2014. Could that be the year when Barrhead gets a new aquatic centre?
After being submerged so long in uncertainty, a breakthrough in the pool project has suddenly surfaced.
Barrhead Town Council on Sept. 24 approved Mayor Brian Schulz’s motion that plans proceed for a pool in 2014 with certain requirements, one being that a parcel of land be acquired for the project.
Another requirement is that the Barrhead and District Agrena Society presents its conceptual design in the spring of 2013 to the Town and County.
While few must have seriously doubted the feasibility of the project, the council’s pellucidly clear declaration of support is extremely welcome.
It allows the conversation about the aquatic centre to move on; it marks the transition from a concept to something more real and tangible.
More significantly it lays the foundation for the Agrena Society to begin fundraising for a project expected to cost between $12m and $15m.
At their Monday meeting councillors made another important decision: that a pool location be chosen as soon as possible, maybe even by November, after Chief Administrative Officer Martin Taylor has consulted architects. Various site options have been put forward, from the existing aquatic centre to the outdoor rink and, controversially, the major baseball diamond.
Last Thursday, Agrena Society president Shannon Carlson expressed confidence that the Town will make the right choice. We hope he is right, for once a location has been announced plans can kick into a higher gear.
Fundraising will be much easier when the public knows where their dollars are being directed.
All of this is good news for those who have been frustrated by the apparently glacial pace of the project.
The pool of tears is fast becoming the pool of joy.
The annual Life Chain event and a failed parliamentary motion to set up a committee to discuss when an unborn child becomes a human has made abortion a front-and-centre issue, if only for a short while.
Abortion is one of those subjects that will always be in the wings when not centre stage.
It touches on fundamental issues that strike at who we are and how we like to be perceived.
It is like the death penalty, euthanasia, animal rights and vegetarianism; in many ways people define themselves by their stances on these core issues.
Often it is difficult to have meaningful debate about them because passions run so high and the conflicting arguments appear to be so well known.
Rather than listen to a different view, it is easier and more comfortable to sink further and further into the bunker of one’s bias, to be selective about facts and figures, to denigrate others, to disregard personal testimonies that challenge one’s position.
To raise one’s head from the bunker and listen – really listen – is a risk many are not willing to take.
After all, it requires moral courage to accept that maybe, just maybe, we have not thought through all the ramifications of a very complex and psychologically fraught issue like abortion.
Abortion raises difficult questions, even if they are easily dismissed by so many on either side of the debate.
