“James your point is very clear and highlighted further by the last comment. Services are services not for making profits, you either see them as contributing to the health and good of the community or you do not. Be it a school, leisure centre or out door pool. This is why the pool was built in the beginning all those years ago and yes as previous employees state and seen for my self, for many previous summer days there have been counted 1000 people in the building.

The trust has spoke at length and has long term financial goals which at public meetings has been discussed, this will mean after the initial period of getting the building operational having it run properly it will again be able to fund its self. The Trust is clear it will not be run as a profit making business for share holders or Trust members as it is seen as a service, therefore any money will be invested within it.

It is sad that as a community we can not support all different types of needs, I do not play bowls and have no friends that do either, however we have three bowling greens in this Town and as far as I can see they are all empty for the majority of the time. I could go on and list all the things my Council Tax pays for that I do not 'use' but I wont because you are right North Somerset Taxpayer we have moved forward and the time for drawing attention to the loss of the pool has evolved, its time now for action and change.”

“James, there is a major difference between the Police Service, flower beds and Swimming Pools. The difference being the Pool is actually in a situation whereby it could and should be made a viable profitable business as people will be paying to use it and hopefully be spending money whilst there.

I think the council argument is not profitablility but affordability and whilst there is already another swimming pool at the leisure centre justiication for two pools in one town does bring up the case of affordability which probably means that now the swimming lobby are getting their way another service may not be recieving adequate funding because it is being channelled to the open air pool.

At no stage have I heard or read that the Trust wishes to fully captilize on the potential profit making possibilities the Pool has to offer. Profits that would make the pool and the trust self sufficient. It seems they are focussed totally on handouts, as yet unsecured grants which could materialise one year and disappear the following and fund raising which is not a long term feasible plan for a concern that will have large operating costs and overheads and a council that will forever be opposed to its very existence.
Were no lessons learned in council tactics when the same method of underhand politics was exactly how this same council and the very same councillors moved the chap from the Portbury layby.
The council bow to public concern, wait until the outcry desists and then come up with a flimsy reason to get what they first wanted.
The pool has won a repreive because of people power but it is only a reprieve and already Councillor Rees is using delaying tactics by saying that papers will not be signed for a fortnight for the handover of the pool because he knows full well that will be less time for the volunteers and Trust members to get the Pool up and running in time for the opening.

Trust members and volunteers should already be in the premises making a start but now another two weeks are being wasted whilst councillors fumble about because they do not like local democracy to be seen working.

I think the bottles of bubbly have been opened a little too soon.”

“Maybe now the moaners of Portishead will spend all of their obvious spare time getting the pool straight and profitable so that by next year the council do not have to support it at all. I dispute the comment that 1,000 people were in the pool at one time, maybe the correspondent needs to look at 1,000 people and then work out how they all fitted in! It appears to others in the locality that, when reading the local papers it there is pre-requisite to living in Portishead - you need to be a good moaner. Most Portishead residents have moved there in recent years, and as the property is primarily private, you did have a choice whether or not this was the area for you!”

“As it has been said time and time again from previous employees and the local community, protest started a long time ago when the council first handed its running over to DC leisure. There were many reports in the press, protests at council meetings started years ago trying to highlight concerns for the pools future unfortunately you appear to have not seen it.

The argument for services to make a profit for me is a real worry. As previously said should the police make a profit, the flower beds and how about schools? You either believe services are for the good of all or a 'drain' on tax payers. My guess is the two separate arguments on this posting will never agree as this is a fundamentally different out look on life and the role of services.

It does not matter how many people turned up to the march if you believe access should be based on equality not profit. There is no begrudging of opinions it is as far as I can see the same argument put forward in so many situations at the moment. The frustration is our town has had so many unaffordable housing developments and yet there are no more resources.

The pool is part of our community it simply needs to be run well as it was for a very long time before it was regarded as a money maker rather than a service. This can happen again and I feel the fight/struggle that was started all those years ago needs to continue and move forward with now people taking action not just complaining.

If you do not believe in just how important a service/leisure facility our open air pool is that is your right but please take on board that for MANY it is vital especially at a time of such worrying health concerns across the county, which incidentally is a greater burden.”

“I'm puzzled. If all you thousands of swimmers used the Pool so regularly, why has it not been more profitable, the council grant made DC Leisures profit not the income from swimmers. Even the unflawed figures show how inderused it has been for a number of years.

Why weren't you thousands of swimmers protesting as you watched its decline instead of after the council made its initial decision to close it??

Also, if there really are thousands of swimmers who use the Pool why did the march only get 2-300 of you out of your beds on a Saturday morning. The attempt to attract schoolkids to protest had less than 200 people turn up, Gordano School alone has 1500+ plus pupils, where were they?

If there really are thousands of you why haven't you all donated a fiver or even a tenner each to the fund and why has it taken so long to raise almost £10,000 and who will keep financing the Pool? Council grants?

There are many questions left unanswered about the furture of the Pool and using the same tactics as the council by feeding exagerrated details to the wider public can only hinder the campaign where it matters, in the long term.

I'm all for the pool being retained but only if its future is based on a feasible reality not a sentimental pipe dream by a small proportion of local people who have actually been as responsible for the current condition of the pool by their years of inaction.

And yes, I have donated money myself though I still have grave doubts about long term plans and the major involvement of previously unsuccessful local political figures who have run this campaign, and hope it will not be used in future as no more than an excuse to further those political ambitions as was evidnet at the last elections when the councillors who were elected got in on a one issue policy regarding a set of traffic lights.

It may be easy for the swimming lobby to begrudge other taxpayers to have an opinion on how their cash is used but that does not mean they are not entitled to that opinion and by alienating non pool users by cheap throwaway comments you are chasing away those vital supporters you will need in the long run..”