Aberdeen Cremation Report: Time Up For Peter Leonard?

 Aberdeen City, Featured, Opinion  No Responses »
Sep 092016
 

Suzanne Kelly looks back at a variety of City issues involving Peter Leonard, Director of Housing Environment and Infrastruccture. She concludes, while he is on sick leave following vacation, that in her opinion, it’s time for him to go.

marischalpicMany people in Aberdeen tend to think the councillors are to blame for all the many, many mistakes, flawed plans, waste of money, and bad decisions that take place.

The truth is that they only get to vote on reports put before them by officers, and officers can and do drive agenda and stop plans they don’t like. Staff too are controlled by the officers.

They are vilified for complaining or resorting to whistle-blowing when complaints to managers fail.

Aberdeen Voice is aware of more than one case of staff being micro-managed and having their work time scrutinized to the last minute. There are many people who, while worried about being discovered, want to talk about negative experiences with officers, and that includes Pete Leonard.

Head of Housing & Environment Pete Leonard has been implicated in a catalogue of bad decisions.

Having just missed a chance to apologise to the public over the cremation scandal so he could holiday, he is now off sick. Reports suggest he will remain out of the office – until terms of his final severance package can be ironed out. Many find his continuing in his post is now untenable following the cremation report – and the public has not seen the report commissioned by the Chief Executive.

My long-running interaction with him over the destruction of the Tullos Hill is no secret. He insisted on deer slaughter: when established consultants offered free help, they were rejected.

The slaughter was called ‘abhorrent and absurd’ by the Scottish SPCA in the circumstances. The expensive, unsuccessful attempts to establish trees on the hill are his responsibility – he declared in formal reports the scheme would be cost neutral. (Tullos is a former waste dump with little topsoil; the government’s own departments have written that establishing trees there is unlikely. However, it’s made quite a bit of money for consultants, suppliers, and deer stalkers).

Leonard’s insistence to the Housing & Environment Committee that the Tree for Every Citizen Scheme would be ‘cost neutral’ has cost well into a five-figure sum (and caused more than 36 deer to be culled needlessly) and may result in further expense to taxpayers soon. A councillor’s proposal to keep the hill as a meadow with deer was quashed before it could be voted on: by  Pete Leonard.

One of many ponderous reports flogging the dubious benefits of the Muse development of Marischal Square bears Leonard’s name. On 2 March 2016 this report recommends against asking the public for any further input on Marischal Square because the public might experience ‘consultation fatigue’ and may result in a ‘negative customer experience’.

Heaven forbid. Customer experience didn’t attract the council’s attention when, despite 3,000 citizens and 3 community councils demanding the deer be spared were ignored.

The idea was to have a temporary place under the arches where people could buy coffee and snacks

As to consultation fatigue, I think more people would prefer the chance to have their say and risk ‘fatigue’ than winding up with the monstrous white elephant at Marischal – where the Press & Journal will now call HQ for one year free – courtesy of the taxpayer.

By the way, after suggesting ‘consultation fatigue’ was real, the report goes on to steamroll the reader with jargon about including citizens to ‘participate in the development, design, and decision making services [how does a citizen participate in a decision making service??] to promote civic pride, active citizenship and resilience.’

Leonard has, in effect, proposed not fatiguing us with consultations while wanting our participation. Sounds like quite a balancing act; no wonder ‘resilience’ is also suggested.

There are many Aberdeen Voice readers who have fought to get basic housing repairs, fought to have housing suitable to the needs of the elderly and disabled, or even to have safe, habitable places to live. Some suggest the head of Housing & Environment needed to have a more hands on approach.

Who scotched the Cafe 52 plan to have a self-sustaining cafe in Union Terrace Gardens?

The idea was to have a temporary place under the arches where people could buy coffee and snacks, the Bothwell family were going to pay all the set-up costs, and volunteers were going to run it, as I recall. I do recall that the profits were all going to be churned back into improving the gardens. The departed Maggie Bochel even recommended this go through, and several councillors as well as many members of the public supported the plan.

Is it possible that a city council officer stepped in to stop this simple plan, and if so why? This may be a small side issue, but hopefully by now the point has been made that directors and officers can, and do, guide how and what a councillor gets to vote on.

As such, we need directors who are competent, who are capable, who are without bias, and who are accountable.

Where does the city most fall down? In its management of communities, housing and (obviously) infrastructure.

Who has been the responsible Director for Communities, Housing & Infrastructure for years? Pete Leonard.

Pete Leonard chose not to attend the public meeting that took place last week

Leonard is on a salary adjacent to £112k per year, plus a generous pension contribution. If he is allowed to remain in post following the various reports (public facing and secret) into the scandal of Aberdeen’s crematorium operations, something is drastically wrong.

Bereaved parents were told for years there would be no ash following cremation of their deceased children. In fact, the crematorium, under Leonard’s remit, was mixing the remains of children with those of unrelated adults, and in effect lying to parents.  This went on for years.

Some of the parents impacted by this cruel deception are calling for those responsible to be let go. I join that call

Pete Leonard chose not to attend the public meeting that took place last week; he was on holiday. It was disappointing to the bereaved that he was not there; his non-attendance sent a strong message.

The report into the long-running contempt shown both to the deceased and bereaved and severe managerial failure can be found here. It makes damning reading. Here are some highlights:

A damning summary:

“There was no overall strategic management of the crematorium. Aberdeen City Council had significant challenges elsewhere. Pete Leonard, Director of Communities, Housing and Infrastructure since 2010, explained to the Investigation,

“…in terms of the focus of senior management attention, you focus on the things that you know need fixing and you focus on the things you know to improve and areas where you need to make savings and you’ve got to try and bring the public and elected members with you, that’s very much a focus.”

“It was clear during the Investigation that the current Environmental Manager, Steven Shaw and those above him [that would include Leonard – S Kelly] had remote and ad hoc involvement in the management of the crematorium or the staff. The Investigation was told by the current Crematorium Manager, Angus Beacom, that,

“…staff felt that, in their words, not mine, they had been somewhat neglected by senior management”

“Pete Leonard, Director of Communities Housing and Infrastructure told the Investigation,

“I guess I was fairly light touch in my management in terms of, I don’t think I had visited the site for some time.”

“Pete Leonard confirmed that the purchase of new cremators was an expensive capital project and that he “was more focused on keeping track of that“,

“I guess the crematorium for me was a case of things seem to be going ok so a light touch management was ok and I wasn’t really getting involved.

The crematorium, I guess, never really featured on my radar. I wish it had, but it never featured on my radar so it was kind of left alone.”

“The Head of Services, Mark Reilly, told the Investigation,

“…Now there was a gap between Steven (Shaw, Environmental Manager) and Derek Snow (Cremation Manager) that I didn’t particularly care for. I wanted to really look at the structure of Bereavement Services and crematoria and how that works and get one manager overseeing both.”

“The Investigation found that despite issues about infant cremation coming to public attention following the media coverage about Mortonhall Crematorium in December 2012, no changes in practice were instigated at Aberdeen until November 2013 and July 2014.

“Pete Leonard, Director of Communities Housing and Infrastructure, told this Investigation,

“And we had lots of conversations, so we’d be saying, well if some people are saying that they’re recovering ashes, how is that? Are they using different temperatures and all this? There’s a lot of speculation about ‘well, we’re not sure how they’re doing it, but they’re probably doing things like turning the ovens off at night and leaving the baby in to ‘slow cook‘ and do we really want to be doing that and what if the parents found out about that?‘ and there were issues being thrown in around emissions and if you turn the heating down then you might be breaking the emissions law. There didn’t seem to be any shared industry knowledge or best practice.”

“There was no evidence that any effort was made by anyone at Aberdeen City Council to clarify at exactly what age or stage ashes were available. The senior managers did not challenge what they were told despite the information emerging from Mortonhall Crematorium nor did they seek information from Seafield Crematorium, or even closer, Parkgrove Crematorium, to ascertain how these crematoria could have been obtaining ashes despite the Aberdeen position that none existed until the age of eighteen months to two years.

“Pete Leonard told the Investigation,

“Around about that time we received a letter from Sue Bruce (then Chief Executive of City of Edinburgh Council) with the scope of the inquiry that she had asked Dame Elish to perform and I had a conversation with Valerie Watts then Chief Executive of Aberdeen City Council. I said I’d been to see the crematorium team, they assure me everything is okay but I really think we need to get some objective people in to do an audit and investigation into some of the processes and ask them questions. That led PwC to do an investigation, which was very much process based. At the same time, myself and Mark Reilly went to visit the team, got more behind the scenes.

“I think not getting ashes had been for as long as they could remember. Certainly with the new cremators they didn’t. With the older ones I don’t think they did, but I think they said previously they may have done in the dim and distant past, there might have been something. I think they gave some examples there, but I can’t really recall.

I think it pretty much reflected what the guys said and looked at the records. On reflection I think we didn’t focus enough on behaviour. When subsequently things changed in terms of what people’s story was, my own reflection on myself was perhaps I could have been a bit more challenging around some behaviours.

