Community football pitches and pools could be saved from closure under new bill
Labour and Co-op MP Emma Foody is to introduce the bill - which has cross-party support - in the Commons on Wednesday
Grassroots sport facilities including football pitches and swimming pools would be protected from closure under a new bill to be introduced today.
Labour and Co-op MP Emma Foody is to introduce the bill - which has cross-party support - in the Commons on Wednesday.
If successful, it would "lock" sporting facilities by automatically designating them as Assets of Community Value.
Community groups could then be given first refusal to take them over if they are at risk of closure, under Labour's Community Right to Buy programme, to be included in devolution legislation expected soon.
It's understood the government has been looking for ways to protect community sports centres in recent months.
"Sports are the beating hearts of so many communities like mine," Ms Foody said.
"They're not just places to keep fit and healthy, they also build community pride and belonging, bringing people together.
'These spaces are so vital, but in too many communities they have completely disappeared.
'My Bill will make sure sporting facilities are properly protected and give local people the best possible chance to own and operate the assets they value most."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Keir Starmer doubles down on DWP PIP cuts as major Labour revolt looms
Most of the savings to the welfare bill will be made by restricting access to a key disability benefit - Personal Independence Payments (PIP) - in a move that has caused alarm Keir Starmer has stood by controversial welfare cuts despite facing the biggest revolt of his premiership so far. The Prime Minister insisted "we have got to get the reforms through" as he sidestepped questions over whether there would be any concessions on the plans. It comes as Mr Starmer braces for a massive revolt when Labour MPs are asked to vote on proposals aimed at slashing £5billion from welfare. Most of the savings will be made by restricting access to a key disability benefit - Personal Independence Payments (PIP) - in a move that has caused alarm among charities and campaigners. The government's own internal assessment said the reforms could result in an extra 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, falling into poverty. READ MORE: Disability cut impact could be even worse than expected warns food bank charity Legislation implementing the changes is expected to be introduced in the Commons this week - before MPs are asked to vote on the changes. Well over 100 Labour MPs have called for a delay or suggested they will rebel. Asked whether he was confident he had the numbers to get the reforms through Parliament, Mr Starmer told reporters: "We've got to reform the welfare system. "Everybody agrees with that proposition. So we've got to do that basic reform. It doesn't work for those that need support and help into work and it doesn't work for the taxpayer. "So it's got to be reformed. The principles remain the same, those who can work should work. "Those who need support in to work should have that support in to work which I don't think they are getting at the moment. "Those who are never going to be able to work should be properly supported and protected. And that includes not being reassessed and reassessed. "So they are the principles, we need to do reform and we will be getting on with that reform when the bill comes." Pressed on whether there would be any more concessions to win over rebellious Labour MPs, Mr Starmer added: "Well we have got to get the reforms through and I have been clear about that from start to finish. "The system is not working, it's not working for those that need support, it's not working for taxpayers."
Metro
2 hours ago
- Metro
Disability benefit isn't 'disposable income', says reader
Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments. Claire (MetroTalk, Thu) says the 'problem' working people have is that those on benefits have more disposable income than them. It's a fact that many disabled people have extra living costs. Many also have to supplement housing benefit payments out of their own pocket. Many more disability benefit claimants would rather work but are unable to find jobs that offer the flexibility those with fluctuating conditions require in order to make work a reality. Many of the myths about disabled benefit claimants are born of falsehoods fuelled by a downgrading of the sick and disabled, which has become prevalent in recent decades. This is hardly surprising when they're often described as a burden to the welfare state. James, Stockport Claire's view is entirely misguided. People on only universal credit have no disposable income despite (variable) allowances on council tax etc. The extra money disabled people get is to cover foreseen and unforeseen costs related to their disability and, anyway, it isn't a fortune. The disabled and unemployed are not your enemy. It's the tax cheats and uber-wealthy millionaires and billionaires funnelling their resources towards themselves who are. Deon, Barnet Of course Sir Keir Starmer is right to restore winter fuel payments to all but the wealthiest pensioners (MetroTalk, Thu) – but for political reasons. Reasonably well-off pensioners managed to get through winter without the payment but they made Labour pay at the ballot box. Pensioners make up around a quarter of the electorate and they always turn out to vote. Taking hundreds of pounds from them was always political suicide. Mess about with pensioners, find out at the election. It's a shame Sir Keir had to be reminded of this. John, Glasgow P Wright from Solihull (MetroTalk, Thu) argues that being willing to change your mind is a good thing, asking how many lives could have been saved if the British Army had done so on the