Consett Empire reduced hours 'protects venue'
Cutting the opening hours at a theatre and cinema will protect the venue's "long-term future" and ensure public money is not wasted, a council has said.The Empire in Consett will trade one day fewer each week under proposals from Durham County Council.Customers and opposition councillors have criticised the plan, pointing out £470,000 was spent last year on roof repairs and describing the venue as "an asset, not a problem".But Liberal Democrat councillor Elizabeth Scott said increases to national insurance and a "very low take up" for some shows meant changes were needed.
As well as being a theatre, the 500-seat venue shows new films with the nearest alternative being 12 miles (19.3km) away in Gateshead.The cinema and café currently opens from Tuesday to Saturday between 10:00 and 15:00, but under the council's proposals it would shut completely on Tuesdays and open for an hour less on the other days.
Empire customers Janice and William Ringer, from New Kyo, Stanley, said they feared reduced opening was a step towards a complete closure.Mr Ringer said: "Think of the money they've just spent doing it up and they [the council] go and do tricks like this... it's criminal."Ms Ringer said the venue was "always busy" as it was currently able to show "some really good shows".She added: "It's disappointing because if it does close, it's something lost from the area."
'No-one visits'
Scott, a cabinet member on the authority run jointly by independents, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, said the council had "invested hundreds of thousands of pounds to make sure that we can continue to offer a fantastic programme of shows and cinema at The Empire"."We've actually just had the most successful pantomime ever at Consett Empire".She claimed "most theatres" in smaller towns were not open every day, but blamed "massive hikes" in national insurance under the Labour government and low audience numbers for some events on the decision."We are doing the right thing to protect the long-term future of the theatre and ensure the council isn't wasting taxpayers' money opening the venue on days when no-one visits."
Labour's Kevin Earley said the council should "look for different ideas" and explore all options to "make it viable" instead of reducing its hours."It's a much loved, cracking little theatre for the community and it has a very good reputation," the opposition councillor for Benfieldside said."If it starts getting less people going through the doors it becomes more difficult to justify what you're spending keeping it open."The budget issue doesn't mean just give up and cut, you have to look at this and say this is an asset, not a problem."
Follow BBC North East on X, Facebook, Nextdoor and Instagram.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
24 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Around 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote against ‘unsafe' assisted dying Bill
But in a letter, published this week, doctors from across the NHS have urged lawmakers to listen to those 'who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill'. They warn the Bill 'poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'. In its current form the proposed legislation, which applies only to England and Wales, would mean terminally ill adults with only six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel. Last month, MPs approved a change in the Bill to ensure no medics would be obliged to take part in assisted dying. Doctors already had an opt-out but the new clause extends that to anyone, including pharmacists and social care workers. Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years. The letter to MPs said: 'As experienced medical professionals who regularly work with dying patients and who have reviewed the worldwide evidence on assisted dying, it is our opinion that this Bill poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce, and we urge you to vote against it. 'We are concerned that the private member's Bill process has not facilitated a balanced approach to the collection of evidence and input from key stakeholders including doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups. 'This Bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe. 'This is the most important piece of healthcare legislation for 60 years and we urge you to listen to the doctors who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill.' Sir Ed Davey welcomed the letter on Monday, telling Sky News he had 'real concerns'. 'I have voted against this assisted dying legislation, as I did on previous occasions,' the Liberal Democrat leader said. 'I have real concerns about the pressure on individuals, that they will put on themselves, if they think they are a burden on their family, so I welcome this letter.' He added: 'I hope, as time has gone on, as the arguments have been better exposed, that MPs will switch sides and join the side that I and many MPs are on.' But Sir Chris Bryant said he would be voting in favour. The technology minister told Sky News: 'The Government doesn't have a formal position at all and individual members are free to choose how they vote. 