Stan Up An Be Coontit

 Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, Articles, Community, Creative Writing, Environment, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour  No Responses »
Sep 232011
 

By Bob Smith. 

Town House1
Ye maun stan up an be coontit
Abeen the parapet stik yer heid
Mak sure ye’re heard lood an clear
Or democracy micht seen be deid

Noo fin ye stan an protest
Ye’ll be ca’ed a sorts o names
By fowk faa’ve ither  motives
An play devious sorts o games

In Aiberdeen yer a nimby
Fer haen a pint o view
Aboot the route o the AWPR
Tho’ some lifestyles it’ll screw

Dinna think bad o The Donald
Ye’ll be ca’ed a progress stopper
E’en tho a richt gweed SSSI
His o coorse  noo cum a cropper

Raisin the gairdens at Union Terrace
Cwid  lan oor  cooncil in penury
Ach nivver myn we’ll be consoled
Being brocht inti iss new century

The third brig ower the River Don
Noo iss cwid cause some grief
Ti the gweed fowk aroon Tillydrone
Seems they shudna be alloo’d ti “beef”

Folkies dinna wint a deer cull
Ower the wye o Tullos Hill
 The cooncil  says usin tree sleeves
We’ll aa hae ti fit the bill

We’re aye bein telt ower an ower
Protests div oor economy strangle
Nae concrete figures ti back iss up
As mair plans they try ti wangle

Showin  Aiberdeen’s open fer business
Am fair tired o hearin iss spik
As tho we’re a bliddy wee shoppie
Fit’s in danger o closin next wikk

Noo a wird ti aa the gadgies
Faa dinna like fowk ti protest
Awa an bide “ooner the thoom”
O eens faa wid line their nest

Mair names a’ll nae doot be ca’ed
An some flak a micht hae ti tak
Fer askin aa maist ordinary fowk
Ti stan up an jist fecht back 

©Bob Smith “The Poetry Mannie” 2011

 

Who Would You Let Watch Your Pet Deer?

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Creative Writing, Environment, Opinion, Satire and Humour  No Responses »
Sep 232011
 

Dave Watt asks Voice readers the question …..

adolfdeer

amalone
Which one would you let watch your pet deer while you were on holiday?

 

a)   Adolf Hitler – Nationalsozialistiche Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (Above)

b)   Aileen Malone – Liberal Democrat (Opposite)

Old Susannah No. 52: The Most Hated Man In Scotland?

 Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, Articles, Community, Creative Writing, Environment, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour  No Responses »
Sep 232011
 

dictionary
Old Susannah looks back at the week that was. By Suzanne Kelly.

Old Susannah is enjoying a glass of ‘Hello… my name is Ingrid’ (a beautiful brew made with cloudberry) at Brewdog, and is reflecting on another busy week in the Deen.
There was the Periurban conference for one thing. This was announced last minute on the City’s website.
It was an international conference on how cities deal with land on the fringes of the urban areas. I guess people from around the world came to see how wonderfully Aberdeen treats Union Terrace Gardens, Tullos Hill, green space at Westhill and Cove, and Loirston Loch.

The two-day conference was opened by the pioneering champion of all things green: Kate Dean.

I sent in an application, and then found myself invited to the second day’s events. For some reason it seemed they didn’t want me on the first day. I heard lots of important speakers, most of whom said urban sprawl is a problem, and we must all use less resources and re-use what we can. Someone even said ‘planting trees is not a solution’ – Cllr HoMalone please take note.

We heard about city centres emptying out if there is too much urban sprawl, with shops closing and crime and social deprivation becoming a problem. I was just surprised no one from Aberdeen explained how our ‘improving’ Union Terrace Gardens into a car park, ‘cosmopolitan cafe’, the hoped-for monorail and building in the greenbelt were going to save the day. I would have loved to have heard it. 

One City Council official kept turning around in their seat to look at me; for some reason they almost looked worried I was there. Could it have been the ‘Save the Tullos Deer’ t-shirt I wore under my suit jacket?

Someone was there from a local green charity, and somehow I brought up the deer cull situation (my t-shirt might have helped). The person had no idea why the Scottish SPCA was against the cull and what the other issues were. I happily explained.

Elsewhere in the Deen, someone has decided to leave a cat in a wheelie bin. Perhaps they want as much media attention as the woman from Coventry got? You may remember Mary Bale who cruelly left a cat in a bin for hours on end and was caught out. Let’s see if we can’t find the Aberdeen copycat cat botherer and do for them what the press did for Bale.

It would likewise be a shame if shamed Banff Brothers David and Colin Reid of 22 Boyndie Street West, Banff, got any bad press for their dogfighting activity conviction and jail sentences.

This is the Scottish SPCA’s first major dogfighting conviction in Aberdeenshire (where officials denied there was a problem, you may recall), and it is cause for celebration.  The Reids must know something about other dog fighters – let’s hope they roll over.  Thankfully, some of the dogs they were abusing have been rescued.

But anyway, here I am in Brewdog wondering what to write about this week.

I am looking at a recent Press & Journal headline which screams in giant letters: ‘IS THIS THE MOST HATED MAN IN SCOTLAND?‘ As I am always happy to follow where the P&J leads, so let’s skip definitions this week and take a look at the most hated man in Scotland instead. 

Imagine one man using the legal system to the maximum for his own self-interested ends. Imagine him standing alone, unwilling to listen to the thousands of people who want him to abandon the battle.

Imagine for a minute how much taxpayer money and court time he is willing to use up.

Yes, Mr Milne may well be the most hated man in Scotland. For openers there is the legal battle which he’s taking all the way to the highest court in the UK. For those who don’t know, Milne bought land from the City Council – 11 acres in Westhill – for some £335,000. (By the way, who do the rest of us have to know to get deals like that? Jane – can you help?). The land is worth millions.

Apparently Milne agreed with the City to pay a portion of any sale/rental profit to the City. In a really sharp, not at all transparent move, the land was sold from one arm of the vast Milne empire to another Milne company. As you’d expect, such a deal cost over £500,000 to do. Or so Milne claims when his companies say there was no profit left after the sale.  Seems pretty clear to me.

Yes, Milne is appealing (but not to most of us).

You’d have thought that our very generous Council wouldn’t go bothering Stew for a mere 1.7 million pounds (goodness knows the City can waste that much with ease), but it seems the City will be trying to claw back the money.

The courts found in the City’s favour – but Milne would rather drag us on through the legal system and cost the taxpayer more money than shell out.

Yes, Milne is appealing (but not to most of us). Of course if you weigh this against all the associated costs, then there probably won’t be much financial gain. Here’s a clever idea: let’s stop selling our assets at less money than they are worth. Who knows?  We might wind up less than the £50 million in debt we currently are.  But back to Milne.

We come to the subject of the once-beautiful game. Someone’s decided it’s much better to do land deals than try and win matches.

Milne will develop Pittodrie (which could have been rennovated – this has been done elsewhere in the UK) and build in the greenbelt well out of town.  Loirston Loch will be greatly improved by the new stadium. What the remaining wildlife will make of the lack of land, the cars, the additional pollution and inevitable trash is another matter.

