Campaign to Reopen City of London Leisure Centre Dealt Blow as Corporation Refuses to Consider Motion
A proposed motion calling on the City of London Corporation to reopen the Golden Lane Leisure Centre has been rejected, sparking accusations that the authority is preventing 'democratic debate'. The motion, proposed by Alderwoman Martha Grekos and seconded by Deputy Marianne Fredericks, had received the requisite number of signatures to be tabled at the next Court of Common Council meeting on Thursday, May 21. However, it was rejected by the Corporation due to being deemed unlawful, with officers claiming a lack of detail around issues such as cost meant the proposal was not reasonable.
Background of the Closure
The Golden Lane Leisure Centre, the only state-funded facility in the Square Mile, was shut on April 30 after operator Fusion Lifestyle went bust. The closure has come under intense scrutiny from users and residents on the estate, particularly regarding the process. The Save Golden Lane Leisure Centre campaign group revealed that the Corporation knew of Fusion's financial challenges back in February. The centre hosted activities from swimming for children with special educational needs and disabilities to elderly gym sessions, impacting vulnerable groups.
Proposed Motion Details
The proposed motion read: 'That this Honourable Court resolves that officers be instructed: (a) to take all necessary steps to reopen Golden Lane Leisure Centre as soon as possible, and to keep it open until refurbishment begins; and (b) to engage with the centre's users on a genuine co-design basis when re-designing the refurbishment and to constitute the advisory board on the basis of community proposals.'
Rejection and Reactions
Alderwoman Grekos told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) that the motion was submitted in full compliance and warned its rejection will prove to be a 'massive own goal' by the Corporation. She said: 'The rejection by unelected officials of a grassroots motion that was submitted in full compliance with the City Corporation's standing orders will prove to be a massive own goal by the City Corporation. It prevents democratic debate, and thus supports the argument of those who call for the Corporation's abolition.'
A City of London Corporation spokesperson said: 'A proposed motion on the temporary closure of Golden Lane Leisure Centre ahead of our £10.4 million refurbishment was not included on the Court of Common Council agenda because, having taken legal advice, it was considered unlawful. We have a legal duty to take decisions on the basis of all relevant considerations, including costs and practical implications, and to ensure we achieve value for money for local taxpayers. This motion would have instructed officers to reopen the centre without explaining how this would work or be funded, given the operator's failure and the planned closure for refurbishment. Alternative, high quality provision is already in place a short distance away.'
Next Steps
Alternative sites have been identified, though the Corporation has said the centre will remain shut until a refurbishment is complete. This was initially intended to begin in December but is expected to be delayed, in part due to a decision to revisit the designs. Amendments were suggested to make the proposal valid, such as by instead instructing that a report on the issue be brought to the relevant committee. Alderwoman Grekos has contested the reasoning given for the rejection.
