Breaking - Aberdeen Voice

Tullos Gorse Clearance: Is The City Damaging Our Wildlife?

Aberdeen City, Articles, Breaking, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, News No Responses »

Mar 252012

Aberdeen City Council has been warned today that its staff could face criminal prosecution for its activities on Tullos Hill. Animal Concern’s John Robins issued a press release explaining all, and Aberdeen Voice brings you this latest development in the ongoing Tullos Hill saga.

Aberdeen City Council (ACC) has been warned that staff and volunteers involved in the controversial Tree for Every Citizen project could face prosecution under wildlife crime laws.

It is believed workers have started clearing gorse and shrubs on Tullos Hill in preparation for the planting of saplings which is due to start next month.

Gorse is a favoured nesting habitat for a variety of birds including members of the finch family. It is a criminal offence to disturb or destroy active nests or to harm eggs or chicks.

John Robins of Animal Concern Advice Line (ACAL) has asked the Wildlife Crime Officer at Grampian Police to investigate the situation with a view to arresting anyone found to have broken wildlife protection laws. The SSPCA and RSPB have also been asked to intervene. ACAL have warned ACC that their staff and volunteers could be prosecuted for destroying birds’ nests and they have asked the Council to suspend all work on Tullos Hill until September.

John Robins states:

“This tree planting scheme has gone from insane to criminally insane. Who in their right mind orders clearance of nest sites just at the time when song birds are nesting and then sends in an army of tree planters when ground nesting birds are trying to raise their young?

“This latest development suggests that the people behind this project really do not have a clue about what they are doing. ACC claim their Tree for Every Citizen project will provide wildlife habitat. All I can see is habitat destruction and disruption at the very worst time of year for that to happen. Will it take a criminal prosecution before ACC see sense?”

Gavin Lindsay, Wildlife Crime Officer at Grampian Police, has agreed to speak to Aberdeen City Council about possible breaches in wildlife protection laws. The SSPCA have asked their Aberdeen inspectorate to look into the matter. We await a response from RSPB Scotland.

The Council have put up temporary fencing around and on Tullos Hill. These have yellow hazard warning signs stating “Warning Forestry Operations. Please obey all signs and restrictions.”

A copy of the warning sent to the ACC Chief Exec and the Councillor behind the tree planting project is as follows:-

Dear Ms Watts and Councillor Malone,

I note that Aberdeen City Council has announced its intention to commence ground preparation work and the planting of saplings on Tullos Hill. I understand that this work will involve the removal of bracken and gorse and that clearance of these plants may already have started.

Given the long period of unseasonably mild weather you’ve had in the Aberdeen area over the last few weeks it is highly likely that birds will be nesting early and there will be nests with eggs and chicks in the gorse and on the ground at Tullos Hill. Gorse, which provides prickly protection for nesting birds, is a favoured nesting habitat for finches such as Twite, Chaffinch, Linnet, Redpoll and others. From photographs and descriptions of the terrain on Tullos Hill I expect there are also a fair number of native ground nesting birds such as Lapwing, Curlew, Skylark and perhaps Ring Ouzel nesting in the area.

Yesterday we had a report that someone has heard grouse calling on the hill so it is likely that grouse will be nesting there too. There will no doubt be many pheasant breeding on the hill as well.

As you are probably aware it is a criminal offence to disturb or destroy birds’ nests containing eggs or chicks. It is likely that it would be individual employees or volunteers who would be prosecuted should wildlife protection laws be breached while the gorse and bracken is removed or while saplings are being planted.

I ask Aberdeen City Council to suspend all activities on Tullos Hill until September to avoid disturbing or destroying any active nests. I have notified the Grampian Police Wildlife Crime Unit, RSPB and the SSPCA of the situation.

Yours sincerely,

John F. Robins, Secretary to ACAL

Aberdeen City Youth Council Hits Out At CGP

Aberdeen City, Articles, Breaking, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, News No Responses »

Jan 272012

Aberdeen Youth Council’s former head Sean Press resigned because of ‘a conflict of interest’, citing his involvement with ACSEF the ‘pro-business and development body [which] is fully supportive of the City Garden Project’ per the Press & Journal. Now Aberdeen City Youth Council, the official voice of young people in the city, has spoken out against the proposed development of Union Terrace Gardens, describing the plans as “unwanted” and “potentially devastating to young people”.

17 year-old office-bearer, Kenneth Watt, comments on the decision:
“It’s not normal for the Youth Council to speak out against the Council like we are doing. However, the decisions made have the potential to be devastating to our generation, and generations to come and we are genuinely worried about the prospect of the City Gardens Project going ahead.”

As a result, the group has registered to submit 300 words in the voter registration pack.

The group also criticised the City Council in its involvement of young people in the decision-making process, after they discovered that only 113 young people from just two schools were consulted with. In the Youth Council’s own consultation 98% of 14-25 year-olds were in favour of retaining the Gardens.

The financial security of the City Gardens Project (CGP) concerns the Youth Council. The Aberdeen City Youth Council (ACYC) are worried by the lack of a plan to cover the possible failure of the risky Tax Increment Funding scheme. After multiple requests for detailed financial information from councillors on the monitoring board were ignored, the group became very apprehensive over the CGP’s feasibility.

Kenneth Watt, an office-bearer in the ACYC says that:

“Young People have been hit hard by spending cuts to key services already; the prospect of facing more in the future is a risk the Council can’t afford to take.”

“Young people need to be listened to and have their questions answered. We’re the ones that will have to foot the bill when the £96million loan can’t be repaid.”

One of the main sufferers of cuts to public services is Aberdeen’s youth. Northfield has the highest rate of child poverty in the north-east of Scotland and the Council cannot commit to such a financially unstable project when they are closing key services to the youth in many areas.

