Stockport Council & Other News

21st December 2025

Vegetation denudement caused by unauthorized mechanical clearing has significantly altered the protected landscape at Padden Brook.

Vick Bates, Stockport Council’s Monitoring Officer, and her team of lazy and useless council officers, Lisa Smart, LibDem MP, local councillors Mark Roberts, Angela Clark and Rachel Bresnahan allowed this. How dare they?

1st December 2025

Conclusion: From public documents and reporting, the £20 m from the Capital Levelling Up Fund was earmarked solely for the Marple Community Hub. I found no credible public evidence that other parts of Stockport were formally considered or proposed as alternative recipients of the same grant.

What we know about the old baths

• The baths were built in c. 1907–1908 as part of a civic complex on Gorton Road — along with a library, fire-station, and mortuary. Contentful+2msarchitecture.co.uk+2
• The building complex is locally listed as “Buildings of Local Interest”. Contentful+1
• The swimming baths themselves closed in July 2005. Contentful+228DaysLater Urban Exploring Forums+2
• Since closure, the baths building has remained “moth­balled” — i.e. unused but retained by the council pending any future use. Contentful+1
• The rest of the complex has had somewhat different fates: the ground floor of the former fire station is now used as a community centre; the library, fire station, and mortuary are all part of the site listing. Contentful+2msarchitecture.co.uk+2

🔄 What has been proposed for the site

Over the years, there have been proposals and planning guidance produced for what to do with the former baths site:

• A “Planning Brief” from the local council describes the site as a “prominent group of civic buildings” with “significant townscape value.” Any redevelopment should respect their historic/architectural interest. Contentful
• The guidance envisages that the baths building could be converted (rather than demolished), with acceptable future uses including offices/businesses, community services, leisure/assembly, cafés/restaurants, or residential — subject to a sympathetic redevelopment that conserves the character and frontage. Contentful
• Specifically, conversion could include “business” use (e.g. offices), or community-oriented uses or even residential, but any redevelopment must preserve external architectural features (such as the main pool-hall shell, the tall chimney, original entrances, boundary walls, railings, etc.). Contentful

⚠️ What has not happened — and current status

Despite the proposals and planning guidance:

• No recent planning applications appear to have been submitted for redevelopment of the baths building. Contentful+1
• The baths remain closed and unused, and the building is effectively “on hold” until a viable future use is secured. Contentful+1
• According to listings and local history summaries, although there has been some community interest — e.g. calls to reopen the baths — as of now there is no backing from the council for renewed bath/swimming-pool use. Wikipedia+1

🧑‍💡 What this means for residents / What might happen

• The site remains a heritage-valued group of buildings. That makes demolition unlikely: any proposal would need to conserve the exterior and respect heritage policy. Contentful+1
• It’s possible — in theory — that the baths building could be repurposed for community use, offices, housing or other uses. But that depends on a developer stepping forward with a plan that satisfies the heritage, planning and local-amenity requirements.
• For now, the building remains “on ice.” Given no active redevelopment or re-opening plan, it remains derelict/unused, albeit structurally largely intact (by virtue of being mothballed).

📰 Wider context and comparable cases

• Similar older bath-building redevelopments in the region have sometimes succeeded — for example, older municipal baths elsewhere have been converted into business centres, leisure-related facilities or mixed-use developments (though often after extensive renovation and restoration work). Place North West+2Place North West+2
• The approach prescribed in the 2009 Planning Brief for Reddish — to encourage adaptive reuse rather than demolition — roughly mirrors what’s been done elsewhere. Contentful+2Place North West+2

🎯 Conclusion — What is being done now

Right now, nothing active seems to be happening to change the status of the old baths at North Reddish: the building remains closed and mothballed, with no approved redevelopment plan or funding. The site is still in the hands of the council, under heritage-protection policy, and its future remains uncertain.

25th October 2025

For years we’ve been told that local politicians “understand our concerns” and are “fighting for affordable homes.” But when it comes to taking real action, it’s all talk and no walk.

Yes, we desperately need new housing — but not housing that prices locals out or destroys what makes our area special. Yet that’s exactly what’s happening as the Labour Government bulldozes through its so-called “local plan,” ignoring the people who actually live here. Stockport residents deserve a voice in shaping our future — not to be treated as an afterthought.

Take the W1 woodland-protected site at Padden Brook. A landowner has been trying to push through housing on this green space, and residents have been sounding the alarm for over 14 months. In all that time, our LibDem MP Lisa Smart and local councillors Clark, Roberts and Bresnahan have done nothing. Emails go unanswered, promises fade, and meanwhile, developers keep circling.

We don’t need another glossy press release or another staged photo in a high-vis jacket. We need genuine representation — leaders willing to stand up, say “no” to reckless development, and protect both our housing needs and our environment.

If you’re as frustrated as I am, make your voice count. Join the call for real accountability and proper local consultation. Our community deserves deeds, not empty slogans — and it’s time our politicians proved whose side they’re really on.

The story of the LibDem Stockport shenanigans over Padden Brook, Local Wildlife Site, protected amenity land is getting a lot of website views around the World, especially in California. Perhaps they will make a film. I have started casting it. Be prepared.

Imelda Staunton – Has an uncanny knack for playing sweet-seeming but ruthless characters. Councillor Angela Clark

Matt Berry channelling that smug, evasive local politician energy. Councillor Mark Roberts.

Beanie Feldstein who fits the role of a young, naïve, and wide-eyed local politician oblivious to the corruption around her. Councillor Rachel Bresnahan.

LibDem MP Lisa Smart would have to be Glenn Close.

Democratic Services – kind, principled people. How council officers should act.

Julia Roberts and John Krasinski

Approachable demeanour and warm expression, qualities that would suit a “decent local council officer” character.

Vicki Bates, Monitoring Officer – No idea who would play her.

Michael Cullen, Chief Executive. A character like Elizabeth, Captain Mainwaring’s wife, who never appears. No actor needed. He takes no part in the story – a bit like real life.

Liz Sykes, who apparently gets all of a dither at the mention of Padden Brook. Thelma Barlow? Mavis in Coronation Street.

Finally me. An old lady who muddles along and wins in the end. I suggest someone like Margaret Rutherford.

My clever husband has pointed out that this dim LibDem Councillor must have brought this sod of grass to pretend to have dug it up, as there is no grass anywhere near that area. Sod-gate. It’s the cover-ups that bring them down. Watch this space.