I wonder what it’s like to be less popular than the Donald? Will the Dons become the Donalds?

The bottom line is the stadium will glow in the dark (!) and we can have Elton John and Rod Stewart concerts!. (Who cares that two BBC stories this week prove another link between ill health and car exhaust fumes, and Scotland’s wildlife continues to diminish?)

You would have thought that AFC fans would be jumping for joy at the chance to drive/bus/walk to Loirston. Instead, many of them want Milne to jump ship. Things are so desperate that some fans are actively inviting Donald Trump to invest in the club.  Ouch.

I wonder what it’s like to be less popular than the Donald? Will the Dons become the Donalds? Mr Milne might want to stay away from Facebook or AFC fan sites for a wee while, where there is just a hint of dissatisfaction. Such ingratitude – and after all he’s done to us. Sorry – I mean ‘for us’.

Stew’s not very popular in the city centre either. In his proposal for Triple Kirks, he’s promised us more office buildings. Result!

So who’d have thought that putting two glass box buildings next to the Triple Kirk spire (and probably chasing those pesky peregrine falcons away in the process) could make you unpopular? There will be office space – and who wants anything more than more office space?

I’m afraid to say Mr Milne is now as popular with golfers as fox-batterer Forbes would be at an animal rights meeting.

The only problem is parking (not that that is hindering him developing Pittodrie or in creating the stadium – neither has adequate parking in their plans). Where on earth will Stew find any parking solutions close to Triple Kirks? If only there was some empty, under-used space nearby – maybe something that ‘only has grass’ in it. He could have car parking, the offices would go ahead without a hitch, he’d rake in some money.

People would be amazingly grateful: we would get parking, shopping and ‘cosmopolitan cafes’ – where we can sit and drink coffee year round and be, er, cosmopolitan. If only Stew or his pal Ian could think of some solution to the problem, it would mean more money for Milne. There are some people who think the consultation should have been handled by the city with a lengthy consultation, and that the listed status of Triple Kirks carried a bit of weight.  These people were of course wrong.

And let’s face it: Milne could be low on cash.  Am I alone in thinking he’s short?  He’s chasing a mere 1.7 million through the courts (when he’s supposedly worth about 60 million). He’s about to lay off workers up and down Scotland – he says he can’t afford them.

Perhaps he expanded a bit too quickly? Perhaps he thought new building would continue for ever? Well – with our City Council it just might.

It seems a little ironic that the City is giving Milne contracts (some recent ones total over ten million) while he is both dragging the city through the courts and firing Aberdonians in the building trade. But the people who are in charge know best. 

For reasons of space, I’ll limit this to just one more aspect of the man’s popularity. I’m afraid to say Mr Milne is now as popular with golfers as fox-batterer Forbes would be at an animal rights meeting. It seems that the Portlethen community council and those who use Portlethen Golf Club are up in arms over Milne’s plans to build 153 houses so close to the course that there may be a few problems. Safe to say, people are teed off.

There you have it. The Press & Journal had their own front-page suggestion for ‘the most hated man in Scotland.’ Some of us have a different candidate for that title.

Last word: City Council employees: stop criticising your wonderful employers and managers on the Intranet. First: they don’t like it and are drafting all kinds of means to stop your free speech. Second: that’s my job. I understand they may participate in a 24-hour ‘tweeting’ session to say what excellent services they’ve got going. You are cordially uninvited to tweet back.

Deer Citizens…

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information, Opinion  No Responses »
Sep 222011
 

It’s the debate we weren’t supposed to hear, it seems, and there is suspicion that the full facts were held back from publication to Aberdeen residents. Public opposition to a controversial scheme seems to be growing. With thanks to Suzanne Kelly.

snodeerpic
Local campaigners, opposed to Aberdeen City Council’s cull of the Tullos Hill roe deer, have placed advertisements in the local press and launched a postcard campaign.

The first advert appeared in Aberdeen’s Evening Express on 7 September, and it appears again in the 21 September issue of Aberdeen Citizen.

Campaigners will also be out in force in Aberdeen city centre this Saturday (24 September).

“The City Council may think they can go ahead with the cull of the roe deer unnoticed,” campaigner Suzanne Kelly said, “but the truth is the opposition is growing daily. People are watching the hill and reporting anything that might indicate a cull.”

A postcard campaign with a strong graphic encourages people to write to Aberdeen City Council Chief Executive, Valerie Watts.

The advertising campaign spells out some of the many reasons why opponents are so fierce in condemning the Council’s plans. These reasons include:

  • The cull was already being planned (as per correspondence in November 2010 between Aberdeen City Council and Scottish Natural Heritage) but was kept out of the Phase 2 public consultation. This consultation mentioned rabbits and therefore gave the impression that these were the only species affected by the massive tree plantation. Current public objections would have been made during the consultation had the public been properly informed that a cull was planned. Many people therefore feel misled by the Council and the scheme’s main proponent, Councillor Aileen Malone.
  • The Scottish SPCA calls the cull ‘abhorrent and absurd’ – to kill animals to protect trees that aren’t even planted and which could go elsewhere, is wrong. They will support culling only for animal welfare reasons
  • The City Council recently had to return £43,800 to the Forestry Commission for a failed planting on Tullos Hill. It certainly seems the Council tried to keep that information under wraps. Taxpayers could spend over £100,000 if further planting goes wrong, according to the Forestry Commission
  • Since the cull was made public, several community councils, representing tens of thousands of local residents, condemned it and complained about the lack of proper consultation. Over 2,400 people locally signed petitions, and hundreds of letters of protest were sent to the Council. Still the Council refuses to back down
  • The Council has turned down or ignored offers from experts including Animal Concern to provide other non-lethal solutions, of which there are many
  • There is already an eco-system on Tullos Hill which includes flora and fauna; changing it makes no sense

A hunter in camouflage gear with a gun on Tullos Hill was reported to police by a dog-walker on 5 September, but the police are neither confirming the report nor supplying any further information at present.

Earlier this month, the City Council mentioned the tree planting scheme, but not the deer cull, in a full colour, four page Aberdeen Citizen supplement touting its environmental credentials.  Campaigners against the cull have not yet been able to find out the cost to the public of this supplement.

Anyone opposed to this cull or who wants further information can contact: www.tullosdeer@yahoo.co.uk

“The response the advertisement received when first launched was overwhelming; the email inbox is overflowing with people – 100% of whom oppose the Council’s plans and the handling of the whole affair. I do hope that commonsense will prevail and this scheme will be altered to spare the deer. With a previous planting on the hill already costing the taxpayer £43,800 – the City must come up with a better plan and halt this senseless cull,” said Kelly.

The cull could begin in October this year; it is likely that the killing would continue for several years.