“It is ridiculous for the Council to commit to a £96million loan when vital community services – such as the Mastrick Young People’s Project – are being cut left, right and centre.”

It was claimed that the CGP would reduce crime rates in the city, which young people are frequently blamed for. Both final designs for the CGP have direct access from Belmont Street and Union Street, home to many pubs and clubs. A £170million project of this nature will not cure the violence and crime that Aberdeen faces.

“Voters need to think seriously about the long-term aspect of the City Gardens Project and the financial burden it could easily leave for generations of Aberdonians to come.”

“Union Terrace Gardens is a space that is unique to our city. Our parents have loved the Gardens, we love the Gardens, and – if retained – our children will love the Gardens too.”

Tree for Every Citizen Scheme: Not So Cost Neutral After All

Aberdeen City, Articles, Breaking, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, News, Opinion No Responses »

Jan 072012

Aberdeen’s contentious Tullos Hill deer cull / tree-planting scheme takes a particularly strong blow as a Freedom of Information request shows that the financial picture is not as ‘cost-neutral’ as its (few) supporters would have us think. Suzanne Kelly examines the newly-released figures for Phase 1 of the planting and questions the logic of proceeding with Phase 2.

Aileen Malone, Aberdeen City Councillor and Convener of the Housing & Environment Committee has been silent on the subject of her pet project and Liberal Democrat election manifesto pledge lately; she’s not answered emails on the subject, nor has she appeared in the media to defend the scheme.
The Liberal Democrat party headquarters likewise have not replied to any emails on the matter of the deer cull to date.

Malone is the de facto figurehead for the plan to cull the roe deer (which have happily lived in the area for decades without the need for a cull) in order to plant a staggering 89,000 trees on Tullos Hill.

When full details broke as to what this Phase 2 planting entails emerged, individuals, community councils and animal welfare charities expressed dismay and disbelief.

One of the main arguments offered by its proponents is that planting the trees and shooting the deer is ‘cost-neutral’, or in the words of Councillor Neil Fletcher in an email concerning the cull:-

“… this project is at practically no cost to the tax-payer”.

But is the scheme as cost-neutral as its City Council proponents claim? The answer is most definitely NO.

The attached spread sheet excerpt was obtained in mid-December following months of requests (note that a line has been added to show a refund the City had to make – this was somehow omitted). Aileen Malone wrote in early October to advise an officer would get back on the matter shortly. When no information was forthcoming , a Freedom of Information request was lodged (and answered slightly later than was meant to be the deadline).

The City’s (incomplete) spread sheet

The spread sheet from the city shows incoming money as negative and outgoings as positive figures.

There is an outgoing sum of £3,000 at Line 18 with no explanatory text. There is likewise a line for £142 – this may relate to an advertising supplement extolling the virtues of the scheme, but this is not certain. The city also forgot to take off the £43,800 it had to return for the failure of phase 1 on Tullos. Combining all of the figures together, I get an indication that Aberdeen may be £20,600 in the red at this point – and yet may look to go ahead with a bigger plantation.

See: Tree-for-every-citizen-finances/

Looking at the list of money going in and out of the account, it seems that the scheme was not the simple, cheap, well thought-out plan promised. When the finances are considered in conjunction with a soil report issued by the Forestry Commission, it is possible to conclude the plan is deeply flawed and expensive.

The the soil report indicates that Tullos Hill’s soil quality means the trees would be subject to ‘wind throw.’ This means that winds (such as the extremely strong winds frequently experienced this winter) will more than likely topple trees growing on the hill.

The report also points to the possibility that trees simply will not thrive on Tullos for a variety of reasons– but what is the financial impact of failure?

The costly Phase 1 failure- £43,800 in grant money repaid

The City was forced to repay £43,800 of grant money (after months of being chased for payment, it should be noted) to the Forestry Commission. Presumably this money was generated from the taxpayer in the first place – therefore the taxpayer may well have wound up paying both for the trees to be planted as well as for their failure to thrive.

While the City has chosen largely to put the blame for the failure on some 29 roe deer in Loirston County Park, the failure belongs in no small part to those who selected the site, who decided to buy smaller tree guards than had been recommended, who ignored the historic wind, weather and soil data, and who did little about weeds. Perhaps an investigation is called for into the selection of Tullos in the first place, and into any possible negligence on the part of those involved.

Will Aberdeen be taking another grant from the Forestry Commission – which arguably we were led to believe was already arranged?

If so – why? What are the implications of a failure of 89,000 trees financially speaking? Unfortunately, according to the Freedom of Information response, thereares as yet no financial plans, budgets or projections available.

Considering the proponents originally gave a deadline of May 2011 for private individuals to stump up £225,000 to save the deer (a figure which exceeds the £200,000 Phase 1 grant!), it is highly worrying that projections for the future phase 2 scheme cannot be supplied as ‘the information is not held’. Had the scheme’s supporters come clean in these respects months ago, this scheme may not have gone so far down the road as it has been allowed to.

Paying for Experts

Animal charities offered the services of other forestry experts to the City free of charge with a view to finding a way to plant trees without killing the deer – something which is quite possible to do. Deer will apparently be culled for several years (there are thought to be 29 deer in the area which roam from site to site; these creatures usually live 6-7 years, and in some instances are fed by local people).

The city denigrated the experts, and advised it already has an expert.

The identity of the City’s expert has never been made known. At one stage it was suggested that they were being paid for their services in connection with ‘A Tree for Every Citizen.’

Looking at the companies listed on the spread sheet involved and the people who serve on these companies, a number of forestry experts seem to be involved as paid consultants. As such, these people might be seen to have a vested interest in a Phase 2 planting going ahead; it would be human nature to protect one’s source of income.