I drew up the terms of reference for the report and cleared these with the Chief Executive but it was based on what Sue Bruce had sent through, it was very similar terms of reference.

I am asked if the auditors looked at records as opposed to wider processes. Yes, that was the case. I am asked if anyone was examining the actual operational processes of cremation itself. No there was not. I think the years picked for audit were aligned with the different types of cremators from what I can see. I think there were different changes to the record keeping and we kept records up to a certain date. I think somebody had written to say they’d had some issue around 2008 and that they received ashes so on the back of that, we said can you go further back and examine what the practice was then”

“Pete Leonard told the Investigation,

“Around about that time we received a letter from Sue Bruce (then Chief Executive of City of Edinburgh Council) with the scope of the inquiry that she had asked Dame Elish to perform and I had a conversation with Valerie Watts then Chief Executive of Aberdeen City Council. I said I’d been to see the crematorium team, they assure me everything is okay but I really think we need to get some objective people in to do an audit and investigation into some of the processes and ask them questions. That led PwC to do an investigation, which was very much process based. At the same time, myself and Mark Reilly went to visit the team, got more behind the scenes.

I think not getting ashes had been for as long as they could remember. Certainly with the new cremators they didn’t. With the older ones I don’t think they did, but I think they said previously they may have done in the dim and distant past, there might have been something. I think they gave some examples there, but I can’t really recall.

I think it pretty much reflected what the guys said and looked at the records. On reflection I think we didn’t focus enough on behaviour. When subsequently things changed in terms of what people’s story was, my own reflection on myself was perhaps I could have been a bit more challenging around some behaviours.

I drew up the terms of reference for the report and cleared these with the Chief Executive but it was based on what Sue Bruce had sent through, it was very similar terms of reference.

I am asked if the auditors looked at records as opposed to wider processes. Yes, that was the case. I am asked if anyone was examining the actual operational processes of cremation itself. No there was not. I think the years picked for audit were aligned with the different types of cremators from what I can see. I think there were different changes to the record keeping and we kept records up to a certain date. I think somebody had written to say they’d had some issue around 2008 and that they received ashes so on the back of that, we said can you go further back and examine what the practice was then”

“An audit by the company PwC LLP was duly commissioned and terms of reference agreed in March 2013. The auditors reported on 9 July 2013. This audit was limited in scope and did not look at the actual cremation operational processes but rather traced a sample of cremations to the supporting records and administrative process in respect of the cremation of stillborn babies and infants under the age of two.

“The audit report describes its work as to ‘undertake a data collection exercise and review the current procedures in operation to better inform the Council Officers’ understanding of arrangements and practices.’ The report was based on the documentation available but there is no indication of the Council seeking audit of the actual cremation working processes by a suitably qualified cremation industry expert or body such as the FBCA.

“Pete Leonard, Director, told the Investigation,

“There had been a conversation about use of trays and what have you and I was very nervous about health and safety and I guess I placed a lot of reliance on the internal audit which we scoped out in March and it reported in July 2013.”

“There was no evidence given to the Investigation that after the production of this audit report the Council challenged Derek Snow’s assertion that there were no ashes to be obtained from babies less than eighteen months old. At the very least the information provided by PwC should have alerted the Council to the inconsistency between their public position and what the audit disclosed from the past.

“There is no evidence of the contents of the report being probed or checked to ascertain the reason for the different outcomes in the sampled cases. This information should have been of particular interest given the Council’s public position that ashes did not exist for babies under eighteen months to two years.

“Derek Snow, the Crematorium Manager added,

“When I started in 1986 there was no written procedures or guidance for babies. As far as I know there’s still nothing like that at the moment.”

“Steven Shaw, the current Environmental Manager, said that it was clear to him that,

“we didn’t have written up simple guidelines. I pushed for them to write up the procedures.”

“Pete Leonard said,

“When we started speaking to the guys, it was very clear then that there were no practices which made me nervous. “

“Staff also had access to manufacturers’ manuals for the cremators they were using. Aberdeen City Council’s response noted in the 10 July 2013 PwC LLP internal audit report was that they would be formalising their written policy and would consider any findings that came from the Scottish Government’s review.

“However, when staff were interviewed by the Investigation in February 2015 there was still no formal written procedure, guidance, instruction or local training manual available to staff at Aberdeen Crematorium despite

  • the recommendations of Lord Bonomy in his report of May 2014,
  • the Mortonhall Investigation Report April 2014,
  • the PwC internal audit recommendation of July 2013,
  • interest expressed by the Scottish Parliament,
  • press and extensive media coverage of the issues surrounding the cremation of babies throughout the period 2012-2014.

“Neither did the receipt of an anonymous letter result in such action. This letter indicated that the reason baby ashes were not being returned to families at Aberdeen was because babies were being cremated alongside the coffins of unrelated adults. Members of staff were still working on drafting the crematorium’s first Operational Procedures Booklet in early 2015.

“It was put to Pete Leonard, Director, that Derek Snow had suggested that he was only really a manager when it suited his line managers to treat him as such, that he was given very little scope to manage and was not given the opportunity to attend training. Pete Leonard replied,

“I couldn’t really say. I am asked if he ever made a complaint to me about the way he was being managed. No not at all, he seemed to be happy in his work.”

“This is in stark contrast to what former Environmental Manager, Sandy Scott said about Derek Snow wanting to leave since 2006. Sandy Scott told the Investigation,

“Derek Snow did not want to be at the Council. He made it quite clear he wanted to leave and I did some investigating and spoke to my Head of Service but we felt we couldn’t let him go at that point. It was always a feature of our one to ones as he wanted to bring it up with me.”

“Pete Leonard, Director of Communities Housing and Infrastructure said,

“I guess I felt really let down and right from the word go, what we’d said to the guys was ‘we’re not going to judge you on what’s happened, when you’re in an industry and you follow historic practices, sometimes you might find yourself doing something that culture accepted before. Something which might look horrific but you’re caught up in the middle of that and you’re just doing what you’ve always been told.

“So this is about understanding what’s going on’. We had said, ‘if there’s anything, anything at all, now’s the time to get it out, you’ve got our full support’. We couldn’t have emphasised that more and so to then find out that the guys were lying and they’d been so convincing …I was bloody angry to be honest but really upset. Then I was really upset because of the impact on families.

“I’ve got young children myself and you can empathise. So then we had to move into trying to figure what happened and I wasn’t looking at punishing anybody, I just wanted to figure out what had been going on and we don’t really know. I mean, having gone through the experience of believing what they said before, to be honest, anything they said, I took with a pinch of salt.

“Could be true, it maybe isn’t true and there was no real way I got that mechanism to get to the truth. The investigation may have more success.”

“this was a section of the City Council working in almost complete isolation without any strategic direction, development or quality control of the service, so far as it related to babies, infants and non-viable foetuses. There was little knowledge by Senior Management of the service provided to the families of these babies.

“There was insufficient interest taken or leadership shown by management

“much of what was learned by Cremator Operators at Aberdeen was received wisdom from more experienced peers. The extraordinary belief that there would be no recovered ashes from babies up to the age of eighteen months or two years was contradicted by what was known to be recovered in many other crematoria as well as in Aberdeen itself in earlier years

“The cremation of babies along with unknown adults is an unethical and abhorrent practice which will offend the sensibilities of the wider community and cause great distress to those whose babies were cremated there. It will also cause profound concern to the next of kin of unrelated adults who may have collected and continue to retain ashes of loved ones cremated at Aberdeen which also contain the ashes of a baby or one or even several non-viable foetuses

“When obliged to consider this issue with the commencement of the Mortonhall Investigation and during the separate opportunity to explain their position to Lord Bonomy and his team the true picture at Aberdeen Crematorium was not disclosed. The Infant Cremation Commission was misled about the practices taking place.

“It was clear from the interviews of staff in early 2015 that despite the passage of time since the Mortonhall Report, the report of the Infant Cremation Commission and extensive media coverage of the circumstances at Mortonhall Crematorium that staff had not yet been properly briefed or briefed at all to allow them to have an accurate understanding of the physiology of the bones of foetuses, stillborn babies and infants.

8. The most senior level of management at Aberdeen must provide strong leadership and now take full responsibility for the effective management of the crematorium. It must also ensure that immediate and appropriate training takes place and that effective and ethical practices are maintained. This relates not only to a change of working practices but to an assurance that the culture of the organisation and the knowledge and understanding is such as to prevent any future abuse of the trust of those families who have placed the remains of their loved ones in their care.

10. As with other crematoria there was a total absence of any local written instruction or guidance. This remained the case even in 2015 after an audit report of 2013 which highlighted the lack of written procedure. This meant that the actual practices employed in the crematoria were not documented and available for inspection by normal quality assurance procedures. Had such written guidance been available it may have alerted Cremator Operators to the deviant nature of their practices.

11. By allowing the predicted outcome rather than the actual outcome to remain in the disposal column Aberdeen City Council created a situation where the inaccurate information was allowed to remain on the Register. Although the inaccuracy was identified no steps had been to correct the accuracy of the Register. This casual and careless approach to a statutory obligation is of considerable concern.”