Old Susannah No. 51 – Police and Thieves

 Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, Articles, Opinion, Satire and Humour  No Responses »
Sep 162011
 

Old Susannah watches the latest developments in the ‘Deen and the wider world and feels like a deer caught in headlights. Here is this week’slook at what’s happening where and who’s doing what to whom. By Suzanne Kelly.

dictionary

It’s been another one of those weeks in Aberdeen. Campaigners launched an advertisement in the Evening Express highlighting the Tullos Hill Roe Deer situation ( link ). It also seems that our raptor population – golden eagles, red kites and so on – are still being poisoned left, right and centre.
Every spare bit of greenbelt land is up for development to the highest bidder here in the City and Shire, and things look rather grim on the environment front whever you turn. What do overdevelopment, the deer cull and bird poisonings have in common? The people behind them are more interested in money than our environment.

These little issues have not stopped our intrepid Kate Dean from welcoming a European delegation for a ‘Periurban Parks’ conference this week. 

Kate is slated (as ever) to give a welcome speech and explain how wonderfully well Aberdeen manages its parks and land.  I could not miss such a conference, and if you’re reading this on Friday morning 16/9, I will be sitting at said conference hanging on every word.  Who knows?  I might even have a few choice words of my own for the attendees.  But what to wear…? 

A bit of good news though – it looks as if some form of Referendum on the future of Union Terrace Gardens will take place.  As Aileen Malone  promised this referendum, we should not be surprised that it is coming about – she is a woman true to her word.  If she says we’re having a referendum, then we’re having a referendum.  If she says we’re going to start shooting deer in October on Tullos Hill, then we’re going to kill (sorry ‘manage’) deer.  Fantastic.

Finally, Old Susannah was dolphin and whale watching last Saturday morning with Ian Hay as part of Techfest’s rich programme. 

Do have a look at the other activities on offer at Techfest. Then on Sunday I had a fantastic outing with ‘Contact the Elderly’.  We all went to Crathes Castle, where the National Trust supplied a very generous afternoon tea.  Some of these elderly people are a bit confused:  they mistakenly think that once upon a time the City was accountable to its electorate, that the streets were clean, and green spaces were valued.  If only.
Anyway, they were a great bunch, and by the end of it they were fine, but I was exhausted.

Here are a few observations on recent developments regarding police and thieves….

Aberdeen Police:

I’ve got to say, I usually get good service from our local  police. Two weeks ago some maniac and his grandchildren decided to have a  family outing.  This took the form of going to the mouth of the harbour and setting fire to as many things they could get their hands on – next to a beautiful patch of wildflowers (including orchids).
For some crazy reason, I objected to this, but they were sticking to their right to burn stuff.  The police and fire services somehow saw things my way, and dealt with the situation quickly.  Thanks.

You may recall an Evening Express story about a dog-walker coming across a man in combat fatigues with a gun on Tullos Hill (he must have looked very macho indeed – I am most impressed!).  

The police answered my questions about this very quickly – but in truth they themselves haven’t much information.  I wondered if it wasn’t gull-shooting Mervyn New, enjoying a weekend away from shooting things at his workplace.  Anyway, the Council insist the gunman wasn’t there to blast  (sorry, I mean ‘manage’) our deer just yet.

Exactly how (and indeed why) someone gets permission to run around with shotguns to kill ‘vermin’ (that’s birds and small animals to you and me) is still a mystery to me, but I’m looking into it.

Aberdeenshire Police

If you’ve seen the documentary ‘you’ve been trumped!’, you  might recall a tiny, minor scene in which Anthony Baxter and Richard Phinney are arrested.  Quite right, too. 

They had clearly broken the law and deserved to be arrested, as earlier that day they had gone to speak to the estate managers overseeing the creation of the ‘world’s greatest golf course’ (now taking bookings from £150 a round- see you there!).  

The poor policemen must have been very intimidated by Baxter and Phinney; their aggressive use of words like ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ coupled with their undoubted martial arts skills and video camera would have frightened all but Stallone or Swarzenegger.  As caught on film, in mid sentence the police wisely jumped the pair and thrust them into a squadcar.  Only kind of language these people understand, or so I’m told.

Did they need a SWAT team?  Were MI6 and helicopters called?

My curiosity got the better of me, and I wrote to Aberdeenshire Police to find out more.  How did they usually deal with such dangerous men? How did the arrest come about?  Did they need a SWAT team?  Were MI6 and helicopters called?  

I also asked why their DNA was stored, who decided to give them a caution rather than charge them (which stopped them having their day in court – obviously saving the taxpayer money if doing nothing for justice), and why they weren’t directly told when the charges were eventually dropped? 

The shire police told me  the answers are exempt from disclosure as:

“the requested information relates to the alleged commission of a criminal offence by two identifiable individuals.  Such information is classed as sensitive personal information under the Data Protection Act 1998.”

You might think the police would want to explain the thinking behind arresting two journalists on the say-so of a rich landowner’s hired help.  You might think it possible for Grampian’s finest to explain the rationale behind the arrests without leaking any personal details (after all, it’s all on film anyway).  But you’d be wrong.

I’d also asked police what their policy is for policing the Menie Estate (which if you look at the film seems to have more cops cruising it than you’d see on Miami Vice).  This is what they said:-

“…in Spring 2009, following the announcement of a number of strategic economic and infrastructure developments, Grampian Police established a short life Critical Incident Preparation Group (CIPG) with a remit to coordinate the prepared phase of ‘critical incidents”  (Note:  if someone can explain this to me, please get in touch).

“From this, a generic, local strategy, relevant to Menie Estate and other similar developments was developed.  This has been determined as; Maximise safety; minimise disruption; facilitate lawful protest; deter, detect, detain and report those responsible for unlawful behaviour.”  

(Again, can someone help me make sense of this?  Thanks!)

For openers’ it’s great the safety and disruption of the existing residents has been so well handled! (There have been lawful, peaceful protests, so no complaints there).

However, I’m thinking about this ‘deter, detect, detain’ business relating to ‘unlawful behaviour.’ How can you deter unlawful behaviour before it happens without undermining freedom?  Answers on a postcard, thanks.  I’ll put the kettle on.

Note:

– if you happen to see Anthony ‘Big Tony’ Baxter or Richard ‘Baby Face’ Phinney, just call the police.  Do not approach these men, as they are armed with numerous International documentary awards.

A United Scotland Police Force?:

Regarding the fire I reported; the police had to call me back and I described where the generational arsonists were in detail so they could find them (although the giant plume of smoke was a bit of a giveaway). 

If I’d had to explain to a phone operator in Glasgow which part of Greyhope Road I was on about, the harbour and its remaining vegetation would be ashes.  For many reasons, I am not comfortable with this united police service idea. 

For one thing, it would cost Stewart Milne a much bigger whack to get a sponsorship deal to have his logo on police cars across Scotland.  But we do have to save money and cut corners.  Schools, hospitals, fire, police, services to the old and disabled are so last year.  We need more buildings, statues, roads, car parks and shopping malls.  The Government isn’t a charity you know.

Thieves:

Caution!  There are thieves about.  No, not just the usual people robbing off-licenses and bookies.  Aberdeen City Council has another new campaign, and is very kindly warning us that there are scams doing the rounds.