One of the people whose names crops up in a list of company directors has many directorships to their credit – including charcoal and sawmill director/company officer roles. Some of the twenty or so companies on this person’s list of directorships have been dissolved, including a boomerang company or two.

Further research into the companies and individuals mentioned on the Council’s spread sheet is under way.

Aberdeen officials have issued conflicting statements on the nature of the forest to be created – some say it will bring in revenue which will help pay for the scheme; others say no such plans are in place. If a sawmill plant, lumber jacking or charcoal works (and these types of business interests are reflected in the company activities of people involved with the scheme per the spread sheet) are envisaged for Tullos, then the public should be told.

If one or more persons with vested interests in making profit from lumber are refusing the advice / peer review from animal welfare experts with forestry experience, then the entire scheme should be examined in a public, transparent forum and reviewed by a number of recognised experts.

Surely an impartial, scientific professional would normally welcome experienced, free advice even if they chose not to heed it. The claims of expert advice seem hollow when in one document tree guards are discarded as deer control devices because they have ‘visual impact.’

Can complete impartiality of someone who may stand to gain from the Phase 2 planting going ahead be guaranteed? How can there be an objection to wider scrutiny?

Sponsors and ‘Educational’ use of children to plant trees: I wouldn’t count on it

Companies which donated to the first phase of the ‘Tree for Every Citizen’ scheme are understandably reluctant to use their budgets for controversial Phase 2.

weed protection of some sort will be required which may impact other wildlife, and yet the wind may make it all in vain.

Two major companies have indicated that they will not sponsor this next phase. Will any business want to put their brand’s value at risk by association with an unpopular scheme and deer cull? It is highly unlikely, but some in the council seem to think sponsors will be found. Again, there seems to be nothing budgeted, just nebulous talk of seeking business sponsors.

Schoolchildren are being relied on to make the plan look more affordable; they will be asked to help plant the trees on Tullos.

It seems doubtful that local parents will willingly give consent; thousands have signed a petition against the scheme, and over three thousand people are on a Facebook group opposing the scheme. Clearly if the scheme will have to pay for planting all 89,000 trees when it had hoped to use children in part, then the scheme becomes even less financially sound.

The educational benefits of planting saplings should also be delivered alongside the fact a cull is being implemented not for animal welfare reasons (the Scottish SPCA condemns this particular scheme) as it is (allegedly) the cheapest way to protect the trees, that weed protection of some sort will be required which may impact other wildlife, and yet the wind may make it all in vain.

Other costs; environmental costs

Weeds were largely to blame according to a Forestry report for the Phase 1 failure.

The Aberdeen taxpayer will be paying for several years of ‘weed control’ for Phase 2 – this may mean spraying pesticides which will damage other plants, insects, birds and other wildlife. Using pesticides in an area near factories, homes and schools will also lead to further citizen protests. Aberdeen paid £7,125 for Bryan Massie specifically for weed control in Phase 1 (as well as another £22,800). If the weed control was inadequate then, then how much more will we spend annually?

It is important to remember that Tullos already has its own wildlife and is a thriving ecosystem in its own right. Gorse clearance is also recommended, although many environmentalists state that gorse is a food and habitat haven for much wildlife. How much money will the taxpayer spend ripping up gorse?

The winners

According to the City’s information, the following companies have made money on the scheme:

CJ Piper & Co £42,000

Bryan Massie £30,000

Dulnain Bridge £77,800

Scottish Woodlands £11,700

TM Forestry £44,400

(unspecified) £ 3,000

TOTAL: £208,900

(Note – while over the months there have been different figures mentioned and unofficially given, it is assumed that the most accurate set of figures is the one supplied by the Freedom of Information request received mid December which is used in this article).

The future: No tangible financial projections – and no funding application lodged

The Freedom of Information request seems to be admitting that no budget for the future phase is held by the City.

An earlier FOI request shows that despite everything the proponents have said and done, there is as yet no formalised application lodged for a second phase. This means that for nearly a year the claims of proponents such as Malone that the scheme was going to go ahead and was going to be cost neutral were inaccurate. It is possible that some of the members of the Housing Committee voted in favour of this plan based on its being cost neutral; if so, the matter should be examined by that Committee and the relevant Audit Committee.

It is safe to assume that not every single grant application gets approved. We seem to have a situation for Phase 2 where there was no final, formal application for funds lodged, no approved funding in place, and no budget in place.

When the £43,800 repayment is subtracted from the accounts it certainly looks as if some £22,000 more than was granted was spent on Phase 1, leaving a budget deficit for Phase 2 before it even starts.

In the absence of information to the contrary the evidence speaks for itself.

Conclusion

Parents of school-age children might wish to check with their schools as to any planting plans involving their children.

Voters might want to ask their City Councillors how they stand on the issue now, and if they were in a position to vote on the matter in May 2011, did they then believe the scheme was cost-neutral. Private sector companies might wish to think twice before entering any sponsorship/funding deals for Phase 2 as well – it does not look like a public relations win any longer.

The whole point of the cull was to make the tree planting possible, yet some council officers and elected officials want to backtrack on that point now. They now claim it is for animal welfare reasons and not the trees. However, the entire unfolding history of the City’s claims are a matter of record.

What may have started out as a great-sounding greenwash election plank has irrevocably turned into an unpopular, controversial, seemingly disorganised non-starter. It is time to leave Tullos alone for now – or to consider enhancing its status as meadowland. Anything else just does not add up.

ACC Ordered To Release List Of Property Sold To Milne

Aberdeen City, Articles, Breaking, Community, Featured, Information, News No Responses »

Dec 122011

Aberdeen Voice has learned that the Scottish Information Commissioner has upheld Voice reporter Suzanne Kelly’s Freedom of Information request with regard to land and property sold by Aberdeen City Council to Stewart Milne and associated companies.