My conclusions

There is contradiction about Leonard’s position in the Muse report (do we not consult people so as not to ‘fatigue’ them or do we involve them in the design, etc).

Leonard contradicts himself again in his testimony here.  At one stage we’re asked to think of him as being a father who’d be concerned about the families; and then we have the inexcusable on the appalling choice of words about ‘slow cooking babies’ and ‘what if the parents found out’. Either you are a caring, empathetic parent – or you use that kind of language and seek to keep your parent peers in the dark.

Claims that there was no way to find out about any industry best practice or operational standards are debunked within five minutes by anyone with internet access. A search would swiftly find  The Federation of Burial and Cremation Authorities(FBCA). This organisation told me:

“The Federation of Burial and Cremation Authorities(FBCA) represents all but two of the operational crematoria in Scotland and around 85% of crematoria in the whole of the UK.

The FBCA has existed since 1924 and represents the owners and operators of cemeteries and crematoria in the UK.

All members of the FBCA have to confirm that they operate in accordance with our Code of Cremation Practice on an annual basis.

The process of cremation is regulated by Sepa and there are parameters which have to be maintained throughout each and every cremation, whether adult or infant, however it is important that special measures are taken during the cremation of very young babies to ensure that the conditions within the cremator provide the best possible opportunity for the recovery of ashes at the completion of the process..

We provide the training and examination process used at the majority of crematoria in Scotland and we strive to ensure that Best Practice and the highest standards are met at all times. “
– email from R Powell of FBCA to S Kelly 5 September 2016

For someone with a director’s mandate covering the crematorium, ignorance of this easily-found knowledge is bad enough; it is compounded by the evident lack of interest in pro-actively seeking for it.

Changes were to have been made in documentation for procedures; this went un-remedied for years. Should the buck have stopped with Leonard?

The curtains are drawn:

It should be noted that there is a Customer Services Standards document – but it is being updated, and requests for a copy of the current one have gone unanswered.  Aberdeen Voice also made an appointment to view the Officers’ register of interests – and hours before the appointment the city cancelled on the grounds ‘personal data’ would be in the records.

The legal team decided that a Freedom of Information request would be needed, and that while councillors’ records are all electronically available, the records for officers and directors were off limits.

Let’s hope the wait to see the records won’t take too long (all FOI requests I have made to the city have been just to the deadline or have been late).

Enough:

I watched as the arrogance and assurances from Leonard led to the destruction of a herd of deer that had lived on Tullos for decades without needing any cull. I watched as he stubbornly refused free advice on non-lethal culling, refused to take on board the soil report saying that trees are unlikely to establish while approving hundreds of thousands of pounds on consultants, fencing, trees and deer hunters.

I watched as a friend whose stillborn child was told there would be no ashes to scatter after cremation some years ago. I worried as I helped arrange a cremation fairly recently as to what was going on.

I watched as the hated Muse project was foist upon a largely unwilling, certainly poorly consulted public – who will  now subsidise the Press & Journal with a year’s free rent.

I watched as parents were further disrespected by Leonard deciding not to face them at the crematorium public meeting as he chose to vacation instead.  I’ve listened to complaints of people with health issues in housing inadequate to their needs.

I’ve heard from people who waited months and months for simple housing repairs.  I’ve heard from people living in housing where anti social behaviour runs rampant because the city keeps no residential staff to ensure safety. I’ve heard from staff who have felt bullied under his regieme.

I now want to watch as Leonard leaves his post with as small a remuneration as legally possible, and leaves quickly.

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

Valerie Watts: So Long, And Thanks For … Errr … ?

 Aberdeen City, Featured, Opinion  5 Responses »
Mar 312014
 

Valerie Watts served as  Aberdeen City Chief Executive on a six figure salary  from March 2011 until mid-March 2014. She scrapped her job as Derry Chief Executive and came to Aberdeen to give us the benefit of her experience. What benefits exactly have we reaped from the experience of Valerie’s tenure? ‘Watt’ should not be forgot? By Suzanne Kelly.

town-house-rain-featBackdrop

Valerie Watts’ stewardship as Aberdeen’s Chief Executive of Aberdeen City Council could and should have been a huge triumph by default.

Thousands marched against cuts imposed by the LibDem/SNP alliance in 2008.

The reigning LibDem/SNP coalition not only imposed cuts – they then turned around with some serious audacity to march along with thousands of those whose services they had cut.

Service slasher and budget protest marcher Kate Dean said at the time:

“I will be marching under the banner calling for a fair deal for Aberdeen. I can understand why people need to protest against these cuts but we also need to protest against the reason why we have had to make the cuts which in my opinion is mostly to do with the distribution formula.

“If we had the same funding as Glasgow we would have something like £60m a year more. We have the lowest funding settlement per head of population of any council in Scotland.”
http://www.heraldscotland.com/councillors-to-join-protest-over-service-cuts-1.845949 (Note – when Labour today use this argument in the council, they are derided. It is almost as if politics overrode logic).

LibDem Kate Dean imposed cuts while the city lost millions and gave land away for a song. Then Dean marched alongside people protesting her cuts.  LibDem Aileen Malone, an elected councillor, later participated in a protest against the council she was part of (over the failure to build a structure in Union Terrace Gardens).   Perhaps this form of protesting against yourself is a LibDem thing.

Some £11 million was written off under Dean as bad debt in one year; a property sale scandal came under her as well. Choices Day Care Centre was controversially closed. Could the then administration have found £60 million to benefit people in need? Not if it also wanted a shiny new office building.

Guess which need won the day. Sue Bruce apparently had enough of the Chief Executive post and scarpered.

Prologue

Watt’s immediate predecessor Sue Bruce moved to Edinburgh by January 2011; Bruce also received a six figure salary. Before her we had the spectacle of Chief Executive Douglas Paterson retiring due to ill heath in June 2008, (coincidentally concurrent with the Audit Scotland investigation into the property sales) days after announcing that he would not resign.

For further background on the property sales including how Stewart Milne was virtually handed land in Kingswells, see past issues of Aberdeen Voice.

Kate Dean and SNP coalition councillor Kevin Stewart tried to sweeten Paterson’s leaving package for reasons only they would understand, but sadly the pair were unsuccessful, as this extra money proved too unseemly even for Paterson to swallow. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/fury-over-pay-off-for-chief-exec-981139 .

some of her less shiny milestones from three years in Aberdeen should be remembered

In the end, Audit Scotland couldn’t decide if the city was amazingly inefficient or criminally negligent.

Aberdeen Voice tried to find the report Audit Scotland directed Grampian Police to produce on the matter.

However, Police Scotland has said they cannot find any record of a report on a multimillion pound real estate debacle they were directed to create by Audit Scotland. It would be difficult to find such a document as you can imagine.

In short, it was a sorry catalogue of scandals that swept through the city’s previous administrations (best not mention a curly-haired councillor disgraced for financial misappropriation or another councillor done for ‘kerb crawling’ while being appointed to work with youths).

Surely the woman who brought Derry its City of Culture status would turn our fortunes around, stop any corruption, and make accountability to the taxpayer a priority, and ensure our vulnerable citizens, our environment and our wildlife would be protected. The only way was up. So we thought.

While some newspapers are busy lauding her accomplishments, whatever they may be, perhaps some of her less shiny milestones from three years in Aberdeen should be remembered too.

She was not amused: Early days at Marischal College

It was not an auspicious start.  She was not long into the job when the glorious refurbishment (read gutting and disposal of many architectural and historic items) of Marischal College was announced and an opening scheduled.

The taxpayers were supposed to be forelock-tuggingly appreciative as to how the project apparently came in under budget and on time – a first for Aberdeen by any reckoning. A mere £60 million pounds or so was spent refitting the interior of the Victorian building, designed in such a way that new, smaller office furniture had to be bought to fit the space. All the while, school closures were considered and further cutbacks appeared.

Valuable Victorian books were thrown in a skip (and their rescuer was threatened for saving them by a construction worker).

Amid much fanfare over the £60 million spend when it could have been £80 million, the ceilings leaked dubious substances onto the council offices from a men’s loo.

it looks as if marischal itself will prove a popular meeting place perhaps no need to build in utgThis £60 million gutting of an architectural gem might not have seemed a bargain to those harmed by swingeing cuts. Since the city doesn’t actually own the building, was this re-fit really a great bargain and the only solution to office space?

The council owns hundreds of office properties for one thing, and surely before embarking on such a project, carefully researched options and costs would be studied. Value for money?

An Aberdeen Voice request to see the costing of alternatives to the Marischal College refit was rebuffed; it was claimed the financials were actually the ‘intellectual property’ of the accountants, not the taxpayers whose money was under discussion and who ultimately had to foot the bill.  And Ms Watts had just taken the reins of power. According to STV, she said:

“The City Council has brought to fruition a remarkable project which has created a stunning new public building for all the people of Aberdeen. It will be admired far and wide by citizens and visitors alike and will become the iconic (iconic is a hard word to avoid in Aberdeen) image for this proud city.”
http://news.stv.tv/north/19847-marischal-college-opens-its-doors-to-customers-for-first-time/

For those who opposed the previous budget cuts and saw their effect of people in need, ‘pride’ was hardly the appropriate word for this £60 million pound office building which gutted a gem. So the principle of pride and edifice before people was established in the opening speech.