There are fake lottery prize letters, fake inheritance scams, and so on.  Some scams are small; some are huge.  And here is perhaps the biggest one in the area at present…

In a huge swindle, local businesses are targeted by letter.  They are asked to participate in an ‘Economic Impact Survey’.  This survey is run by people who will stop at nothing to get their own way and seize property .  It is Union Terrace Gardens these mercenaries want – and they want
to get the consumer ultimately to pay for having their own park taken away from them.

Here is how this remarkable swindle works.

First, tell local businesses they were ‘specially chosen’ to be in a survey. Win their confidence and they’ll be eating out of your hand.  The so-called ‘survey’ is about 5 potential options for the city centre.  Get the businesses to agree with you, and agree to hand over Union Terrace Gardens for a building project.  As Edinburgh residents know, city centre projects are a great bet.

But who will ultimately pay for turning the gardens into whatever it is Woody and Stew want?

  your vote against changing the gardens got turned into the opposite vote.

The consumer, of course.  If the business rates are going to rise from their very low, generous current levels, then the retailer/shopkeeper will have to get that extra money from somewhere.

That somewhere is in increased prices to you and me.

Of course there is not one single shred of evidence to prove that changing the gardens (i.e: putting in a car park and ‘cosmopolitan cafe culture’ ) will bring any economic benefits at all.  But with charismatic business people leading the way, the scam seems legitimate to the gullible.

Here’s one catch:  the survey results will be completely confidential: only the people who want the gardens turned into something other than what they are will ever see the results!  And obviously the survey is only for businesses – we can’t have the average person involved in this deal, can we?

You may recall a related scam some months back.  The public were allowed to vote on changing the gardens or not.  If you voted online, there was a tiny glitch (an accident?) wherein your vote against changing the gardens got turned into the opposite vote. Result!  Obviously the results of this new survey – to be seen only by the committee who want to change the gardens – will have no such glitch and will be completely above board.

Theft prevention:

Thankfully, one of our elected officials is on the case to make sure you and I aren’t ‘ripped off’.  

In the course of the City Council’s debate over the Union Terrace Gardens referendum earlier this week, one brave man stood up and said the referendum might cost a quarter of a million pounds.  He argued that the taxpayer should not have to shell out for this.  What a champion!  After all, we have statues, portraits of the Lord Provost, ‘civic cars’, Lord Provost clothing allowances and so forth that we need to pay for.

If only John Stewart – for it was he – had been able to stand up when our tax money went to paying for the initial consultation.  This consultation included an expensive colour brochure on heavy paper which clearly showed a giant concrete square with one or two trees in pots.  This was why some people misunderstood the initial consultation and thought it was going to deliver a giant concrete square with one or two trees in pots.

Never mind, John’s on the case now and will save us money.  I suggest we watch him crusade in the coming months to safeguard our city’s budget.

Next week – more of the same and a report from the Periurban  Conference.

Old Susannah No.50 – Open Doors, Open Season

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Creative Writing, Environment, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour  No Responses »
Sep 092011
 

Old Susannah watches the latest developments in the ‘Deen and the wider world and feels like a deer caught in headlights.  Here is this week’s look at what’s happening where and who’s doing what to whom. By Suzanne Kelly.

dictionary

This Saturday is Open Doors day; I urge you to get out and visit sites in Aberdeen normally closed to the public.  (I will try and get to Marischal College – but I will also be whale-watching at Torry Battery with local expert Ian Hay at 10:30).

From noon Old Susannah will be at Marks & Spencer collecting signatures on postcards to highlight the plight of our Tullos Hill Deer. The postcards are free and will be sent to the City; please come see me.  The design is a powerful one, I think you’ll agree.

Old Susannah spent last week in France and Italy. I wandered around small towns and capital cities, and was struck at the lack of concrete, shopping malls, and ‘connectivity’.  Small, intimate spaces were around every corner – but you actually were better off walking from place to place. 

Not a single monorail was in sight either.  Small, local shops were busy with locals and tourists – there was no choice but to buy individualistic, hand-made items in most of the places I visited.  Streets were tree-lined; parks filled with interesting plants, and the pavements were amazingly clean.  Even the smallest of towns had rich programmes for retired/elderly people.

I even came across a programme to teach dog owners the importance of keeping their animals under control and cleaning up after them.   Don’t worry – nothing like this will happen here.

Sad to say I missed this year’s Offshore Europe. 

While historically a few firms hire attractive fashion models to talk to prospective clients about North Sea joint venture economics and showcase the latest in directional drilling techniques and so on, this year it seems one firm took things a bit further.  I am told swimsuit models were window dressing for one of the stands.

Perhaps this bathing-suit theme was something to do with subsea operations or ‘diving’ of some sort or other.  Whatever happened to the old-fashioned practice of giving OE visitors lots to drink? In any case, it is a good thing we have more women involved in the oil business, and the presence of glamour models should by no means be seen as a cheap publicity stunt or a large backwards step for equality.

In a happy development, the baby gull that I rescued (with a co-worker’s help) made a complete recovery at New Arc Animal Sanctuary, and will be released soon, along with a Fulmar and some ducklings. Keith at New Arc has his hands full, and is still looking for volunteers and donations.  New Arc will shortly open a charity shop in Banff, and will want your unwanted quality goods (new and used) to sell.  Get in touch with New Arc at  thenewarc1@aol.com. 

I realise not everyone loves birds and gulls – I’ve not forgotten Mervyn New, who happily blasted baby gulls with a gun (at his work no less).  But it seems a contributor to Aberdeen’s newest free newspaper, Aberdeen City Life, isn’t fond of them, either.

‘Fona’ McKinnon writes in City Life about the ‘Terrorists From the Sky.’  Er, they are birds and not quite terrorists; some people might object to the comparison in this run-up to the anniversary of 9/11.  Best not to feed them (terrorists I mean) in town, but it’s definitely best not to blast them with guns either.  Old Susannah wishes City Life all the best, and  is glad there is another hard copy newspaper in town.

Finally, a tired, old, Aberdeen institution has had a much-needed facelift (no, not you Kate).  Aberdeen City’s website has been re-vamped, and looks absolutely vibrant and dynamic.  (More on its contents in a minute).

Time for some timely Deen definitions.

Family Business

(modern  English compound noun) An organisation or enterprise staffed, organised and managed mainly by members of one family.

Much has been said lately about the excesses of the UK’s MPs when it comes to  claiming expenses.   Gone are the days of flipping second homes, flipping padded expenses and flipping new luxury bird houses in moats for the flipping MPs.

Much has also been said about the MPs using unpaid interns.  The interns work for free, and more often than not are people who don’t need to work for money; often internships are given out to the well connected.  But one area where the MP is still free to do as they please concerns hiring family.

Family members serve as secretaries, assistants and office managers.  The Independent Newspaper’s sister paper ‘i’ reports that the taxpayer is shelling out a few million pounds annually for the 130 or so MPs’ family members. I  am sure it must be a hardship working for mum or dad; the interviewing process must be rigorous.

