Dipping our toes in another swirling pool

Rother cabinet voted on Monday to take up a Government initiative aimed at encouraging over-60s to keep fit by swimming.

Rother will accept the Government's 43,123 grant to support the scheme in the coming financial year.

A grant figure has yet to be decided upon by the Government for its linked promotion designed to encourage the under-16s to learn to swim and to take up this healthy exercise.

The Government's eventual offer for the under-16s promotion will be accepted provided it meets at least 95 per cent of the cost.

But then what...?

Both schemes are praiseworthy attempts to persuade the public to make maximum use of community facilities for the benefit of their health.

Both suffer from the same fatal flaw and risk repeating a sadly familiar story.

No provision is being made to enable authorities such as Rother to continue the schemes once the period covered by the initial Government inducement ends.

It's a bit like offering a child free use of a sweet shop one week and locking the door the next.

As Rother opposition leader Cllr Sue Prochak sagely observed, the council could be left in the invidious position of being seen as "misers" when the funding ends and they are forced to end free swimming.

Offering the over-60s "free" use of the buses was another excellent idea. It encourages pensioners to forsake the car and use public transport; it offers the means for the less affluent to get out of the house and to broaden their horizons.

The fact that it was a scheme which meets a significant social need has been demonstrated by the take-up for bus passes.

But someone has to pay and as a result of its success local authorities have been saddled with a colossal bill.

Sidley's Learning Link project was another case in point. It was a scheme which matched the need of a socially-deprived sector of the community to improve its learning and, therefore, to break out of the cycle of poverty.

It was funded, launched, proved its worth '“ and then left without financial support to wither and die.

From Rother's perspective, it is clearly advantageous to take up the Government's funding and make the free swimming offer available to the public all the while the grants last.

But wouldn't it be wonderful if our national politicians could see beyond the short-term and go for endurance events rather than sprints?