'I'm not going to hide my own personal preference. I abstained on the first time round, I decided I wasn't going to vote because I wanted to hear the debate. 'I have listened to a lot of the debate. Of course, I don't want anybody to feel that they are a burden on society and that should lead them towards taking their own life, but I also have heard the cries of people who are absolutely miserable, and that's why I will be voting for the Bill.' Some of the Bill's opponents have urged MPs to focus on improving end-of-life care rather than legislating for assisted dying. Ahead of last month's Commons debate on the Bill, two royal medical colleges raised concerns over the proposed legislation. The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) said it believes there are 'concerning deficiencies', while the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) said it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the Bill. People with terminal illnesses, surrounded by loved ones, display their dying wishes on tags outside the Palace of Westminster in London to urge MPs to support the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Jas Lehal/PA) Opinions among members of the medical profession remain varied, with TV doctor Hilary Jones describing assisted dying for the terminally ill as 'kind and compassionate', adding that he would help a patient to end their life if the law was changed. The GP, often seen on ITV's Good Morning Britain and the Lorraine show, told the PA news agency he believes medicine will go 'back to the Dark Ages' if proposed legislation being considered at Westminster is voted down. While Friday is expected to see debate on further amendments to the Bill, it is thought a vote on the overall legislation might not take place until the following Friday, June 20.
New Statesman
an hour ago
- New Statesman
Rachel Reeves wants to teach her critics a lesson
Photo by Hannah McKay -. The toughest job in politics is usually said to be the leader of the opposition – an impression that Kemi Badenoch's tenure has done nothing to dispel. But it is arguably rivalled by that of chancellor. Every incumbent since the 2008 financial crisis has faced a version of the same dilemma: the UK is a poorer country than it once expected to be. At last year's Budget, Rachel Reeves escaped her fiscal straitjacket through two manoeuvres: she raised taxes by £41.5bn and loosened her debt rules to increase investment. The Spending Review is the moment at which the Chancellor gets to distribute the bounty that resulted. Reeves has already launched a pre-emptive strike against critics who liken her to the flinty George Osborne. A graph shows how Labour's spending far exceeds that planned by the Conservatives before the election (one aide calls it 'the honesty chart'). This isn't just spin: Reeves intends to increase day-to-day spending by £190bn – the biggest real-terms rise since Gordon Brown occupied the Treasury in 2000 – and capital investment by £113bn. Austerity this is not. But two things can be true. Yes, overall spending is rising by £303bn but some must lose in order that others may win. The latter includes the NHS – which has secured a 2.8 per cent real-terms rise – and defence (even if plenty regard 2.5 per cent of GDP as inadequate). Ed Miliband's energy security department will enjoy a large increase in capital investment including on nuclear power (allies point to the Energy Secretary's long-standing support for the sector as part of 'the sprint for clean energy abundance'). Other departments, however, face average real-terms cuts of 0.3 per cent to day-to-day spending. Hence the fraught negotiations of the last week. Angela Rayner – that former trade union negotiator – reached a settlement with Reeves last night having warned that cuts to affordable housing would render Labour's target of building 1.5 million new homes impossible. Yvette Cooper – who knows her way around the Treasury as a former chief secretary – is still holding out. After public dissent, the police will receive a real-terms increase but this will entail cuts to other Home Office areas. Last week I detailed Andy Burnham's rhetorical fusillades against the government. This week it's Sadiq Khan who is unhappy, with concern inside City Hall that Reeves will announce no new projects or funding for London at the Spending Review (key demands include Docklands Light Railway and Bakerloo line extensions, a tourist/visitors levy and a significant rise in funding for the Met Police). 'We must not return to the damaging, anti-London approach of the last government, which would not only harm London's vital public services, but jobs and growth across the country,' one person close to the Mayor tells me. