Forum Topics

Gunnersbury Park Bowls Club

Some readers may have read the very sad and alarming news that the bowling green at Gunnersbury Park is to be "repurposed" as a putting green (also known as a crazy golf course).Much has changed since the incorporation of the Community Interest Company (CIC) in 2015. In that year, as part of a leisure strategy for the Park, it was stated that "the location of the bowls club and its green is seen as a positive to the scheme in terms of development of the club, membership and participation. For example use of the sports hall for indoor short matt bowls and general increase in footfall to the site. The councils have met with the bowls club committee and will continue to work together in developing these proposals."There is no question that the CIC faces formidable financial challenges, greatly exacerbated by the Covid crisis and by the fire at the cafe. However other significant problems, including the one year delay in the completion of the Sports Hub, appear to be due to poor project management rather than to bad luck.The CIC is a not-for-profit community interest company set up to manage Gunnersbury Park and Museum. The CIC is managed by a board of 6 people, supported by an executive arm comprising the CEO and other salaried staff. Amongst other things a CIC is statutorily responsible for ensuring that the company is run in a way that satisfies the community interest test. In practice, this means that it may be required to give more weight to the interests of the community than to financial returns although, like any other company, it is required to remain solvent.A matter of very significant public concern is the "democratic deficit" which characterises the CIC's activities. This is manifested in a lack of transparency, accountabilty, and reluctance to engage with the community. For example, the CIC publishes no lists of meeting dates, agendas, minutes, or agreed action points.This latest announcement by the CIC presages the wanton destruction of a precious community facility which was founded in 1931 and which could still be reinstated. It is clear that the CIC is bent on the cynical engineering of a situation whereby they hope that a planning permission for a cafe/restaurant at the bowling club pavilion will be be granted in due course.Descriptions of events over recent years have been characterised by misunderstandings, blatant misinformation and, like any other sports club, some internal dissension. At the end of its life the Bowling Club had 25 members, of which 22 were active. The Club was fully aware of the need to grow its membership, of all ages. To this end, the CIC were approached and a strategy was presented to them. A 2-year plan, allowing for completion of the new Sports Hub building, then 1 year exposure to all the visitors to the Hub, and then 1 year of open days and free training and associated publicity. It was felt that as a result the membership could easily be raised to 60 or more particularly as there were positive signs of a revival in the sport.The CIC rejected the plan out of hand.The club was given notice to quit the site by 9 January 2020. The CIC had reneged on an agreed extension of the Licence to Occupy and thereby forced the departure of the bowls club.All of those involved in the CIC's decision should hang their heads in shame. Brentford Voice wishes to do all in its very limited power to rescue the situation. To that end we would welcome any comments, suggestions, and expressions of support.Please post your replies on this Forum or send an email to info@brentfordvoice.co.uk

Jim Storrar ● 2278d11 Comments ● 2277d

Telling the truth re Gunnersbury Park Bowls Club

It is important to tell the truth, not put out CIC propaganda, so I would like to correct some of the points in Cllr Lambert's statement about the bowls club:'the bowls club was wound up by the members/committee' - trying to make it sound as if it was our decision; in fact it was forced upon us by the CIC who ordered us to be out by Jan 2020'it had 22 members of whom 12 were active' - wrong: there was a petition signed by 21 playing members who wanted the club to continue'They maintained the green themselves with some help from Capel Manor' - the vast majority of the work was carried out by the members; there was occasionally some help from Capel Manor students who in exchange benefited from learning greenkeeping skills'the lease called for them to maintain the clubhouse, however the CIC stepped in to do so at times at a cost of around £2 per annum' - three longstanding members say they have no idea where this claim came from; there was no regular contribution from the CIC, in fact no one can remember any contribution except something to do with some fire alarm/equipment'they believed membership would grow after the delayed sports hub was completed but the development is many months late' - CIC should have kept a proper check on working practices and (the lack of) progress. The delays were not our fault so couldn't CIC have waited a few months to give us a chance to grow the membership?'Most of the bowlers have moved on to other clubs or retired' - again, not because we wanted to but because we have been forced to retire in the case of those without cars who want to respect the instruction not to travel unnecessarily on public transport'It's not clear there would be anyone to fix the green' - a number of volunteers have offered to do so. Before the club was kicked out, Capel Manor offered to take over the greenkeeping provided the club was allowed to stay. The CIC wouldn't even consider it'The CIC is supposed to grow the use of the park' - how does killing off one of the park's longest-established activities contribute to that? Why could no other place in the park be found for the pitch and putt so that both activities could co-exist? 'pitch and putt mooted to attract 3000 players per year' - apart from the wildly optimistic numbers, if golf is so important to the park why was the previous pitch and putt eliminated rather than relocated?

Bela Cunha ● 2293d7 Comments ● 2278d