Less than a week having passed since Stewart Milne’s appeal to the Supreme Court failed, the Scottish Information Commissioner has decided that the Council must provide Kelly with information on land transactions between Aberdeen City and Stewart Milne companies.

The Supreme Court had been asked to review the details of a land purchase Milne Group made from Aberdeen City Council. The Supreme Court found that Milne must pay the City £1.7 million over the land deal.

The cost of the legal action is at this point unknown.

Kelly had followed the case, and had heard from several sources that there may have been other deals regarding the property developer and the City.

In a Freedom of Information Request made to the City, Kelly asked for a list of property sold to Milne and/or associated companies and the selling price, as well as a list of contracts the Milne companies had won from Aberdeen (there are several companies connected to Stewart Milne). Kelly wanted to analyse the contracts won and land purchased. The City initially refused her request.

An appeal was lodged, and the Information Commissioner was asked to look at the history of the freedom of information request and the grounds for refusal. The Commissioner issued its findings on 9 December 2011. The Commission decided that Aberdeen City Council and its Freedom of Information officers failed to act properly on a number of issues.

Key points include:-

The City did not always respond to correspondence and requests in a timely manner.
The City said it did not have a comprehensive record keeping system and finding the information would be very difficult. Kelly proved to the Information Commissioner that the City keeps much of its property portfolio details on spreadsheets.
The City said it would cost over a thousand pounds to find this information.
Kelly received some of the requested information during the course of the investigation including details of c. £10 million worth of construction contracts won by Milne and associated companies. No information has as yet been released by Aberdeen to show what property it sold to Milne.

The property dealings of Aberdeen City council had come to the attention of Audit Scotland some time ago. In its findings Audit Scotland found:-

evidence of procedural and administrative deficiencies and poor record keeping,
cases where accurate and relevant information was not reported to elected members,
a lack of evidence to support the valuation at which properties were sold, and
cases where the Council may have achieved a better price. Overall, it appears that there is a potential loss of capital receipts which may be more than £5 million.

The City is considering a number of budget and service cuts, and this spurred Kelly on. Kelly states.

“If the city is awarding contracts based even in part on low bids, then I question the wisdom and prudence of selling land at a fraction of its potential market value to a successful bidder. The City has a massive property portfolio, and if must keep detailed and accurate records of its transactions. In light of the Supreme Court decision last week, the decision from the Information Commissioner is extremely timely and most welcome. I look forward to receiving the information I have sought for so many months.”

Milne is also a director of Aberdeen Football Club. It is slated to sell its existing Pittodrie Stadium ( the UK’s first all-seater stadium ) and use the proceeds to build a stadium in greenbelt land near Loirston Loch. Planning permission was hotly contested, with local community councils objecting to the plans. The area is home to a variety of wildlife. The club’s income is thought to be in steady decline, as attendances have fallen and the team struggle to climb the league.

Says Kelly,

“I shall contact Aberdeen Council if I have not heard from them shortly, and as soon as the information is made available to me, I will report back. The Commissioner agrees that the public have a right to have the information I have fought long and hard to obtain.”

Security Or Censorship? Photos Banned Near UTG Show

Aberdeen City, Articles, Breaking, Community, Featured, Information, News No Responses »

Oct 152011

Aberdeen Voice reporter Suzanne Kelly attempts photography around Union Terrace Gardens Design Exhibition, only to be threatened with police and forced to delete some photos from phone.

Last week a news story showed just how far security had over-ridden basic civil rights, as a father from Glasgow was apparently cautioned by both private shopping mall security and police. He had taken a photo of his daughter atop a child’s seat within the confines of the mall in question. It seems signs warned shoppers against taking photos, and this otherwise perfectly harmless photo wound up being a cause celebre.

A Facebook campaign to boycott the mall was organised, and the suddenly contrite shopping mall seemed to have changed its colours.

Perhaps Apardion Security (motto: “job done”) which work Aberdeen’s Academy Shopping mall and Aberdeen City Council didn’t get wind of this story.

Despite absolutely no signs prohibiting photography being visible in the mall itself – despite my taking a photo while standing on a public street of a poster – I was followed by security from one mall to the next, cornered, threatened with police and legal action being implied - and forced to delete some (but not all) photos from my phone: from a guard who refused to say who he was or who had given him this instruction to stop photographers.

I had spent a pleasant morning at an event in town – Prince Charles had arrived to unveil and dedicate a statue erected to commemorate the Gordon Highlanders. It was a great morning, a well-attended event, and provided a good opportunity to talk to Gordon Highlanders, who were all happy to talk about this now legendary unit, sadly resigned to history in 1994.

At the end of the event, I bumped into two separate people who had been taken aback by the over-enthusiasm of security guards at the Academy Shopping Mall.

The mall, with several vacant shops, is to be the home of the public exhibition of the six designs shortlisted to win a competition to replace the city’s Victorian Union Terrace Gardens with some form of design centre/parking/shopping/’cultural’ space.

The actual competition shop is not within the Mall itself but in the old ‘Pier’ outlet on Belmont Street, formerly a Presbyterian Church which houses a tribute to Mary Slessor. Aberdeen’s other memorial to Mary Slessor lies in Union Terrace Gardens and would be obliterated by any new design.

Many journalists have written to reflect the public’s dismay at the proposal to change the gardens. They are the remains of the Denburn Valley as landscaped in Victorian times. They are the only city-centre green park and contain listed, ancient trees – some of the few trees in the City Centre, seen as vital against air pollution.

The City it should be rememembered is nearly £500 million in debt, and does not have money for this project, estimated to cost upwards of £140 million.