I guess the jobs are  all advertised widely, and a number of candidates are shortlisted before junior  gets the job.

Closer  to home, I note that many of our elected City Council officials still have time  to run Aberdeen along world-class lines while still keeping a hand in their own  family businesses.  Some work as  assistants for family plumbing or electrical businesses.  Old Susannah knows it’s possible to do more than one job at once, but has always been confused by one little detail. 

Some of these councillors list on their  council web pages that they work for a family business – but when I look at the official register of interests, I can’t find where that work is actually  listed.  Are they working for free?  Possibly – they are all quite selfless souls.  Even so, I believe such work is  meant to be on the official register of interests.

I am still trying to get to grips with what is/is not put on the registers, and aside from one rather terse email to me from the City (which took months for them to compose), I’m just not there yet.

Of course if any of these family business companies were doing any work for the City, the relevant councillors would bow out of any relevant meetings, and there would be complete transparency.  I am sure that everything is above  board.  I just can’t find it in writing, that’s all.

‘Open Data Initiative’

(Aberdeen modern phrase) 

Just when you thought the  City had completely shown its hand and come clean about deer, trees, expenses, garden projects, planning, and selling land at less than market value – along comes:  the ‘Open Data Initiative’.  I mentioned the swish new website layout (I have to admit – it is an improvement), well one of the new-look site’s great successes is the Open Data Initiative.

I  can practically feel the suspense building, and almost hear people asking aloud “What is the Open Data Initiative”! Without any further ado – here you go:-

Open data is about increased transparency, about sharing the information we hold with the wider community to build useful applications.

We’re always looking for new ways of making it as easy as possible for developers and website owners to access and present data held by us in ways that they want – allowing you to remix, mashup and share data easily.

Use the links to the right to navigate to our various datasets available.  We’ll be adding more datasets soon, as well as pointers to online tools for making use of this data.

 http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/open_data/open_data_home.asp

I am confident the City knows about data ‘mashup’; I would in fact swear to this.  Well, what possible data are they now freeing up for us to mash and re-organise?  

Will they tell me how much they are paying the deer ‘expert’? 
Will they (finally) say how much land they sold at less than market value? 
Will they let me know if any companies doing building maintenance at council properties are Councillors’ family businesses?

Brace yourself:  if you go to the Statistics page link on the Open Data page.
(http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/open_data/statistics.asp)
You will find everything you might want to know.  About how many hits the City’s website gets per month, the population figures, and the expenditure on something called the  ‘Accord’ Card.

These are the very things I’d put on a Statistics page if I ran a city that was millions in the red.  I was dying to know how many visitors the City’s web page had in August 2010 – the answer was (of course) 214,000.  I guess that’s all of our questions answered now.

With our debt level in mind (and not being 100% certain a carpark and mall in UTG will save us from ruin), I followed a link to the February finance meeting documents.  With our newly-launched ‘Open Data’ initiative in place, surely the City will be open with its – I mean our  – finances, I thought.

Not all data is for the public of course. For instance, I was relieved to find that about half the information the Finance Committee discussed in February last year is off limits.  Have a look for yourself if you like: 
http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=146&MId=1925&Ver=4

You’ll see that many documents are withheld as they are tip top secret, must never be released, and are commercially sensitive. And thank goodness.  It’s hard to get any privacy sometimes; so I’m glad to know that privacy is respected by our City’s officials.

However, I noted that an item from this Finance meeting about ‘Managed Data Centre and Virtual Desktop Environment’ was deemed secret.
If we have an ‘open data’ policy I guess it’s reasonable to withhold information from the public on the ‘Managed Data Centre and Virtual Desktop Environment ’ –  I’m just not sure why.

But the good news is now you can see the reasons why you can’t see the items on the agenda.   And that, I suppose, is ‘Open Data’.

On that note I feel the need for a Brewdog coming on.  I will say here and now I bought a few shares in Brewdog, so please consider that my interest in Brewdog to be declared.  I bought the shares, the T-shirt, and the beers.  Why?  Because they are great.
If I had a family business, I’d like it to be Brewdog, I do declare.

– Next week:  ‘Police and Thieves’

Truth, Untruth And Consequences: Part Two

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, Opinion  No Responses »
Sep 012011
 

A look at more contradictory information from different arms of the council – with deadly consequences for the Tullos Hill Roe Deer by Suzanne Kelly.

deer5pic
In the first instalment of ‘Truth’, I revealed part of Valerie Watts’ response to my formal complaint.
This contained the shocking story of how we have already paid £43,800 for a previous failed plantation on Tullos Hill – and that Ms Watts failed to clarify the existence of this debt when asked.
In fact, Aberdeen Council (ie the taxpayer) “could be liable for a reclaim of up to £120,333.91” if trees to be planted fail, says a Forestry Commission Scotland letter.

The second part of the story will examine Watt’s response in more depth, revealing yet more contradiction; council use of general statements to justify the specific Tullos Hill situation; and the deliberate snubbing of experts who offered objections to as well as solutions to this completely arbitrary tree-planting.

As detailed in Part One, I launched a formal protest following my researches into the details of the tree scheme and the cull; these can be found in Aberdeen Voice. I found no fewer than 10 main points, which I felt the Council should be called to account on.
See: https://aberdeenvoice.com/2010/12/10-more-reasons-to-call-off-the-deer-cull/

The Council and I have traded emails back and forth. My specific, targeted questions are largely going unanswered. Either that, or I get sweeping, non-specific statements (such as ‘deer culling is perfectly normal’ – which has nothing to do with killing deer to protect trees that could be elsewhere – or not planted at all). This all wound up in my formally complaining, and the initial response from Ms Watts was much in the same vein as what I had heard before. I sent a reply, which I had to chase twice.

The first time I chased my reply was 8 July. The Council now say that they sent a reply to me on 11 July, and this date appears on a letter sent via email (although there is no trace of it in my inbox).

Interestingly, their first letter, also sent by email, was addressed to me at my home, and was posted. The second letter the city says it sent on 11 July did not include my street address, and certainly did not ever reach me in the post. I do wonder why they would change their method of communication.

But there are larger points at stake.

Time is running out, and this article cannot touch on all the new information or recap all of the previous points raised. There are previous stories still available on Aberdeen Voice, and a good deal of information can be found on the internet.

If at the end of reading this and other articles you decide you want the deer spared, then please contact your councillors as soon as you can, as well as the City Council. Your voice can make a difference yet. Details of councillors can be found at:
http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?bcr=1

Here is a selection of some (certainly not all) of the issues arising from my last letter from Valerie Watts – the one that never arrived either in the –post or by email at the time it was meant to have been sent. Sadly, I am not getting any closer to getting any definitive, meaningful answers, which the following examples will show. It is time for everyone concerned for the deer to consider other forms of action.

Income from trees? Depends who’s talking

Various council officers and rangers have written to me saying that there will be ‘income streams’ from the trees.

