I AGREE with Graham Ley (Crediton Courier letter, October 8) that £500K is an extraordinary amount for a knee-deep paddling pool.

The Town Council will need to find just under £57,000 for the current quote to be met.

There is already £125,000 in reserves, an identical amount being offered by MDDC (time limited), and £157,000 in S106 funds available (also time limited.)

The pump room and equipment are different from domestic pieces of equipment and are designed to keep the water clean and safe for large numbers of bathers over long time periods. This I am happy to accept. However, in my view, prices for such projects do reflect greed and not reality.

The paddling pool survey and making the decision has thrown up several shocking facts: there are no HSE paddling pool regulations, only swimming pool regulations.

The pool was described as approaching "end of life" due to circulation rates being far longer than that required.. for a swimming pool.

Crediton Town Council has written to the HSE to ask that regulations be written for paddling pools, so more informed decisions can be made.

The Town Council knows that for the safety of children, we must accept the advice available on water treatment, however, the advice available is unsatisfactory.

I have also suggested we write to Ustigate, the company who did the current quote, to suggest that they look at their marketing, because their wording for splash pads suggests they are a more sustainable option.

It was discovered late on in the decision process, that a pool uses far less water than a splash pad (around 5 or more times less, potentially.)

These are two examples of Crediton Town Council seeking to lobby for decent information.

I return to the point of the quotes being larger than they might be: I share the view that the current quote is very high.

However, the procurement process for this project sits with Mid Devon District Council, not Crediton Town Council and is governed by requirements that are beyond the Town Council's control.

MDDC has been asked to seek alternative quotations, and we await these. Of course it is a good thing to question value for money, but waiting for wider changes to procurement practices is not possible given the time-limited funding currently available.

The funding for the pool is time limited, and a decision was needed in order to ensure the money being offered (£282,000 in total, from MDDC and the S106 money).

We hope that further quotes will be more realistic, but if they are not, we have a chance to have a new pool, for many years ahead.

There are other factors involved but I wanted to clarify that despite the overinflated cost, Crediton residents are not being expected to part with half a million pounds next year.

Rachel Backhouse (personal view)

Crediton