A local millionaire has offered £50 million to change the gardens into something else, an anonymous donor wants to give another £5 million, and the rest will come from Tax Incremental Funding if the City succeeds in a bid to be one of the pilots of the TIF scheme. If TIF is secured, local retailers will pay increased rates if the area is commercially successful (so trees are not exactly what’s wanted). And as is suspected, such increased taxes on the retailer will be passed onto the consumer in the final analysis.

With the tales of the two people being harassed, I went to Belmont Street where the space for the exhibitions has a large glass front.

I took a photograph of a long, thin poster advising that the public display of the shortlisted designs would be forthcoming. I also stood on the steps of the shop front (where absolutely no signage warned me against taking photos), and took a single shot of the poorly draped glass window and the paltry displays that were being set up. Then I left.

I went inside the Academy shopping centre itself, and noticed a poster saying what shops were in the Academy. This poster, on a round pillar, advised that several of the shops were vacant.

I thought that would be a good photo.

The premise of those who want to build in Union Terrace Gardens is that shops will revitalise Aberdeen. Aberdeen’s problem, as any first-year economic student would confirm, is not a lack of shop spaces.

Vacant shops are found all across the city centre, as large multinationals offering cheap goods (often made abroad) are taking customers who in more stable economic times would probably have preferred to buy from local shops.

As I was considering this shot I had my mobile in my hand, and was suddenly very aware of a security guard eyeing me as if I were a criminal. I made a quick call to a friend to say I was going to Marks & Spencer, and I left.

you took photos of an exhibition which isn’t even open to the public yet

I had by now taken three photos – one of the poster visible to all the world on Belmont Street; one standing on the steps of the shop where the exhibition would be, and one inside the academy showing the rear of the exhibition area.

Upon entering the ‘Bon Accord’ Mall, I was immediately stopped by a security guard. The
dialogue was along these lines, but this is not verbatim (text in blue is the writer):

“Are you the woman who took photos inside the Academy shopping centre?”

“I was on my phone”

“You were seen taking photos and you are not allowed to”

“I didn’t see any signs – who says photos aren’t allowed?”

“you took photos of an exhibition which isn’t even open to the public yet”

“I took a photo of a poster when standing on Belmont Street”

“you also took photos through a window”

“Yes I did – where does it say I can’t do this?”

“If you don’t delete those photos right now I am going to call the police”

“I might call the police myself”

“There is no sign telling me I can’t take pictures”

“we can’t have a sign up telling you everything that’s not allowed”

(at this point the guard, in a deep blue t-shirt with photo ID spoke into his radio)

“This lady is being difficult” he told the person on the other end

“Look- I’ll show you my photos, and you can tell me which ones to delete, OK”

We then looked at my photos. There were only three.

“Look at this one” I said “you can’t even tell what’s behind the window at all”

The guard didn’t make me delete this.

“And here’s another photo – do I need to delete this?”

The guard did not reply, and I did not delete these photos. We then came to the photo of the poster

“You have taken a photo of an exhibition which is not even open yet”

“I took this photo while standing on Belmont Street in public – why do I have to delete that?”

“We will call the police”

“What is your name – let me see your ID”

(at this point the man in his 40s, balding, slightly chubby and about 5’5 or so turned his photo ID badge around so I could not see it)

“I think your surname started with ‘E’” “My name is Suzanne”

“I don’t need to know who you are and you don’t need to know who I am” he cut across me.

I deleted the phone photo he told me to.

I had moved – deliberately – outside the shopping centre and stood by the very clear, permanent sign which had symbols of prohibited activities. In the heat of the moment I noted ‘no radios’ ‘no eating’ ‘no skateboarding’ – but no ‘no photography’ sign. I mentioned this to the guard.

“We are in a public place now, arent’ we?” I asked “yes”

“Well, then I think I’d better take your picture as you aren’t going to tell me your name”

At this point I took a photo of his back as he scurried away, and another of the prohibited activities poster.

The public are largely against borrowing money to build in Union Terrace Gardens, this was reflected in a public consultation.

Those who are determined that something should go there now have no fewer than 9 entities – either specific vehicles invented for the project, private companies, the quango Scottish Enterprise, and the local economic forum ACSEF promoting the project. There is also a public relations company (which also apparently represents the Wood Family Trust, involved in the project), the Big Partnership.

It seems as if one or some of these entities are very keen that no one should get any press on the exhibition, certainly no photographs.

Perhaps they will be pleased with the public relations the heavy-handed security measures have provoked. Perhaps not.

But if those behind the Union Terrace Gardens ‘design’ project do not want the poster advertising the event photographed, may I kindly and gently suggest it not be posted on a public street?

______________________________

At the time of publishing, the shopping mall’s staff are unable to comment, and suggest I contact the manager on Monday. Two security guards are apparently standing in front of the storefront on Belmont Street this afternoon, and are reportedly stopping anyone taking any photos.

Bert Jansch 1943 – 2011

Articles, Breaking, Community, Featured, History, Information, News No Responses »

Oct 072011

“There are people playing guitar who don’t even realise they’ve been influenced by him”, Johnny Marr observed of Bert Jansch who has died of cancer, aged 67. Jansch was a Zelig-like figure in modern British music. Like Woody Allen’s eponymous social chameleon, Jansch’s eclectic, groundbreaking presence and influence over more than 40 years was subtle but pervasive. Neil McLeod gives a fan’s view of a huge talent who straddled generations and genres.

From the mid-60s folk boom, through the blues-rock melting pot, via the cult of the introspective singer/songwriter and latterly in indie and Britpop, Jansch was there, a significant but frequently-unseen presence in the background of almost all modern British musical movements.
Born in Glasgow and raised in Edinburgh, Jansch was initially schooled in those cities’ folk clubs before moving to London in the early 1960s and honing his skills during incessant tours of UK folk clubs.