In fact, some of the reports say that some income can be relied upon from this giant forest in time. I asked Ms Watts for the financials. She replied:

“There is no business plan to justify the potential future timber crop and subsequent potential income stream.”

Either Ms Watts is right and the rangers and others who mentioned an income from the trees are wrong – or the City is confused. In fact, here is what the public consultation for phase 2 said:-

“… the trees should be well established and require minimal maintenance before they start generating income”

Which leads us to Watts’ comments on the public consultation.

Public Consultation: ‘was robust’

We have already established what a flawed, misleading document this phase 2 consultation exercise was, but Ms Watts insists the consultation was ‘robust’.

Those supporting the tree scheme are adamant that the consultation was never about the method of tree planting, and it was not relevant. This is the excuse they give when asked why shooting the Tullos deer was not in the document.

If it had been mentioned, the scheme would never have passed the public consultation in a million years. But people like me and those I have spoken to cite this passage from the public consultation as the reason we thought the deer were safe:-

“Where necessary some sites will require rabbit fencing to minimize damage from rabbits…”

If you read this document, you would come to the conclusion that animal damage had been considered: why mention fencing to control rabbits and not mention damage from other animals? I concluded –as did dozens of others (and more) that if deer were a problem, they would likewise have been mentioned.

We now know that in November 2010 the Council and Scottish Natural Heritage were already planning to shoot the deer to plant these trees: they just decided not to tell us this.

The Scottish Natural Heritage letter suggests handling the public over the deer. Well, the public has most definitely been misled by this poor excuse for a consultation. It was biased. It withheld information. To date, no one has come forward despite my requests to say they were the author of this document; the author certainly has some questions to answer.

See: shhh-dont-mention-the-pre-planned-deer-cull

The Media can’t see the Trees for the Forest

Perhaps the most pompous claim Ms Watts makes is that the media got the facts wrong, and that the community councils got misinformation from the media, so didn’t understand the scheme.

I find it a bit late in the day to blame the media – does Ms Watts include the P&J, EE, BBC, STV, Northsound, and the Scotsman as well as Aberdeen Voice? Where and when did the City’s Public Relations staff counter any inaccuracies in the media? In fact Ms Aileen Malone, convener of the housing committee and large proponent of this plan spoke to the media on many occasions. Here is what Watts wrote on the matter:-

“Aberdeen City Council has no control over how the media report Council meetings. In this case the media did not accurately report on the decisions of this Committee and have continued to publish inaccurate information about this project. They have published their interpretation of the committee decisions.”

It should be noted that when the media have published inaccuracies in the past the Council swiftly jumps in to make corrections when it suits them. We saw the recent debacle of the City countering its own press office’s release about the frequency and costs of using outside consultants. I also recall a Press & Journal editorial stating that the P&J would apologise when it made errors, but would not apologise for publishing information the City released and subsequently retracted.

Scottish SPCA don’t understand the project – says Watts

The work and the position of the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is world-renowned and respected. Except here.

The Scottish SPCA issued a statement specifically about the Tullos cull: they called it ‘abhorrent and absurd to kill deer to protect non-existent trees.’ Ms Watts doesn’t believe the Scottish SPCA are clever enough to have formulated its stance, and writes the following:-

“You quote the Scottish SPCA in your response. We* have been unable to find any evidence from the charities [sic – she must mean charity’s] policies that it has one that is against culling.

“We are in the process of checking this with the organization. We believe that the quote from Mr Mike Flynn is based on inaccurate reporting of the committee decision in the media. If the SSPCA were financially able to and prepared to relocate the deer legally within the project timescales, then the City would be amenable to them doing so.”

However, this amazing about-face needs examining, regarding allowing the deer to be relocated. The Council and the Scottish Natural Heritage made their positions clear previously that moving deer was not a solution.

I wrote to the Scottish SPCA to get their feedback on Watt’s paragraph above, and spoke to Mike Flynn on 26th August. He explained the difficulties in catching and moving deer, and says this idea just does not work. Mike confirmed the Scottish SPCA’s position on culling: it is to be carried out only where there are clear animal welfare issues or public safety issues.

Flynn confirmed that a person from the City did contact the Scottish SPCA to ask for its policy on culling. He was not happy that Watts believes he didn’t understand the issues and had been misinformed by the media. He understands, and is happy to stand by the previously-stated position: it is abhorrent and absurd to cull the Tullos Hill Roe Deer to plant trees. And whatever anyone at ACC may say, Mr Flynn is right.

* (somehow Ms Watts is now a group or is using the royal ‘we’ –she does not spell out who she means when she says ‘we’)

My Opinion and Conclusions Summarised

• The main conclusion I reach from months of research and asking questions is that I will be given different information from every council official, officer and elected member I speak to.

• They are united in one thing: they want the deer shot and the trees planted at all costs.

• The expert they hired after a tender process (note – the cost of this expert should be queried) is not interested in other experts’ opinions: this is no longer detached scientific expertise, but dogma.

• They are not actually as united as they think they are. There is increasing SNP resistance to this plan, which must be encouraged. Ms Malone insists the ‘tree for every citizen’ scheme was a Lib Dem election pledge. Ms Watts writes the Lib Dems and SNP jointly pursue this scheme, which “… has the mandate of the people of Aberdeen.” This Mandate is most definitely in the past tense – now that we know what the planting means for our deer and other existing wildlife.

• Most importantly: it is not too late to stop this insane scheme!

Watts next? – my opinion

A radio presenter had invited me and Aileen Malone to speak about the deer situation some months back.

Aileen was far too busy to spare the 20 minutes of a Sunday morning for this phone-in debate. A shame – as she could have rectified all the ‘misunderstandings’ which Watts claims the media are putting about. The show’s researchers were told I was not part of any group. And, I am not.

Still, the presenter seemed keen to draw me into an argument about direct action and getting people to stand in front of guns. I do not want to tell anyone to do anything, particularly anything to do with gun-toting shoot-to-kill mercenaries. However, it is plain that reason, logic, expense and the will of the people are being thrown out the window.

Before I had seen Emily James’ film about average people taking direct action, ‘Just Do It’ (at the Belmont a few weeks ago), I would not have considered taking steps to directly intervene in this tree plan. I am now re-thinking my position. When campaigning and logic have no effect, other (peaceful) means may be needed.

In the meantime, please get in touch with your elected representatives. Details of councillors can be found at:
http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?bcr=1

Tell them what you do and do not want to happen regarding Tullos Hill. Stopping this cull is not down to me or any one group – it is down to everyone.

If anyone wants a postcard to send the City, or a poster to put in their window, or to be kept informed of any developments, please write to oldsusannah@aberdeenvoice.com – sooner rather than later.