Alas, nothing could stop the opening of the grandiose ACC offices at Marischal.

Unfortunately, someone leaked the date to the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens and other grass-roots groups, whose members peacefully showed up with placards at the launch of the new Marischal College, protesting the plans to turn the only city centre gardens which happened to be common good land into a development opportunity.

On the day the opening took place, these peaceful protestors arrived with placards. Some politicians chatted to the group; some VIPs seemed bemused. One woman on the scene positively seethed with rage according to several accounts.

As a protestor put it – Valerie Watts (for it was she) might have been fairly new in the job, but it was clear she was ‘fizzing with anger’. Watts had apparently been both on holiday and spray painted an orange/brown tan shade for the event, earning her the nickname in some quarters ‘fake bake.’

Responsibility:

Newly-ensconced Watts said:

 “This is an exciting time in the life of Aberdeen. We are facing the tightest squeeze on public spending that almost any of us can remember but this gives us the chance to use our imaginations and rise to the challenges.

“It is my role as Chief Executive to take responsibility for leading on the priorities which elected members and the people of Aberdeen have set for this organisation – and I am bringing together all the strengths of this great city to make sure it continues to thrive.”

No one knew what she meant by ‘continues to thrive,’ but at any rate, Valerie was set to turn things around.

Deer Oh Deer:

Coinciding with Watt’s tenure, the LibDems and in particular their leader, Aileen Malone, were determined to plant ‘A Tree For Every  Citizen’.  This noble-sounding scheme somehow didn’t seem so noble when it was eventually revealed in Aberdeen Voice that the herd of deer on Tullos Hill, had been set for the cull before the consultation was published.

Deer had existed on Tullos without any cull for 30 years – all for trees which probably would not grow due to soil condition and decades of dumping (including industrial, household waste and some traces of radiation).

somehow her turning seven council departments into three departments wasn’t meant to mean job losses

Aileen Malone, Lib Dem, held all the cards when she was the convener of the Housing & Environment Committee; she issued the unprecedented ultimatum that the public had to come up with £250,000 in a short space of time, or the deer would be killed as the most ‘economic’ way to turn Tullos Hill into a forest.

Watts didn’t bat an eyelash and animal charities and opposition politicians called this unprecedented blackmail.  Those in the know, including the Scottish SPCA derided the scheme and its cruelty; much of which has already been written. But it is to the part Valerie Watt played in the destruction of a herd of deer that should be looked at.

Should anyone want to view source documents and a report, they can be found here along with her letter to me.

A whole raft of information was put to Watts as to why the cull was unnecessary, cruel and flawed.

Animal Concern Advice Line, the Scottish SPCA, local residents, community councils all objected specifically to this particular cull and its circumstances. Watts’ behaviour in denying any possible options or  alternatives to killing the animals, and her dismissal of all arguments from the opposition might have reminded those she left behind in Derry of her stance on jobs cuts she proposed as a parting gift.

When she was leaving Derry to grace Aberdeen with her presence, she created a plan to restructure Derry’s council. In a BBC report entitled ‘No Job Losses’ at Derry City Council, Watts ‘denied there will be any job losses under restructuring plans’. This then turned out to mean ‘I have worked out that potentially there may not be any job losses, but that depends on the willingness of employees to apply for these new jobs as they are advertised’.

In an article filled with rhetoric, Watts was said to have refused to negotiate over the restructure (as she refused to negotiate over the future of Tullos Hill’s deer), and somehow her turning seven council departments into three departments wasn’t meant to mean job losses, even though people had to apply and be accepted for jobs.

With such a command of logic and mathematics, it is no wonder she had a few lapses in terms of arithmetic with deer-related issues in Aberdeen.

These included losing track of a 3,000-strong petition against the cull and the tree scheme presented to the council’s representative Aileen Malone on national television.  She also managed to lose track of anti-Tullos deer cull postcards (thought to be a much higher figure) which were hand delivered to a receptionist at the Town House who said he’d seen ‘tons’ of the postcards.

She used her Watts logic and claimed this  had no bearing at all on the question asked

Hundreds of cards were handed out; dozens of people advise they posted their cards in, and over 60 were handed to the receptionist. Watts claimed to have received 35. The Scottish SPCA made a specific objection to the Tullos Cull, calling it ‘abhorrent and absurd’ to kill deer where trees were highly unlikely to flourish.

When given that quote, Watts replied to Aberdeen Voice that there was no evidence the Scottish SPCA opposed deer culls. She had taken a statement made by a senior Scottish SPCA officer directed specifically at the Tullos cull, and managed to come up with a statement which had nothing to do with the fact she was presented with.

This strategy of taking a specific fact and contorting it to either a specific focus or a widely painted assertion seems to be a Watts trademark, whether it is denying facts on deer killing or potential job losses during her Derry job restructuring.

When asked if a previous failed tree planting scheme on Tullos Hill cost Aberdeen’s taxpayers £44,000, Watts colourfully asserted that this was not the case. When pressed, she admitted that £43,800 (which seems to the lay person as being rather close to £44,000) had been repaid to the Forestry Commission for a failed tree planting on Tullos.

She used her Watts logic and claimed this  had no bearing at all on the question asked, because the money was paid in March and the question was asked in May. Surprisingly animal welfare campaigners were not impressed.

Aberdeen Voice also uncovered the fact the cull was being planned, but was kept out of the public consultation (which only mentioned putting in rabbit fences rather than slaughtering deer). Watts wrote the consultation was ‘robust’ and that it wasn’t necessary to spell out what was required to have the projected forest.

She never did explain why then it was spelled out that deer fencing was mentioned in the consultation as a method for the plantation if it was not necessary to say what was going to happen to the deer if the trees were approved.

Several community councils, thousands of petition signers disagreed.

Eventually Aberdeen Voice found out the city spent tens of thousands of pounds on consultant Chris Piper, who would be paid if the trees were planted and the deer culled.

case after case of financial misappropriation arose

Watts could have stopped all this and saved money for the city in the bargain with saving deer, but she didn’t do anything except defend the cull, rejecting the wishes of elected community councils.

(It should be noted that at the following election, the LibDems who supported their ‘tree for every citizen’ scheme so staunchly were themselves culled. Kate Dean lost her seat, and a campaigner who tried to save the animals, Andy Finlayson, was elected).

Thirty four or thirty five deer were destroyed – and the fact remains the soil reports say the hill – a former refuse dump with a radioactive history on record – cannot grow trees that won’t eventually topple in strong winds, something Aberdeen has in abundance.

In the City’s Hallowed Halls:

Watts also oversaw a few internal struggles, as case after case of financial misappropriation arose. People apparently stole money from the council just before her time as well as during it. People engaged by the city to look after the elderly and otherwise infirm turned out to be thieving money from their vulnerable clients  The council then had a colourful time as it bungled the potential cut of 150 jobs.

There have been other amusing stories as to the city’s mismanagement (well, amusing if you are not the people involved).

Valerie, while head of the operations, was surely not responsible for what was going on under her. That seems to have been outwith the remit of taking responsibility.

As the council meandered from one pointless expensive exercise to another (remember the City Garden Project anyone?), Valerie found time to invest our money in trying to relive her glory days.  Back in Derry she had won the (apparently) coveted City of Culture Award, and she was going to go for it here, too.

Forgetting the fact that the city of culture has not seen any increase in tourists jetting into Derry, and that some of that city’s cultural infrastructure for music is facing financial ruin, Watts nevertheless pursued the Culture accolade for Aberdeen. This would have been a huge comfort to, for instance, the Torry-based artist collective Limousine Bull, which went out of existence.

Rita Stephen to come up with the goods and create a bid

They had provided art courses, exhibition space and studio rooms in Torry which were popular in the area. Bull ran out of money, and for want of a relatively small sum of money, died. Still, we managed to find money for the ‘Retail Rocks’ scheme in Torry.

Virtually all of the shops created in Torry (where shop holders were exempt from paying various taxes and got advice for their shops) folded, but there was no money for the Limousine Bull collective. Rather disappointing in a would-be city of culture trying to regenerate its poorer areas.

Selecting culture expert (???) Rita Stephen to come up with the goods and create a bid, Watts allowed a fair few Aberdonian’s tax pounds to be invested in pursuing the bid, in the process inventing the risible ‘gigs on rigs’ scheme.

City officials thought rock stars and the like were willingly going to go and perform on drink free, non-smoking, oil rigs in the rough North Sea so we could watch the concerts via video linkup in Aberdeen bars; of course these concerts could have been beamed to any onshore location. All of this was rolled out poignantly in what was formerly one of the city’s few independent record shops which also showcased bands, One Up  records on Belmont Street.

Before leaving the issue of culture, it would seem that the approved arts organisations and people had no problem with funding.