His reinterpretations of classic folk songs didn’t sound fey or singalong, but muscular, passionate and virtuosic.

A mix of standards and original compositions were recorded to mesmerising effect on his early LPs, particularly Jack Orion which featured his first recording of Blackwaterside, later taken up by Jimmy Page and recorded by Led Zeppelin as Black Mountain Side.

Jansch’s songs were beasts of such raw, genre-defying power that they could not be contained by the boundaries of the folk club. By the late 1960s his solo work and as a member of the now legendary Pentangle saw him achieve recognition and exert influence which took no account of musical barriers. Formed in 1967, Pentangle toured and recorded extensively until 1972 and reunited intermittently with Jansch’s participation right up to his final public appearance in August this year.

Jansch’s songs were beasts of raw, genre-defying power

In the mid 70s, Jansch recorded further career highlights including LA Turnaround and Santa Barbara Honeymoon. These were expansive, lush efforts which tackled the mellow rock produced by the Laurel Canyon crowd, but kept a distinctively British voice both in Jansch’s delicate vocal phrasing and guitar playing.

Introverted and shy on stage, he was nonetheless a riveting performer. He was the archetypal non-conformist who cared little for personal possessions and who often had no fixed address. Like many artists he also succumbed to alcohol excess and this had a detrimental impact on his health and his output by the 1980s.

Thankfully, he recovered his health and his productivity by the 1990s and was by that stage benefitting from the patronage of younger generation giants such as Johnny Marr and Bernard Butler, who played with him on Crimson Moon in 2000. That long, late period of acclaim continued until his final days, with everyone from Neil Young to new folk darlings Fleet Foxes singing his praises.

With all this muso respect it would be easy to think of Jansch as being a bit too worthy and considered in his playing, appreciated reflectively by beard-stroking guitar bores. Nothing could be further from the truth. Jansch played his songs for the love of music and never let craftsmanship become over-elaborate or get in the way of the tune.

Bert Jansch was that rarity – a musician who legitimately deserved recognition and who retained that status throughout his career.

Town Or Country: Elsick New Town Biggest Proposal Yet

Aberdeenshire, Articles, Breaking, Community, Environment, Information, News, Opinion No Responses »

Sep 182011

Expansion and Urban Sprawl are coming your way if you are in Aberdeen City or Shire. Peter Kennedy reports on the colossal proposal for the Elsick Estate which would change the complexion of Aberdeenshire forever.

I wonder if any of you have been following the proposal to build a new town at the Elsick Estate, Cammachmore. This new town could become the biggest single town in Aberdeenshire, with an estimated population of 20,000+, outstripping the likes of Peterhead and Inverurie.

This could see an extra 15000 – 20000 cars flooding the A90 corridor

In the initial plans, local residents were told the new settlement would be some 6,000 homes, but now it has come to the planning stage, it has emerged as a settlement of 9,000+ homes, an increase of 50% on the original proposal, and possibly even more in view of the elastic nature of such developments.

The proponent of this development, David Carnegie, aka Lord Southesk, on whose father’s estate he hopes to build the new town, has made much of the ‘transparency’ of these plans, though little indication is given as to where the additional 3000 homes have come from. Given that each home will have on average 2 cars, this could see an extra 15000 – 20000 cars flooding the A90 corridor, daily, at peak times.

Given their self-proclaimed reputation for unbiased reporting one might have expected that the BBC would have shown impartiality regarding this important development. Alas, this appears not to be the case.

In an interview solicited by the BBC with a local resident, David Kennedy, which was broadcast on both BBC1 Scotland news and BBC Aberdeen radio news , the editorial team seemed more interested in the irrelevance that he had been involved with “Tripping Up Trump”, by handing back his honorary degree in protest at Donald Trump being awarded one.

Although two BBC employees were present for three quarters of an hour for an interview at the Kennedy home last week, the BBCTV news only showed an old photograph taken almost a year ago this month, (28th September 2010) showing David Kennedy handing back his degree parchment – perhaps a little archaic even for a (un)biased broadcasting corporation.

The issue of what impact the new town might have on the local environment was pushed to one side. Co-incidentally, Lord Southesk was given a number of minutes to air his views and ‘sell’ his vision. According to him, no-one in the surrounding villages is opposed to the proposed newtown -though they will undoubtedly be affected by it.

The proposed site for the new town is 2000 acres of agricultural land, rather than any of the surrounding scrubland, which is more suitable for a development of this kind. Instead it is proposed to make a country park in this area of scrub land.

According to The Scottish Government paper, Scotland’s Soil Resource – Current State and Threats, published in 2006:

“Between 1970 and 1999, 25,217 hectares of agricultural land were converted to roads, housing and industry and 9,481 hectares to mineral workings (Scottish Office 1998, quoted by Birnie et al., 2002). These figures may be an underestimate of the conversion of all land to built infrastructure. In absolute terms they represent annual conversions of approximately 850 and 316 hectares respectively.”

More recent data shows that

“between 1989 and 1996, the conversion of land to roads, housing and industry was approximately 700 hectares a year. In the succeeding seven years this rose to c. 1,200 hectares per year.”

Thus, at a time as a nation we are being encouraged to grow our own crops to cut down on global warming, etc some 2000 acres (approx 810 hectares ) of agricultural land will be taken out of production.

This matter is now subject to a statutory 28 days consultation period as from Thursday 8th September 2011.

I hope people may feel able to make suitable representations to both the BBC for their biased support for the development, and the disgraceful denigration of David Kennedy; and to Aberdeenshire Council asking them to consider the impact of turning productive agricultural land over to the building of a new town.