Old Susannah No. 49 – Board Stupid

 Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, Articles, Community, Environment, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour  No Responses »
Aug 292011
 

Old Susannah watches the latest developments in the ‘Deen and the wider world and feels like a deer caught in headlights.  Here is this week’s look at what’s happening where and who’s doing what to whom.  By Suzanne Kelly.

dictionary

Evening Express readers were rejoicing in the streets last weekend as the results of the ‘Happy Tots’ photo contest were revealed. Little wonder then, that there has been no word there or in the P&J of Anthony Baxter’s continued world tour of his award-winning film ‘You’ve Been Trumped, or the screening of Emily James’s film ‘Just Do It’ at the Belmont. Nor was there space for the little matter of the council’s ongoing deer debacle.
Word has it that the SNP is growing squeamish over the blood-letting that the little creatures (ie the LibDems) will suffer at the ballot box when the voting season opens, and are looking for a way out.

Let’s hope so. Not even the most gullible politician believes the promised carbon off-setting benefits of this unwanted forest has any merit. The Public Services Ombudsman likewise are weighing up the City’s actions over the deer. The Ombudsman may soon look at other matters, but that is another story for another time.

In the larger, non EE world, there is violence at every turn it seems.  Happily we can all feel safer for a few reasons. One, the use of tasers seems to be going up in the UK.  This seems to coincide with the number of deaths caused by tasers likewise increasing – but then again, that means less criminals on the streets.  

It also means less innocent people on the streets, but you can’t have everything. 

Tasers don’t cause severe agony I’m told, but there was a police official who was going to make a film demonstrating how innocuous the tasers were, using himself as a guinea pig.  Unfortunately, he was in excruciating pain, and his little film didn’t have the desired effect.  Tasers are only used by calm, rational, well-trained men, and not angry cops who might repeatedly taser a suspect until they die.  Usually.

But I feel even safer still:  the US Navy’s been spending time (and lots and lots of money) developing a means to make their weaponry even more deadly.  It has been said that this new technology means weapons can explode with up to five times the energy of existing armaments.  I guess this is their way of trying to be more energy efficient, so that’s quite good.  As things stood, NATO was only able to destroy the world a few dozen times over. Now we can sleep soundly in our beds.

Old Susannah enjoyed the (mostly) sunny Tullos Hill picnic last Sunday and was happy to see some new faces there. 

It is a beautiful hill with beautiful panoramic views over city and sea – so it’s got to go.  Sadly, a second group of picnic-ers failed to find the main party, but a good time was still had. 

Anyway, time for some definitions.

Board:

(noun) a collection of people who have managerial, supervisory, or other responsibilities and powers, e.g.. ‘Board of Directors’ ‘Board of Governors’.

Private company boards are established (normally) to oversee methods and manage reasonable, defined objectives.  However, we are in Aberdeen, and are ruled by Aberdeen City Council.

There is no shortage of boards set up by the City and given  powers – powers which are always used in a fair, reasonable and democratic  way.  The Licensing Board did itself proud two years ago; it ran straight to the Press & Journal to say a dozen or so restaurants and clubs, etc. were not compliant with new licensing laws.  These wrong-doers were named and shamed in the press, and faced being closed, fined, and having their licenses revoked.

In a truly dramatic style, this was announced about a week before the traditional Christmas lunches and dinners were to be held.

Naturally you would expect a Board to have possession of all the facts before going to the papers.  Yet somehow this board made a few tiny mistakes.  A few of those it named as non-compliant with the law had, er, long gone out of business.  Slightly more embarrassing, at least two of the named-and-shamed establishments were fully compliant, having jumped through hoops made of red tape.

Old Susannah had planned a lunch in such a place, and called the Board once I knew for certain how wrong the Board was.  I spoke to a woman; she was very helpful.  She asked me who I was to question the board, and told me I must be mistaken.  However, a day or so later, the Board had gone back to the P&J with a grudging retraction.  My Christmas lunch went ahead, and all was right.

But here are a few lines from the Board we should all be looking at:-

“The role of the Project Monitoring Group is to oversee the Union Terrace City Garden project’s progress and ensure that Council’s interests, and that of the majority of Aberdeen citizens, are protected as the project progresses. The membership of the Project Monitoring Group comprises   Councillors Malone (Chair), Boulton, McDonald, Kirsty West, Wisely, Young and Yuill”.

“For reference, the membership of the City Garden Project Management Board comprises Councillor John Stewart (Chair), Councillor Callum   McCaig and Valerie Watts, ACC; Tom Smith and Colin Crosby, ACSEF; Jennifer Craw, the Wood Family Trust; Bob Collier, Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce; John Michie, Aberdeen City Centre Association; Lavina Massie, the Aberdeen City Alliance, Maggie McGinlay, Scottish Enterprise and Paul Harris, Gray’s School of Art”.

– Aberdeen City Council Website

I guess it must be an Aberdonian thing, but here we have a board to oversee a project which 55% of people responding to a survey don’t support.  (Arguably the number against ruining UTG is higher, as a tiny hiccough in the online voting system changed negative votes to positive ones – I guess it’s hard to use this new-fangled technology).

Isn’t it wonderful that this Board just sprang into being without the need to trouble the taxpayer or voter as to their thoughts? 

Perhaps it will be a difficult job to be a board member here – for one thing these selfless souls have to ‘oversee the progress’ of the project which is unknown (there is no scope, timescale or budget agreed – but I’m splitting hairs).  If you look at the paragraphs above, you might get the idea that not progressing the project is not an option.

The tricky bit will be how on earth to ‘ensure that Council’s interests, AND that of the majority of Aberdeen citizens, are protected as the project progresses.’

 I vote we protect the Council’s interests above all else.  The project will progress, and the vastly different interests of the Council and the citizen somehow have to be both ‘protected’.   This Board (led by one Mr Gerry Brough) has so far protected us by employing a wide range of techniques.  

These include setting up a company to take the project forward with no mandate from the people, stacking the board with people who want a Wood Group solution for UTG, and by redacting minutes to protect us from truth.  I feel as protected by Gerry Brough and this board as I do by the US Navy and its brand new super-explosives.

It is unclear who designed the make-up of this board, but I wonder – did they have a small, subconscious desire for the project to go ahead? 

It almost seems as if most of these people are desperate for the gardens to be turned into whatever Wood (and Milne) want.  Then again, the presence of Jennifer Craw to represent the Wood Family Trust is a reassuring sign that everything is totally impartial and ‘above Board’.

Citizens opposed to the project should not bother their heads about the decision the board made:  there will be no opportunity at the upcoming public consultation to vote to leave the gardens as is.  You get to vote on which of the six shortlisted projects (again chosen by a handful of non-elected people) you want – and that’s that.  And this wonderful, unbiased board has just decided at its last meeting to start lobbying government officials to pressure them to go ahead and fill in our garden.

If you want to write to the Board and tell them how happy you are with their work so far, please do.  And if you feel like doing some lobbying of your own, you can always write to the Scottish Futures Trust to tell them how happy you are about these fantastic garden-raising  plans.

The City is some £50,000,000 in the red

But of all the many boards we have working hard to keep Aberdeen the efficient vibrant, dynamic hub it is, there is a board composed completely of planks.

I refer of course to the Budget Monitoring Board:  the City is some 50 million pounds in the red that we know of.  That really is some job they have managed  these past few years.

Dictatorship

(noun) system of government wherein a single person or small  group has undemocratic control and powers over the citizenry; often a totalitarian state.