SHMU, which undoubtedly does some good work, receives some £200,000 per year from the city, whereas Limousine Bull couldn’t get a few extra thousand. A city employee involved in the distribution of Creative Scotland arts funding managed to win enough money to create a film. Precisely who evaluated his bid as successful over the artists who failed to win funding will form a future story.

Artists have approached Aberdeen Voice concerned that the City seems to have used their artwork without prior consent or remuneration.

All this was on Ms Watts’ three-year watch. Where did the buck stop exactly?

Resigned:

Why did Valerie go? Could it have been due to her crossing swords with Alex Salmond over his unauthorised visit to the Bramble Brae primary school during a by election? No other political parties were given a chance to pose with children for photo opportunities at the grammar school. The SNP locally are saying, as published in the local Press & Journal, that Watts was finally tired of Labour embarrassing the city.

It is tempting as an idea, but if Watts were the embarrassed type, she waited quite a time to show it. Alas for the SNP, she’s said Labour was not to blame.

There is no word as to whether a leaving card or a collection is being made. Aberdeen Voice will keep you posted on any card signing, and what kind of severance package is being offered. Who will take the job next remains to be seen.

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

Comrade Cooncil

 Aberdeenshire, Creative Writing, Opinion  1 Response »
Jul 262013
 

By Bob Smith.

martinford-kintore-crossing-tall

Martin Ford wis teen ower the coals
Fer spikkin tae yon Panorama
Seems the chiel’s opinion fae
Cooncil offices canna be on camera

The stushie fae the ‘shire cooncil
Tae North Koreawis mair suited
Wull aa future cooncil policy
Tae Kim Jong-Un be re-routed

A thocht we bade in a democracy
An war alood tae say yer bit
Cooncillor Ford gied his opinion
An some cooncillors hid a fit

His Trumpie got sic a grip?
Are cooncillors jist Trumpie goons?
Feart tae challenge The Donald
On onything tae dee wi dunes

A nivver thocht a’d see the day
Growen fowk aa rinnin scared
Fae a mannie full o bluster
Like the Menie Yankee laird

Lit’s curse aa coordly vratches
Lit them hang their heids in shame
They’ve selt fowk doon the river
As they play “King” Donald’s game

© Bob Smith “The Poetry Mannie” 2013

Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

TIF Business Case Complaint – An Open Letter

 Aberdeen City, Featured, Opinion  No Responses »
Jul 092012
 

Mike Shepherd has  lodged a complaint in a letter to Aberdeen City Council Chief Executive Valerie Watts regarding the recently published TIF business case. Mike shares the content of the letter with Aberdeen Voice readers.

Town House1
To The Chief Executive, Aberdeen Council

I am lodging a complaint about the TIF Business Case “Aberdeen City Centre Regeneration Scheme” which has been written as a report to inform a council vote in August. This document should be a disinterested analysis of the case, or otherwise, for Aberdeen Council borrowing £92 million through Tax Incremental Financing (TIF).

It is not. The report is a constructed narrative that contains major factual mistakes, errors of omission, false statements and flawed data. It is not credible.

The key argument of the report is based on input by private developers and their advisors who have a clear interest in a positive outcome to the council vote.  The conclusions of the report are therefore incompetent.

I request that Aberdeen Council withdraw the TIF business case as unfit for purpose.
http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/TIF_business_case

The details of my complaint are as follows:

  • The TIF business case contains a major factual mistake concerning funding for the Art Gallery:

On page 11 it is stated: 

“It is expected that a further £20 million of funding will be secured via Grants and other funding mechanisms to enable the City Art Gallery Redevelopment.”

In a table on page 42, it is stated that:

“The City Art Gallery redevelopment:  Funding identified from existing sources – £20 million”

This is incorrect. There is no identified £20 million funding for the Art Gallery. Council minutes show that the appropriate figure is £4 million.

The £20 million figure stems from an unrealistic aspiration to apply for funding from the Scottish Heritage Lottery Fund (SHLF):

“Both the Art Gallery redevelopment and a Museums Collection Centre would be eligible to apply for Heritage Fund Lottery grants, although the value the City Council would wish is beyond the annual allocation, which for all of Scotland is currently £20 million.”
http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=7314

The Council have yet to apply for funding from the SHLF and intend to do so later this year, in November. They have approached the SHLF:

“Officers have also discussed the current status of the project with the Scottish office of the Heritage Lottery Fund; the Fund advises that if matched funding can be raised within the City, then their Board would accept this as the Council’s contribution to the project within the application.

“The Art Gallery redevelopment is also included as one of the projects within the Tax Incremental Fund BID to the Scottish Government and if this is successful, that funding can be counted as part of the city’s contribution.”
http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=18050

The Art Gallery component of the TIF application is for £4 million (Ref: Table on page 42).  Matched funding from the SLHF for the TIF sum would be £4 million, not £20 million.

In the table on page 42 it is also stated:  

“The TIF Scheme creates the opportunity to invest in the City Art Gallery and even if after this investment the City of Culture bid is unsuccessful, the City will still have a state of the art asset for future generations to enjoy, as a result of the TIF mechanism.”

This is misleading. The Art Gallery redevelopment costings are as follows:

“The Development Study was fully funded by the Marguerite McBey Trust. Gareth Hoskins Architects provided an options appraisal in 2010 outlining 5 schemes ranging in scale and costs from £15.7m to £24.3m [2010 prices].”

TIF plus matched funding from the SHLF would only account for £8 million of the total sum required. The conclusion that “the City will still have a state of the art asset for future generations to enjoy, as a result of the TIF mechanism” is false and incompetent.

  • The TIF business case is misleading about funding from the private sector:

On page 11 there is a statement concerning private funding for the City Garden Project:  

“This includes £55 million that has already been pledged to the City Garden Project by private donors and a further £15 million to be raised”.

It is also mentioned that Aberdeen Council are confident that the extra £15 million can be found even though that this has been an unfulfilled aspiration for the last two years. Although the full £70 million has not been pledged, this figure has been assumed as valid for the rest of the report.

By page 42 this has become “funding identified from existing sources: £70 million.” This is incorrect, only £55 million has been identified.

On page 89 the conclusion states:

“The estimated total cost of the assets and enabling infrastructure for the TIF Scheme is £182 million.

“Pledged donations towards the City Garden Project of £70 million and potential grants for the City Art Gallery of £20 million creates a public sector investment requirement of £92 million, or marginally over 50% of the total cost, which will be borrowed by ACC as part of the proposed TIF Scheme.”

This conclusion is incompetent. The sums are wrong.  A consequence of this blunder is that Aberdeen Council may be required to borrow more than £92 million to ensure that the ‘city centre regeneration project’ is enabled.

  • An overlooked detail of critical importance to the business case: 

The report quotes extensively from the conditions voted through at the January 25th Council meeting. However, I have failed to find the following information mentioned.

From the report to Council of 25th January and voted through:

“Instructs officers to enter into negotiations with a view to putting in place a development agreement with Aberdeen City Garden Trust (ACGT) and/or their representatives, which sets out the terms upon which Aberdeen City Council (ACC) would be prepared to make necessary Council owned land available, to realise the proposed development described in Appendix 1 of this report after 1st March subject to;

“(x) Requires ACGT to confirm, in a legally binding form, that they have access to at least £70 million of private sector funds to invest in the CGP, prior to the signing of;

“a. An appropriate Development Agreement, and

“b. A TIF agreement confirming ACC’s ability to invest at least £70 million in enabling infrastructure related to the CGP. “

http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=18252

In other words, councillors have already decided that if the extra £15 million of private investment is not guaranteed, they are not going to apply for TIF funding. This should have been stated in the business case.

  • Flawed data:

Part of the justification for the City Garden Project is based on a questionnaire that was sent out to two selected groups in Aberdeen. This covers several pages of the report. One ‘cohort’ was a small group of 35 developers, landowners and agents in the City Centre area; the second comprised

“four hundred local private, public and third-sector organisations, representing a wide range of views.”

They got no replies from the first group (“a small response”), and later tried to phone them to get any views at all. Eventually seven people replied and several pages of analysis ensues in the report based on the comments of only seven individuals. There was a bit more interest from the second group, a group that included me.

I found that the questions were framed in such a way that it was virtually impossible to register any negative opinions about the City Garden Project. By dint of answering almost all the questions you ended up agreeing that the project was worthwhile.

This is typical:

“Considering each of the development schemes, which of the following benefits do you envisage they might deliver to the wider Aberdeen City economy?”

There is a clear intentional bias to the questionnaire that looks designed to elicit positive statements in favour of the City Garden Project. My opinion is that this is propaganda not data, and it should have no place in what should have been a dispassionate report informing councillors regarding the decision they have to make about the TIF business case.

  • Inappropriate input from the Aberdeen City Garden Trust:

The bottom line of the business case is that the City Garden Project will “will act as a catalyst for regeneration and economic growth” in Aberdeen and gives “The potential to unlock significant private sector investment and generate up to 8121 jobs and an average of £142.0 million per annum of economic growth over 25 years.”

