapier’s own words his objective in organising this meeting is to ‘present a “fait accompli” case to the Trustees for the re-opening of the Cinema in a few weeks rather than several months. The cinema proposed will be run entirely for and by the Community Membership on a Cooperative basis with the Trustees allowing “gratis” rental of equipment and the Cinema in exchange for a reasonable Profit Share . All are welcome but this meeting would be most ideally suited to those wishing to “register” and “volunteer” to help set up and manage a community cinema within the Pavilion. Depending on the response and the view of professional experts expected to attend a second meeting will be called where a democratically elected committee will be appointed. We will then be able to debate further strategy.’ In response I would say:- 1. Mr Rapier has already decided on the solution so the meeting is not about hearing the views of cinema goers on a way forward. However he does invite us to ‘come and please feel free to challenge my calculations’ 2. A community cinema along the BFI Cinema for All model is absolutely fine for small communities that do not have a full cinema and want to have screenings in church halls etc ( like in Dinas Powis). However in Penarth we have enjoyed a full independent cinema run on a ‘commercial’ model basis with a full programme of new films and specialist films in a state of the art digital auditorium. Is what Mr Rapier is proposing what we want now in Penarth? I for one don’t -although once the cinema is open again properly I do agree there is a role for a Penarth Film Society working alongside the operator of the Pavilion to maybe screen a weekly film at the start of the week when attendance is naturally lower. 3. Mr Rapier has looked at what the BFI offer but appears to have totally ignored the fact that the Pavilion is already a client of the Independent Cinema Office which puts together an excellent monthly programme of screenings and distributes the films ( www.independentcinemaoffice.org.uk). Not one person who has commented on my petition site has criticised the programme of films screened at the Pavilion. The opposite in fact! The reason why I set up this petition in the first place is because I don’t want to lose this excellent programme in the best cinema around. More than 1500 cinema goers feel the same! Why would anyone not want to continue with this arrangement? There is no evidence whatsoever that this is not viable as PACL are now suggesting. 4. The irony is that – probably as a result of this arrangement with the ICO – the cinema is the one part of the Pavilion operation that is done well. What is missing is a proper marketing strategy and holistic approach to maximising the income potential of the cinema/pavilion together ( eg café and bar, private screenings when cinema not open to the public, corporate hire). 5. In presenting his ‘ fait accompli’ he is assuming that PACL will just hand over the cinema to the community to run. There is no evidence of this at all as to date PACL have shown no intention of engaging with those of us who use the Pavilion for a way forward. They are here for the long haul so the only way change will come is by having change at the top of PACL or if PACL get to a position where they are insolvent then a new operator of the Pavilion brought in by the freeholder VoG CC and the Heriatge Lottery Fund with first charge. 6. Mr Rapier goes on to say ‘there is a need to act swiftly as rumours abound of further borrowing being considered and outsourcing to ” big business” at the Pavilion.’ I have to say that outsourcing to operators who have the skills and expertise to make the pavilion work sounds a great idea to me I hope this is useful to people in understanding what we are being presented with at these meetings and in deciding which meeting you want to go to or whether you would prefer not to go to either. In the meantime don’t forget that you can express your views to your local councillor, MP, Heritage Lottery Fund, etc. We know that these organisations are in discussions but from what I can see to date the missing ingredient is that us as users of the cinema are not included and our views not sought. That only results in rumour, suspicion and even anger and is somewhat at odds with the fact that PACL only got the project funding on the back of original community engagement and support. I have no political motivation here whatsoever. I just want the cinema back open and the Pavilion to have the successful future we know it can have. I would be more than happy to have a dialogue with those who are discussing any rescue plans. Food for thought?