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Here is further evidence of why some inside government believe that Reeves needs an 'economic reset' – abandoning her tax lock or further loosening her fiscal rules. But the Chancellor will have a message for such critics in her speech, which aides describe as a chance to 're-educate' these errant foes. Rewriting the UK's fiscal rules, Reeves will warn, would not be a cost-free choice, but one that would entail higher borrowing and higher mortgage rates. An ally speaks of a 'terrifying' gap between a commentariat that pleads for more taxes and more borrowing, and a much more sceptical electorate. 'They think we tax too much, they think we borrow too much, and a lot of people probably think we spend too much.' The Chancellor is seeking to pull off a tricky double act – assailing those who accuse her of austerity while reassuring those who fear Labour profligacy. This week will test whether she can keep her balance. This piece first appeared in the Morning Call newsletter; receive it every morning by subscribing on Substack here [See also: Rachel Reeves wants to level up your commute. Does she have the money?] Related
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
The thin blue line? Yvette Cooper STILL holding out over funding for 'broken' police with barely 48 hours until Rachel Reeves unveils spending plans up to next election
Haggling over Labour 's spending plans is still raging with barely 48 hours until Rachel Reeves unveils the package. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper is yet to settle with the Treasury amid bitter squabbling over police and borders funding. The Chancellor is due to lay out departmental allocations running up to 2029 - the likely timetable for the next general election - on Wednesday. But the generous fiscal envelope set at the Budget last Autumn has been put under massive pressure by the economic slowdown, calls for more defence cash, and Labour revolts on benefits. Ms Reeves has been signalled she will announce real-terms increases to budgets for police as she tries to quell Home Office resistance. However, that is likely to be offset by cuts to other areas, with the NHS and defence sucking up funding. The political backdrop to the proposals this week is the Reform surge, with Labour panicking about the challenge from Nigel Farage. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper is yet to settle with the Treasury amid bitter squabbling over police and borders funding Touring broadcast studios this morning, Technology minister Chris Bryant denied the review will mark a return to austerity. But he acknowledged some parts of the budget will be 'more stretched'. He told Times Radio: 'That period of austerity where I think previous governments simply cut all public service budgets just because they believed that was what you had to do is over. 'But, secondly, we are investing, but it's not just about spending money, you have to get return, and that means we have to have change and we have to have a plan for change in every single one of our public services.' He pointed to increased investment in defence and health, but added: 'There are going to be other parts of the budget that are going to be much more stretched and be difficult.' Ms Reeves will have some £113billion to distribute that has been freed up by looser borrowing rules on capital investment. But she has acknowledged that she has been forced to turn down requests for funding for projects she would have wanted to back in a sign of the behind-the-scenes wrangling over her spending review. Economists have warned the Chancellor faces unavoidably tough choices in allocating funding for the next three years. She will need to balance manifesto commitments with more recent pledges, such as a hike in defence spending, as well as her strict fiscal rules which include a promise to match day-to-day spending with revenues. The expected increase to police budgets comes after two senior policing figures publicly warned that the service is 'broken' and forces are left with no choice but to cut staff to save money. Nick Smart, the president of the Police Superintendents' Association, and Tiff Lynch, acting national chairman for the Police Federation of England and Wales, said policing was in 'crisis'. In a joint article for the Telegraph, they said: 'Police forces across the country are being forced to shed officers and staff to deliver savings. These are not administrative cuts. 'They go to the core of policing's ability to deliver a quality service: fewer officers on the beat, longer wait times for victims, and less available officers when crisis hits.' The Department of Health is set to be the biggest winner in Ms Reeves' spending review on Wednesday, with the NHS expected to receive a boost of up to £30billion at the expense of other public services. Meanwhile, day-to-day funding for schools is expected to increase by £4.5billion by 2028-9 compared with the 2025-6 core budget, which was published in the spring statement. Elsewhere, the Government has committed to spend 2.5 per cent of gross domestic product on defence from April 2027, with a goal of increasing that to 3 per cent over the next parliament – a timetable which could stretch to 2034. Ms Reeves' plans will also include an £86billion package for science and technology research and development.