The business justification is that take up of commercial space in two large business parks being built in the north of the city will be significantly under-subscribed unless the City Garden Project is built. An additional assumption concerns extra business activity in the city centre.

There is no discussion concerning how these assumptions have been made, yet this is the crux of the business case. We are being asked to trust that these assumptions are valid without any cogent analysis provided.

Yet, trust is a major issue concerning these assumptions. On page 74 under the section “ASSESSMENT OF NEW DEVELOPMENT AND BUSINESS RATES UPLIFT” we read that:

“In undertaking this assessment of development uplift ACC has received specialist research support from property advisors CB Richard Ellis as well as input from ACGT and PwC.”

(ACGT –Aberdeen City Garden Trust, PwC – Price Waterhouse Coopers, CBRE – CB Richard Ellis)

The relationship between CB Richard Ellis, PwC and the Aberdeen City Garden Trust is made clear on page 52:

 “ACC, with support from ACGT Enterprises and their advisers (PwC and CBRE)”

Thus it appears that major input has been provided to the critical argument in the business case by Aberdeen City Garden Trust and their advisors. A private company seeking to take over a lease and operatorship of council property, has been allowed to dictate input to a report recommending that  Aberdeen Council borrow £92 million for a project in which the company has a direct interest. This is entirely inappropriate.

The Aberdeen City Garden Trust has a clear interest in a positive outcome for the City Garden Project. They and their advisors should not have been allowed to have input into this report.

  • Conclusion:

Aberdeen Council operates at both a corporate and political level. Politicians make policy while key council officials provide a detailed examination of the background that commonly informs the decision making process.

In this regard, it is important that council officials provide a rigorous and dispassionate analysis, with any recommendations based on logic and a clear basis for the arguments that have been set out to justify these recommendations. In the report detailing the business case for the City Garden Project and other ancillary schemes, they have failed abysmally.

The most recent version of the business case is a travesty of synthesis and thesis. Rather than setting out a well argued case leading from careful marshalling of data towards a conclusion, the report appears to proceed from conclusion (the City Garden Project is a good thing) via a constructed narrative that includes mistakes, flawed data and wishful thinking.

Given that a consequence of this report is that Aberdeen Council could end up borrowing £92 million on the basis of ‘economic regeneration’, this may result in major reputational and financial damage for the council. The vote to approve submitting the business case to the Scottish Government is likely to take place in August this year.

  • The outcome I would like to see:

The TIF business case should be withdrawn immediately as incompetent and unfit for purpose.

  • Comments enabled. Note, All comments will be moderated.

FAIL: FOI Fatally Flawed?

 Aberdeen City, Featured, Information  1 Response »
Jul 062012
 

Disillusioned and dissatisfied with the speed, quality and transparency (for lack of a better word), Suzanne Kelly sums up her dealings with Aberdeen City’s FOI officers.

Aberdeen Rain

In 2007 I made my first Freedom of Information request to Aberdeen City Council.  This concerned travellers’ sites (the city had the brainstorm of telling travellers to go to the Torry  Battery – I pointed out that it was an Ancient Monument which the City was supposed to safeguard).

I received a reasonable answer in a reasonable timeframe.

However, it seems as if FOI request handling is far from straightforward of late.

I have been given information late on several occasions.  I have been refused information which I should have been given (as the Information Commissioner later agreed).  I have been given contradictory information. I have even, in my opinion, had disingenuous interpretations made of straightforward requests.    A few examples will illustrate the types of failings I believe need to be addressed.

1.  How many deer were shot on Tullos Hill?

Initially the first figure of deer shot was 22.  This was later changed to 23.  The figures continue to change.  An email of 22 June 2012 from the FOI Office implies 33 shots were fired.  Yet this same reply came with a copy of a handwritten notebook, in which 35 deer were listed as  killed.

Still another document sent at the same time shows 34 deer were killed.  Even though the last animal was -we are told- killed on 9 May, June FOI requests said 23 deer were killed.

This hardly seems like accurate information management to me.

2.  CJ Piper & Co. –  A mystery to ACC

‘CJ Piper & Co.’ is an entity connected to the tree scheme and the cull.  This company co-wrote a report with ACC on the tree scheme – recommending the destruction of 22 deer this year.  ACC paid CJ Piper & Co. at least £44,000.  However, there is no ‘CJ Piper & Co’ listed with Companies House.  There may be very simple explanations for this.  Whatever the explanation, we are not likely to get details anytime soon.

The FOI officer advised me:

“ACC is unable to provide you with information on ‘C J Piper & Co’, including  whether or not this is a registered company, … as it is not held by ACC. “

Precisely how Aberdeen City can spend public money and make payments to a company without holding its details may be of interest to the Information Commissioner as well as Audit Scotland.   It must have been extremely difficult to write a report with this mysterious firm, but ACC managed it.

There is of course the assumption that Chris Piper (a known forestry expert) is the main force behind this company, but the public should have the right to know this company’s details and whether there are any other directors/shareholders.

Should someone being paid to plant trees be the same person who writes a report recommending deer should be slaughtered in order to plant trees when they stand to gain financially from the contents of the report? The relevant issues will be looked at in the next Aberdeen Voice.

3.  How much has the Tree for Every Citizen and deer cull cost? 

I have received two spreadsheets under FOI legislation on this question.  The  latest spreadsheet was meant to show all the incoming and outgoing money on the deer cull and tree scheme.  But it raised more issues than it answered, including:

  • Thirteen lines of 32 line items are classed as ‘unknown concerning ‘ – this is unacceptable
  • Who are ‘Highland Estate Services’  – did they carry out the cull?  How did they and other contractors win work on this project?
  • What exactly are the ‘interdepartmental charges’ on Line 15 for £3000?
  • Where do the accounts show  the £43,800 returned to the Forestry Commission?  Accounting for this returned grant, it would seem ACC spent £167,512 minimum on the tree scheme and cull to date
  • Where are any entries to reflect all the deer fencing that was put up, or the £480 per week site clearance charges that went on over several months?
  • One of the few income streams coming in would have been the deer carcasses which were sold to a game meat dealer.  Where is an entry in the books showing how much money the City made from destroying this herd of deer?

4.  Correspondence between ACC and the Scottish SPCA – Someone is hugely mistaken

A story in the Evening Express recently claime 2 deer were found dead ‘ahead’ of the cull (the story appeared in 2012; the deer died of unknown causes in…2010).   The ‘news’ item quoted heavily from a letter ACC sent to the Scottish SPCA.

I asked for copies of letters to and from ACC and the Scottish SPCA (which told me there were a handful of letters on the Tullos topic).

However, Aberdeen FOI office says:

“… ACC holds a high volume of correspondence with the SSPCA relating to Tullos Hill. As such, it has proven to be quite difficult in identifying the particular letter to which you refer.  … it [FOI office]  is not aware of ACC supplying a copy of any letter to the Evening Express.”

So, not only do the City’s FOI people contradict the Scottish SPCA over the quantity of correspondence, but the ACC FOI office also cannot find a letter from ACC to the Scottish SPCA, quoted heavily in a news story (a copy of which I sent with my request).

At this point I can be forgiven for asking whether there is an political pressure at work on the FOI team concerning the cull.

5.  Q:  ‘Who or which agency performed site clearing work at Tullos?’

My question could not have been more straightforward; I asked ‘who or which agency’ performed site clearing work at Tullos (work which was worth apparently £480 per week).  The answer I first got smacked of sarcasm:  ‘a private contractor’.   Somehow, I had already managed to deduce that myself.   Sarcasm is fine in creative writing, but I question its place in a FOI response.

I wrote back:

“…the name of the company / companies involved should be specified.  This should please include their Company Registration Number by which they are listed in Companies House – if not listed, then please specify”

The FOI officer replied:

 “ACC is unable to provide you with the name of the private contractor (a sole trader).  ACC considers this information to be excepted under Regulation 11(2) and Regulation 10(5)(f) of the EIRS.  Please refer to the attached exception notices”

Perhaps they should have just said they were refusing to answer the question in the first place.   I am not completely certain that a sole trader should be called ‘CJ Piper AND COMPANY’, either.

Private entity  or not, the person/company was paid with public money, and we should know who is connected with it, how it was appointed, and what other work it has done.

6.  Is the use of a present tense verb reason enough to deny that a debt existed?

Rumour reached me that the failure of the first planting had cost the taxpayer about £44,000.  I asked the FOI office:

“Is it true that Aberdeen City Council owes a sum for previous, failed planting? “

The answer came:

“No money is owed by Aberdeen City Council to any agency or organisation for the previous planting.”

When I obtained a SNH letter proving £43,800 debt for the previous failed planting indeed existed,  the Chief Executive Watts denied the £43,800 had anything to do with my FOI request.  The Chief Executive indicated the £43,800 for the failed tree planting on Tullos Hill had nothing to do with the current scheme.

In the first place, it certainly has every relevance to the phase 2 tree planting.  In the second, my question did not say anything about phase 2 – just a ‘previous failed planting’.

The FOI people also defended their answer, writing  that since the debt had been paid, it no longer existed – and therefore they considered my question was not relevant.  The debt was paid in March; I asked my question in May.