first day of The Somme. His analogy is unconvincing. The fact that this 'progressive' administration did not know or care that large numbers of elderly people do not have access to generously funded workplace pensions shows how politically naive it is. The economy has barely improved since the payments were axed to all but those on pension credit so there is no financial argument to be made for reversing the cut. It is an obvious political ploy to slow the rise of Nigel Farage's Reform and has made no difference to political polling. Chris Shepherd, London Mick (MetroTalk, Thu) suggests Benjamin Netanyahu and his cabinet should watch a video of 'Israeli atrocities'. He was responding to Greta Thunberg being asked to watch a video of those carried out by Hamas on its October 7 attacks in 2023 that killed 1,200. The environmental activist and her colleagues had been detained trying to break the aid blockade on Gaza. The video they reportedly wanted to show Greta was of all the atrocities Hamas intentionally perpetrated against civilians – kidnap, rape and murder. Israel is fighting a war she did not start or want and all civilian deaths in Gaza are a tragedy. However they have been caused by Hamas using its civilians as human shields – hiding in schools, mosques and hospitals. Daniel, Milan It is a pity Greta Thunberg did not watch the video. It may have helped her to see it is Israel that needs aid for its survival. William, Bromley Further to the government allocating £16.7billon for nuclear power projects. More Trending Nuclear power won't make us self-sufficient in energy because it relies on uranium, which has to be imported. Around 50 per cent of the world's uranium comes from Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Then there is the problem of radioactive waste. The facility at Sellafield is leaking waste into the ground and is expected to do so until 2050. The vast sums that building nuclear reactors will cost would be far better spent on wave power. Roger Smith, Witham MORE: Partner of mum, 48, killed in skydive accident saw her fall to her death MORE: Three ways latest Middle East crisis could make life more expensive in the UK MORE: Emotional Jessie J vows to 'beat breast cancer' in final performance before surgery
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
Labour needs to make its priorities clear to everyone
Martin Kettle quotes a former Whitehall mandarin saying that 'the government has still not made clear what kind of Britain it is trying to create' (Rachel Reeves seized her moment – whatever the future brings, Labour's economic course is now set, 12 June). He has a point, not wholly answered by Rachel Reeves. It's the vision thing, and the ability to communicate it. It's about describing what Labour is for, in a general sense, beyond a list of policy deliverables. Growth is important, but only as a means, not an end. 'Securonomics' is interesting, but has no public resonance. If people are now unsure what Labour stands for, it is because the task of ideological self-definition has been neglected. This is unlike 1997, which was preceded by a process of rethinking that produced New Labour and the 'third way'. Something similar is needed now. There is a rich tradition of social democratic thinking in Britain to draw on, including RH Tawney's argument for equal access to what he called 'the means of civilisation' as the basis for a common culture. Pragmatism is valuable, but it is not enough. An argument should be constructed around the three pillars of security, opportunity and community that would pull together all that the government is trying to do, and the kind of Britain it wants to create. And in a way that people might WrightLabour MP, 1992-2010 I agree with Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah that the focus on investment alone will not work (Has Rachel Reeves made the right choices? Our panel responds to the spending review, 11 June). New public investments are pointless if the operation and maintenance of what already exists isn't adequately funded. After years of austerity, the quickest and surest way to raise GDP and improve public services is to ensure that we realise the full potential of what we already have. The highest priority should be to relieve the financial pressure on those delivering services, especially our severely cash-strapped local authorities. This will deliver more broad-based and higher economic growth quickly, in contrast to the central allocation of investment funds to mega-projects that will take decades to deliver results. Entrepreneurs want to live and invest in safe areas with good health and education, well maintained roads and pleasant amenities. Properly funded local authorities can encourage higher private investment by delivering that. Unfortunately, they are instead expected to implement an expensive and disruptive reorganisation and find the money to pay higher minimum wages and national insurance while receiving a settlement that implies a real-terms cut in funding. Labour needs to think FosterChelmsford According to Rachel Reeves, the NHS has been 'protected' and will receive 'a 3% rise in its budget' (Spending review 2025: who are the winners and losers?, 11 June). But will it in practice? In a recent meeting with the chief executive of the Nottingham University hospitals trust, he told us that he had been instructed to make £97m of cuts in this financial year. This would mean leading to the loss of about 750 jobs and the closure of some wards. Further, these massive cuts are the trust's contribution to the even bigger ones imposed on the integrated care board for our county: a £280m reduction in the provision for all local health services. So, which is it really, protection and a 3% rise, or enormous cuts?Mike ScottChair, Nottingham & Notts Keep Our NHS Public Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