Aberdeenshire Council’s website fails to give a specific reference number for this planning development: – Although the Area Planning Officer is listed as:

Neil Stewart,
Area Planning Officer,
Viewmount,
Arduthie Road,
Stonehaven,
AB39 2DQ.
Tel. 01569 768300.
Fax 01569 766549.
Email: km.planapps@aberdeenshire.gov.uk

The BBC Complaints Team are contactable via:

BBC Complaints,
PO Box 1922,
Darlington,
DL3 0UR
Phone: 03700 100 222
Textphone: 03700 100 212
or via their website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/

An Open Letter To Our Councillors – City Garden Project

Aberdeen City, Articles, Breaking, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, News, Opinion No Responses »

Jul 082011

Is control over the future of the City Centre and its Victorian Union Terrace Gardens falling into the hands of unaccountable, unelected agents? Mike Shepherd believes it is, and sends his thoughts to our Councillors.

Councillors,

Council documents make it clear that you were expected to sign off the design brief for the City Garden Project at the full council meeting on June 29th. The design brief is intended not only to give specifications for the civic square covering the Denburn, but also to provide details for the usage of the large underground space beneath the square.

There is a problem however; the full specifications for the design brief did not appear to be ready in time for the 29th of June.

Although a design brief has been issued, you have only been informed of the usage of only 6,000 square metres of the 56,000 square metres of accommodation space under the civic square (for an arts centre).

There is also intent to provide conference, exhibition and meeting space of unspecified size. The open space is described as a contemporary 21stcentury garden.

Given that these plans are designated for council-owned land, that the area is zoned as public green space in the local plan and the council have been asked to borrow £70million through a TIF scheme to fund it, then it would be reasonable to expect councillors to approve the specifications for the site.

You have now lost control over the City Garden Project. A non-elected body has now made decisions as to what our city centre should look like.

It now turns out that this will not be the case. You are not being asked to approve the design brief. I have been informed by a council officer that:

“it was decided, by members involved in determining the agenda for Council meetings, that there was no need to obtain Council approval for this.”

The intention is to hand out the design brief to short-listed companies for the architectural competition on the 21st of July. The next full council meeting is not until the 17th August.

You have now lost control over the City Garden Project. A non-elected body has now made decisions as to what our city centre should look like. They have decreed that the Denburn should have a “contemporary 21st century garden”, not you. It is this body that is also deciding what the large underground concourse should be used for. If conference and exhibition facilities are to be provided, then this will clearly have implications for the future of the Aberdeen Exhibition and Conference Centre at the Bridge of Don. However, this is not a decision that you will have any control over unless you turn down the city square plans.

The public should be extremely worried about the loss of democratic control over the City’s assets. The public were ignored when they voted against the City Square in a public consultation last year, now the powers given to our councillors are being bypassed too.

I would ask you to assert your right to decide on our behalf what happens in our city. I would request that you insist that the approval or otherwise of the City Square design brief should be a matter for the council meeting on the 17thof August.

Mike Shepherd.

“You’re Shooting Yourself In The Foot” – Cults CC Tells Malone

Aberdeen City, Articles, Breaking, Featured, Opinion No Responses »

May 272011

Voice’s Suzanne Kelly reports from a dramatic meeting ( 26.05.11 ) of Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council she was kindly invited to attend as a guest, and took the opportunity to discuss the roe deer cull in person with Cllr. Aileen Malone, Convener of the Housing and Environment Committee responsible for the decision.

Lib Dem Councillor Aileen Malone avoided debating with me the Tullos Hill Roe Deer cull she supports on Northsound 2 a fortnight ago.

She ‘had a prior engagement’ and could not spare 20 minutes over the phone on a Sunday morning to give Aberdeen her reasons for wanting the deer shot.

Cllr. Malone successfully silenced me and the Nigg Community Council representative when we wanted to debate the cull issue at the 10 May Housing & Environment Committee meeting. We weren’t allowed to speak to the Committee because there was no written report on the cull – just a verbal report. It didn’t matter to the Committee (except for four members) that new information had come to light, and the Community Councils wanted to be heard.

After the Housing Committee voted to get on with killing the deer to plant ‘a tree for every citizen,’ Malone told the media she hoped that would be an end to the controversy. With thousands of petitioners, four protesting community councils, and various animal charities against the cull, this was wishful thinking taken to a new level.
See: Tullos Hill Picnic

I was not alone in making complaints about the handling of the deer cull and tree planting issues to Aberdeen City Council. It is hoped that any cull will be halted until a proper investigation and a democratic, fully informed debate can be held. The 10 point report I prepared as a basis for my complaint is attached at the end of this article. ( click here )

It had been circulated to the members of the Housing Committee and to Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council, where Ms Malone is an elected City Councillor. I told them I would like to attend their next meeting as a guest on this issue, and they kindly invited me along.

Having served as a Community Council member myself, I was not surprised to hear they have some of the same issues I remembered from my days on Torry’s Council – litter, tree pruning, and so on.

I was surprised to find Mike Shepherd, Chair of the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens at this meeting. He gave a presentation on the state of play of the design competition, and what funding might be used for any scheme. To his surprise and mine, Councillor Aileen Malone made a promise that was both dramatic and new to Mike and me.

Cllr. Malone categorically stated and repeated this promise: after a final design for the gardens is chosen, the people will have a vote on whether to go with the design – or to leave Union Terrace Gardens undeveloped (which could include some improvements and amenities)

She was not sure whether or not this would be only for the people of Aberdeen – perhaps the Shire would be voting as well: but she was adamant this was the case. So Friends of Union Terrace Gardens – do not despair just yet. She also confirmed twice that “not a penny” of City Council money would be used to develop the gardens. No doubt Mike Shepherd will have more to say on these matters.