I may be alone, but I see a connection between the £43,800 repaid for the previous failed planting and the £44,000 I asked about for a previous failed planting, irrespective of my  use of past or present tense verb in  my question, it was abundantly clear what information I had wanted.

7.  FOI 10703 The Tree scheme won’t cost us anything

I asked a ‘non-factual’ question, and wondered how the FOI office would cope.   I did get an interesting reply.

I asked,

“ Why is the ‘a tree for every citizen’ project something that must be adhered to so precisely?”

The reply came:

“Elected members made a commitment in their Vibrant Dynamic and Forward Looking statement … to plant a tree for every citizen to support the ongoing development and improvement of the quality and quantity of public open space in the City.  Officers have been challenged to deliver this commitment.  

“Aberdeen has a relatively small area of woodland cover (8.8%) as a percentage of its total area.  ….   Woodland recognised to offer a range of benefits for human well-being, creating a pleasant environment for people to live and work in, as well as being of great biodiversity value. 

“Creating these woodlands … will deliver on all these points, with the additional benefit of being created at no cost to the City Council due to the levels of external funding being obtained to deliver the project.  This demonstrates that the Tree for Every Citizen is not taking resources from other services within the City.”

I have to wonder how this answers ‘why’ we must adhere precisely to a scheme which condemned the existing meadowland ecological system.  is the above answer a factual, quantifiable piece of information – or is it political waffle?  The FOI did not attribute their answer.

8.  Marischal College – on time and under budget?  Where’s the proof?

Back when the idea of gutting Marischal College to create offices (too small for the  Council’s needs) first emerged, people were telling me that the costings for alternative projects had been done very hastily and all alternatives were dropped quickly in favour of the Marischal plan.

My FOI ENQ 7172 uncovered that ACC spent £20K on consultants to look at the Marischal project.  However while I found out that costings on alternatives were done, I can’t see them .

I had asked:

“What were the costings done on the alternatives to Marischal College development?”

FOI Answer:

“ACC are of the opinion that… because the Copyright and Patents Act 1988 forbids Aberdeen City Council from copying the cost analysis on the Marischal Project without the owners consent. … ACC is not obliged under the terms of the FOISA to provide you with the information requested. “

How can ACC have paid consultants to look at costings – and the taxpayer not be allowed to know what the results are because of ‘copyright’ ?  Certainly copyright is meant to stop people profiting from the writings of other people, not to prevent the public finding out how its money could have been spent.

#                              #                              #

We are asked to have sympathy for the FOI staff and are told many of the requests they receive are ‘frivolous.’  However, the purpose of this Freedom of Information office  is to fulfil Aberdeen’s legal duties under Freedom of Information Legislation.

I haven’t counted up how many emails I received from the FOI office apologising for lateness in replying to me (all FOIs are meant to be answered within a certain time frame).  Let’s suffice it to say at least 50% of my requests are answered late.

There is also the matter of a judgment from the Information Commissioner against Aberdeen.  A FOI request concerning Stewart Milne group companies of mine went largely unanswered by the Council, which said the law was against the information coming out.  The information Commissioner had a different take, and eventually  five  errors were identified in how ACC FOI staff handled my questions were identified.

If we want FOI responses  to be accurate, swiftly delivered and comprehensive, then this department needs immediate overhauling.  I will be asking Councillors and the Information  Commissioner  to investigate further.

  •  Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

Bear Grylls Hoodie Tribute Delights Aberdeen Scouts

 Aberdeen City, Featured, News  No Responses »
May 242012
 

Scouts from across NE Scotland celebrated as Chief Scout Bear Grylls made a guest appearance at the Bear Hunt 2012 camp, held at Templars’ Park. Taking in the Aberdeen Scout campsite on a whirlwind tour of Scotland and Northern Ireland, Bear was greeted by over 1500 Scouts of all ages. Thanks to Eoin Smith of Mannofield Explorers.

Bear Grylls with Aberdeen’s Mannofield Explorers.
Bear entered the campsite via the 9th Aberdeen Scouts’ traditional canvas tent site and was met with a Guard of Honour.

He was subsequently shown around the park to experience the numerous attractions and activities, including a cycling base run by the 14th Aberdeen Scouts.

He then delivered an inspiring speech before checking out Templars’ Park’s new campfire circle on his way back to his helicopter, high-fiving as many Beavers, Cubs, Scouts and Explorers as he could on the way.

One Explorer Scout Unit received a massive surprise, when Bear arrived wearing one of their hoodies.

The Mannofield Explorers had sent this to Bear earlier in the year to thank him for inspiring their Scouting, but little did they realise that he would wear it on his whole tour. Upon finding the Unit attending, Bear chatted and posed for photos with the group of enthusiastic and understandably excited 14-18 year olds.

Explorer Calum McRobb, 16, said,

“It was a real honour to meet Bear Grylls. We’re all big fans, and to see him wearing one of our hoodies was amazing.The whole Bear Hunt has been fantastic.”

Craig Allison, 27, Explorer Scout Leader at the Mannofield Explorers, added,

“We were delighted that Bear chose to wear his hoodie this weekend. It was a real shock when we saw him step through the trees.

“We sent it earlier this year to thank Bear for all he has done for Scouting since being appointed Chief Scout in 2009 and also for inspiring us to be as adventurous as we can at Explorers.”

In a time where over 30 million Scouts have taken their Promise worldwide, Bear Grylls is certainly playing his part in keeping British youths enthusiastic about being a part of the Scout Movement.

Assistant Explorer Scout Leader Eoin Smith, 21, concluded,

“By wearing our hoodie around the UK, we hope that Bear has been able to spread the word about Scouting in Aberdeen. There are so many exciting opportunities and experiences to be had in Scouting, and adult volunteers are doing a fantastic job providing everyday adventure for over 1,500 young people in the city.”

 Photo credit: Craig Allison

Old Susannah No. 69½ – Farewell Happy Fields

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Creative Writing, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour  No Responses »
Mar 092012
 

Referendums, deer culls, employers telling employees how to vote, services cuts, classroom assistants under threat.  Old Susannah cuts to the heart of the matter and ponders upcoming Lord Provost parties.

dictionary

Tally Ho!  It’s been a boring week in Aberdeen; referendums, deer culls, habitation destruction and other criminal activity notwithstanding.  I will write a column over the weekend once a few conditions have hopefully been met.

First, I need to find something important and local to write about, and second – I must find an outfit to wear for the Lord Provost’s upcoming parties.  I’ll need everything from some evening gowns to designer jeans for the nearly £28,000 worth of partying just approved by the ‘Lord Provost Sub Committee’ – and that’s on top of the £4,000 party to launch his £9,000 portrait. I am sure my invitations will arrive shortly.

At the time of writing it is not clear whether residents of a home for people with paralysis issues are still being told not to drink too much fluid at night and buy rubber mattresses, as their overnight on-site assistants are no longer affordable.  Perhaps Lord Provost Stephen will invite some of them to one of his little get-togethers.

Hopefully my party invitatins from the Lord Provost  won’t arrive as late as the bundles of postal votes which showed up too late to be counted in the aforementioned referendum.  Hard luck, eh?  Kind of reminds me of when I personally handed in 63 individual postcards protesting the deer cull to the city’s Town House – only to get a letter from Valerie Watts saying she’d had a total of less than 40 from all sources.  But it would be wrong to mention that, or the deer cull.

Unfortunately national media are about to cover the cull, with one reporter telling me this tree planting/deer cull is ‘bizarre’.  Clearly only Aileen HoMalone (newly crowned queen of the Lib Dems – not counting Nick Clegg), Pete Leonard and Ian Tallboys can understand the importance of ripping up existing habitat to expose industrial waste and rocks on which to plant trees that can’t possibly thrive.  The rest of us are thick.

Being busy with the important business of buying new outfits for all the upcoming Lord Provost events means there’s no time for a column just yet, but don’t despair  – the link below will take you to a spread sheet you can download to keep as a little gift.  This shows how our favourite councillors have voted over Union Terrace Gardens and culling deer – with plenty of room for you to fill in the results of your favourite votes as well.

This may be a handly little reminder when it comes time to vote of who is dynamic, forward-thinking and so on.

Here is the link:  http://oldsusannahsjournal.yolasite.com/

You will also find an additional present with this spread sheet – Old Susannah has made her own portrait of the Lord Provost, complete with wife and glamorous security guard.  I would be happy to sell it for less than £9,000, and rather than holding a £4,000 drinks party to celebrate my artwork, I’d happily go down to BrewDog for a pint instead.

So that’s it for now – more in a few days, if I can find some subject matter.  Cheerio!

UTG Referendum Question Already Soured

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, News, Opinion  No Responses »
Dec 092011
 

The Council will be voting on Wednesday on proceeding with either a referendum or an opinion poll in an attempt to resolve the controversy over the fate of Union Terrace Gardens. Mike Shepherd reports that the outcome of the issue on a referendum question has already turned into a total mess.

utg4pic
One of the issues that has been recognised is the need to ensure that the wording of any question asked is fair and acceptable to both sides.

On this basis, both the Friends of Union Terrace Gardens and the Aberdeen City Garden Trust were asked to concur on a suitable question for councillors to agree on at the full Council meeting on the 14th of December.

In practice, this would involve a council officials acting as a mediator.

In good faith, I submitted a group suggestion for the question to the Council as follows:

You are being to ask to choose between either retaining Union Terrace Gardens or replacing them with the proposed City Garden Project design

Which option do you support?

A) Retaining Union Terrace Gardens
B) Building the City Garden Project

Very simple, clear and nothing controversial, you would have thought.

The Council Officer replied with this:

“For your information, based on the responses I have received, the proposed question that I will now be recommending to Council on 14 December (subject to final, last minute consultation with other Council Officers), is as follows:

You are being to ask to choose between either retaining Union Terrace Gardens or replacing them with the proposed City Garden Project design (please read the voter information pack to make sure you understand what is meant by “retaining Union Terrace Gardens ” and “the proposed City Garden Project”).

Which option do you support? (please place a cross in the appropriate box)

A) Retaining Union Terrace Gardens
B) Building the City Garden Project

“I feel that this is a reasonable compromise and trust the FOUTG agree that this represents a fair and balanced position. Kind regards, Gerry Brough.”

I agreed to this. So what happens next?

The Aberdeen City Garden Trust left it to the last possible moment to object to this, allowing no time to be made for any compromise. This was at about 5pm on Monday night this week, when the final wording was needed for the Council report first thing Tuesday.

“Dear Mike,

“Further to my earlier note, I can confirm that ACGT have replied this afternoon asking for some changes to be made to the proposed question, so that it reads as follows:

You are being asked to choose between either retaining Union Terrace Gardens or replacing them with the proposed City Garden Project design which includes Union Terrace Gardens and the covering of the adjacent dual carriageway and railway line.
[please read the voter information pack to make sure you understand what is meant by “retaining Union Terrace Gardens” and “the proposed City Garden Project”]

Which option do you support ? (please place a cross in the appropriate box)

A) The proposed City Garden Project
B) Retaining Union Terrace Gardens

“ACGT feel that the previous suggested compromise question makes it appear that the City Garden Project is restricted to Union Terrace gardens, when in fact UTG is only part of the City Garden Project development area.

“They also feel that since retention of the gardens is placed at the beginning of the introductory paragraph, it is only fair that the option for supporting the proposed City Garden project should be the first option on the ballot paper.

“Can you please indicate whether these changes are acceptable to FOUTG.

“Regards, Gerry Brough”

I replied that the proposed wording was highly ambiguous, confusing and gives far more wordage to one side than the other. The Council official then decided that as the two sides could not agree on the referendum question, the councillors should decide at the full Council meeting next Wednesday instead.

“Since it was not possible to obtain complete agreement prior to the submission of this Council paper, Council are therefore asked to take a view as to whether they would prefer to endorse the question in 5.3 d), 5.3 e) or 5.3 f) or, indeed, whether they wish to propose a further compromise between these three positions.”
http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=17676

I complained bitterly about this as what had happened here was highly irregular.

“Gerry.

“We participated in good faith last week. The ACGT only replied last night, too late. This has stalled the process of mediation as recommended by councillors. This is unacceptable.

“We are not at fault and should not be penalised for this. We insist that our question should stand. This does not bode well for a fairly conducted referendum and we may have to reconsider our options. – Mike”

I received this reply from Mr Brough (this is the last bit of the email):

“Nobody is being penalised.

“As you can see from the attached 5.3 that I sent to you, the process for determining the question is set out clearly up to the final submission received before the paper needed to be submitted. Council members are then being asked to either choose between these latest proposals, or come up with an alternative of their own that they consider to be fair and balanced for both parties.

“I understand your desire to undermine process, as a means of campaigning against any development of UTG. However, in this case, I believe that you are stretching a point to suggest that you have been in any way treated unfairly

“Also, although you “insist” that the FOUTG question should stand, FOUTG need to accept the fact that any referendum will be run by the City Council and that it is ultimately for the Counting Officer to decide, after consultation with Campaign Groups, on a suggested question.

“At a statutory referendum, the question is set by parliament, through consultation and, although there are no rules for the Council to follow, best practice suggests this should be done by the Counting Officer. This is the view expressed by the Electoral Commission.

“The Council are therefore putting in place a process to test various proposed options in advance of the Council Meeting, so that both Council and the Counting Officer can have some comfort concerning the appropriateness of the question.

“Regards, Gerry”

I now have a series of meetings with Councillors and the Council Executive to discuss what has happened. I will make it clear that the ongoing participation in a referendum depends on both sides being treated fairly. However, this is not a good start.

STOP PRESS – Council seeks views of the public re referendum question.
Consultation closes Monday 12th December.
http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/CouncilNews/ci_cns/pr_referendumoptions_081211.asp

City Well Represented In Netball Tests

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, News, Sport  No Responses »
Dec 092011
 

Aberdeen Voice brings you the latest on the netball international test matches this weekend.

claire-brownie-pic
Aberdeen-born Claire Brownie has been included in the Scottish Thistles netball squad to face Wales in a three match test series at Aberdeen Sports Village from December 9–11.

23 year old Brownie, who plays at either Goal Defence or Wing Defence, was part of the squad which tasted success againstSri Lankain the city in May, seeing the Thistles rise to 14th in the world rankings.
With Wales ranked two places above the Scots, these will be closely-fought affairs and will be a crucial in preparing for 2014’s Commonwealth Games in Glasgow.

Also from Aberdeen, Emily Gray (19) and Fiona Farquharson (18) are in the Scottish Under-21 squad which will take on their Welsh counterparts before each Test match.

National Coach, Denise Holland said: 

“Three matches in three days emulates the schedule at the 2014 Glasgow Games. We have always competed hard against each other, with very little between the squads.

“It will be extremely exciting as the winners will not only score World Ranking points but will also gain confidence going into Netball Europe in May 2012, when the squads meet again.”

Thistles squad: Lynsey Gallagher, GA/GS; Stephanie McGarrity, WD/C; Hayley Mulheron, GK/GD; Claire Brownie, GD/WD; Rachel Holmes GA/GS; Erin McQuarrie, WD/GD; Nicola Collins, GA/GS; Lesley MacDonald, GA/GS; Fiona Moore (Captain), C/WD; Gemma Sole, GS; Karin Connell, WA/C; June McNeill, GS/GK; Sam Murphy, WA/GA; Thenneh Conteh, GK/GD; Jenna Storie, WA/C.

Thistles U21 squad: Gillian Crozier; Amy Craig; Laura Gibson; Emily Gray; Emma Hardie; Beverly Campbell; Sarah Kerr; Fiona Farquharson; Sophie May Leyland; Nicola McLeery; Hannah McCaig; Shaunagh Mcuaig; Erin McQuarrie; Jo Pettitt

Tickets are available from the Aberdeen Sports Village on 01224 438900

Admission costs just £5 per adult and £3 per child. Weekend passes cost £12 for adults and £7 for children.

 

Scottish Thistles Return To Aberdeen To Take On Wales

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Events, Information, News, Sport  No Responses »
Dec 012011
 

Following their successful test match against Sri Lanka in May 2011, the Scottish Thistles are returning to Aberdeen for a full three match test series against Wales.  With thanks to Dave Macdermid and The Big Partnership.

Scottish Thistles 2
The Scottish Thistles’ victorious series against Sri Lanka saw their world ranking rise up to 14th, so now the Thistles are looking to ‘slay some Welsh dragons’ in what promises to be some tense, gripping, closely fought matches, as the Welsh are currently 12th in the world.
The series will be a crucial part of their preparation for the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow in 2014.

The Scottish U21s, including squad members Emily Gray and Fiona Farquharson – both from Aberdeen, are also taking on their Welsh counterparts before each Test match.

National Coach, Denise Holland said:

“The Scottish Thistles are ready to meet Wales in this back to back competition; 3 matches in 3 days which emulates the type of schedule at the Glasgow CWG’s 2014. Both sides are out to win all three test matches in Aberdeen; we have always competed hard against each other, with very little but sheer determination between the squads. 

“It will be extremely exciting, as the winner will not only gain much valued World Ranking points but will also gain confidence going into Netball Europe in May 2012, when the squads will meet again. The Thistles are ready now to ‘sting’ with some vital wins!”

David Beattie, Chief Executive of Aberdeen Sports Village said

“I am delighted to welcome the Scottish Thistles back to Aberdeen for the second time this year. We are all excited about seeing top class netball once again in the city and look forward to cheering on the Thistles as they take on the Welsh in what is sure to be three gripping matches. I am confident that Aberdeen will provide some excellent support for the Thistles and thoroughly enjoy being a part of their preparation for the Commonwealth Games in 2014.”

All 3 matches will be at the Aberdeen Sports Village from 9th – 11th December 2011. It costs just £5 per adult and £3 per child or there is a weekend pass for £12 for adults and £7 for children.

Tickets are available now from the Aberdeen Sports Village on 01224 438900.

 Older Entries