Back to the deer...

The Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council Chairman, Peter Reiss opened the deer debate by saying he attended a recent Civic Forum meeting – and was struck that on the subject of the deer cull, there was virtual agreement across the ages and across the boards against the cull. “For outsiders looking in, this looks like a no-brainer: let’s put the trees elsewhere” he said.

Ms Malone tried to use arguments which had already been dismissed in the press – not least in the Aberdeen Voice. She said that expert advice had been given. I countered, and explained to the Councillors that someone had briefed the SNH against the non-lethal measures (as shown in a letter of 25 November from SNH to the council), and offers from experts – who had knowledge and experience of ways to plant trees without killing deer – was refused.

I told the Council that the SNH letter proves someone had said tree guards were out because ‘they had visual impact.’ This did not sit well with the Cults Council at all. I explained that the phase 2 consultation documents made no mention of any deer cull – again, the councillors sided with me.

By now an increasingly desperate Ms Malone explained that the tree planting was ‘A Liberal Democrat manifesto promise’ – as if that were justification of some sort.

Other council attendees had comments for her position such as:

“Aren’t you shooting yourself in the foot,”

“other forms of deer control should be paramount”,

“think about the reaction you have had here tonight – it looks like a stupid thing to do: you have not won the argument.”

Amazingly Ms Malone tried two further tactics. One was to make general sweeping comments that deer culls are necessary, and her earlier, discredited ploy that only a handful of people initially objected to her in writing, and most were animal activists.

I reminded her that the full story had not come out immediately – the phase 2 consultation made no mention of the cull for Tullos Hill, and it had been subsequently proved that I was one of those who had written to her with my address opposing the cull. She had gone to the Press and Journal at first, saying ‘only about one’ person from Aberdeen had objected to the cull. She later made private apologies – but none through the Press & Journal, leaving readers of it with the wrong impression.

Animal lovers and activists might be interested in two further statements Councillor Malone made at the meeting.

Firstly, there has been permission in place to kill the Tullos Hill Roe Deer since March. The Council still are not answering questions about when the shooters will be sent in – I have asked – and if anyone else cares to ask the Council, it may help.

Secondly, Malone alludes to plans to kill the deer at Bridge of Don.

Some Councillors were all in favour of culls of animals – where the animals are in danger of starvation or over population. They were reminded that 30 deer live on Tullos Hill. Malone seemed to say that 9 to 12 of these would be shot now, and the shooting would go on.

She had no real answer why the £225,000 for ten years of fencing / protection was demanded up front. One person present said:

“no one in their right mind would put their hands in their pockets” for protection in the circumstances – i.e. not knowing exactly what they were paying for or for how long.

I reminded those present that there were plenty of ways to have deer and trees together. One councillor suggested having less trees planted. I reminded everyone of the Scottish SPCA position on the matter – the Tullos Hill deer would be killed not because it was for their safety/health – but to plant trees . “Abhorrent and absurd” were how the Scottish SPCA put it.

At the end of the day the Council decided to draft a letter to the City. The debate was closed with Peter Reiss saying to Ms Malone “you have not taken the public with you, and people are saying “this is ridiculous”. It was suggested this might even damage Ms Malone’s political career.

And that is where we leave it for now.

But one thing is certain, the opposition to the cull has not gone away by a very long shot. If nothing else, the Cults, Bieldside & Milltimber Community Council gave me the democratic forum for debate that I could find nowhere else: I am extremely grateful to them.

Suzanne Kelly’s 10 point report - Click here. - Please consider writing to Aberdeen City Council’s Housing and Environment Committee in support of this formal complaint.

Tullos Hill Ablaze

Aberdeen City, Articles, Breaking, Featured, Information, News No Responses »

May 192011

By Alan Robertson.

Two separate fires broke out on Tullos Hill on the evening of Wednesday 18th May from around 8.30pm until the Fire Brigade brought them under control approximately an hour later. The fires were at either side of the hill and one of the fires stretched across an area I would estimate to be approximately 200 metres.

Despite the fact that both fire outbreaks were on green gorse land, the recent dry conditions allowed them to spread extremely quickly. Had conditions been different with a prevailing wind to assist, the blazes may have covered a far greater area at speed and caused more extensive damage.

There has been a history of wilful fire raising on the hill. At present this results in brush fires. The Fire Brigade have estimated that in one summer the cost to their service was in excess of £35,000.

These latest incidents raise further concerns about the viability of Tullos Hill for the proposed planting of 40,000 trees by Aberdeen City Council in their plan to turn the area into a forested area designated Diamond Wood status by the Woodland Trust. Should a similar fire or fires start in a large forested area, as proposed by the Council, the potential for a large scale blaze across a vast area of Tullos Hill would appear to be a real possibility.

Worryingly, Tullos Hill is an area where methane gas, produced by the decomposition of buried waste, is vented from underground using special equipment that is spread across the entirety of the hill. The potential combination of a large forested area and the continual venting of highly flammable methane gas could present a major risk to the surrounding industrial estates if a large forest fire was to take hold.

Tullos Hill is also in close proximity to Tullos Primary School.

71 fires occurred in 2006 according to Grampian Fire And Rescue Service – down from 132 in 2005. This reduction has come about as the result of a range of measures undertaken by the Fire Service in partnership with Police, the local community, schools and media.

http://www.grampianfrs.org.uk/subdreamer/index.php?categoryid=8&p2_articleid=20

However the incidence and potential risk of fires on Tullos Hill will be exacerbated if the proposed extended forestation were to go ahead and this further calls into question the Council proposals to plant a large number of trees in this area.

Older Entries