Despite their threatening and irrational behaviour, it looks as if some of the world’s most hated dictators are set to topple.   These hated figures have held onto power at all costs, some for many years, despite people demanding that they go. Dictators try to threaten journalists and other critics; they use threats of legal action to silence opposition.  These dictators often look slightly deranged and dress in odd garments, and often look over-tired and slightly bloated.

One of my favourite quotes from the ‘Harry Potter’ series of books by the inimitable JK Rowling went something like this (I paraphrase).

“Dictators always fear the people that they oppress, for they know that one day, someone will rise above the masses and over-throw them.” 

– Apologies for the bad  phrasing JK,  but it’s true.  Those who come to power and then disregard clear voices of opposition and who do not play fairly will eventually be overthrown, or just voted out of office.

So dictators, do everyone a favour and just leave when asked to go.  (PS – in a related development it seems that Libya has finally got rid of Gaddafi).

Next week:  start queueing now:  the great St. Nicholas House furniture sale is ON!  Grab a future heirloom from the used, battered desks and chairs.  You paid for them once – here’s your chance to pay for them again (not to mention the brand new furniture you bought for Marischal College).  Sale stars 3 September.

Half-truth And Consequences: The Chief Executive Replies

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Environment, Featured, Information, Opinion  No Responses »
Aug 172011
 

For the past several months Voice’s Suzanne Kelly has been attempting to persuade Aberdeen City Council to stop its planned cull of the Tullos Hill roe deer, which the City insists is necessary in order to plant tens of thousands of trees.  At least four community councils representing tens of thousands of people have likewise condemned the cull, as have 2,400 petitioners and hundreds of letter-writers. As the proposed cull looms, Suzanne updates readers regarding her search for answers.

deer5pic
The public were initially invited to consult on a tree-planting scheme.  The consultation document said rabbits would need some form of control (fencing) – but no mention was made of the deer slaughter – even though the City and Scottish Natural Heritage had already planned to kill the creatures.  The animals have lived on the hill for at least 30 years with no cull; their average lifespan is 6 or 7 years, and they are a source of pleasure for local residents.

But the City wants the cheapest method to plant the trees. As they are spending public money, they must go with the most cost-effective methods available. Do they really always take such care with our money I wonder.

Aileen Malone – the most vocal City proponent of the plan has stated that  ‘A Tree  For Every Citizen’ was a LibDem Election pledge, and a LibDem/SNP plan according to City Council Chief Executive Valerie Watts.

The plan therefore, she writes:

“has the full backing of the people of Aberdeen.”

Search for the Truth:

Whether or not the people back this plan is not the only area where the City and the deer campaigners differ. 

For my part I made formal complaint to Valerie Watts in May.  The City’s response in June was riddled with generalisations and flawed logic – and a serious omission (more about that follows).  I countered the City’s answers in mid June.  I waited for a response and chased this up on 7 July.  Nothing happened.

I chased a reply again on 8 August – and sent a copy of the email to the Public Services Ombudsman, asking them to look at the delay.  Watt’s office then replied to me very quickly – saying that they had already answered my questions.

The City’s says it sent me an email on 11 July (there is no concrete electronic proof of it yet) with a response to my counterpoints.  I searched my entire email without finding any trace.  I will see if I can get an expert to determine if I accidentally deleted any incoming email on my end, and I will be asking for proof from the City that the email exists on its servers (I find it very interesting that their first answer to my complaint came by both email and hard copy in the post.  The second reply certainly did not show up in the post either, and did not have my home address at the top, which the first document did).

But I digress.  The quality of the City’s reply is astonishing.

It again glosses over facts, misinterprets my very clear questions, promises to send me attachments which I don’t have, and denigrates any professional opinions (SSPCA, outside experts) who disagree with a cull.  I will be detailing the full amount of complaints to the Ombudsman and sharing the information in the press.  However, there is one point that to my mind is so blatantly disingenuous that it looks for all the world like the shabbiest attempt at climbing out of a hole I have ever seen or heard of.

If any readers whether for or against the cull would like to give me their opinion on the following, I would be most grateful.  I really want to know whether the following exchanges seem open, fair, and accurate to other people.  It occurs to me that I may be over-reacting, but everyone who has seen this so far is, well, outraged.

Black and White facts:

In my ten-point initial complaint I wrote to Valerie Watts on 20 May, 2011, this was one of my questions – word for word:

“I would like to ask:  is it true that the Council owes a sum for previous, failed planting?  I was told that £44,000 approximately is owed by the City in this regard – please clarify”.

Ms Watts’ reply to me in early June (received on 7 June 2011) reads as follows regarding the point; again the text below is verbatim:

“Aberdeen City Council does not owe any amount to any organisation relating to a previous failed planting scheme.”

This reply surprised me greatly, as I had a source who was certain a debt definitely existed and had long gone unpaid.  I asked my source for proof and they very quickly came back to me with proof positive that the City had been chased by the Forestry Commission for money; the proof was a letter from the Forestry Commission dated 2 March 2011 –  See attached for ease of reference, but here is the crucial paragraph:-

“Tullos Community Woodland

“This is a failed WGS planting scheme. The scheme failed due to inadequate protection from deer and weeds. On the 4th November 2010 we issued Aberdeen City Council with an invoice for £43,831.90 – the reclaim of monies paid out under the above contract. This invoice was to be paid within 30 days. The monies have not been received. This invoice is now accruing interest and has led to a payment ban being put in place over your Business Reference Number”.

I found it astonishing that Ms Watts did not know about this debt; this was a fair amount of taxpayer money for a cash-strapped city to be spending on trees it could not successfully grow.  She was still new in her post as Chief Executive – perhaps she did not know about it.  It never once occurred to me that our highly-paid Chief Executive knew all about this debt but decided to respond to me as she did. 

But that is exactly, precisely what happened:  she knew all about it – and decided to not mention it.

As it turns out, the City had paid the debt not long before I wrote my question.  A critic might on first thought side with the city – after all, the debt was paid.  But I most clearly asked for clarification.   I asked about a debt adjacent to £44,000 for a failed tree planting on Tullos Hill.

I found this shocking as far as it went, and was eagerly awaiting Watt’s reply.  It is inconceivable to me that I would have accidentally deleted an email I was chasing and had looked for eagerly in my inbox for months.  But here is the newly-received response from Valerie Watts, which pushes the word ‘disingenuous’ to a new level – if not straight over the edge to dishonest:-

“The £43,831.90 you refer to does not relate in any way to the current Tree for Every Citizen Project.  This as a grant repayment from a previous planting scheme from 1996 which failed due to deer damage and a lack of weed control.  This amount was repaid to the Forestry Commission Scotland prior to your enquiry so at the time of your enquiry dated 20 May 2011, when you asked “if ACC owed £44,000” our response was correct as the re-payment had been made against  the 1996 grant payment prior to this date”.

  • First I note how conveniently Ms Watts says she was ‘correct’ as the repayment had been made.  This of course ignores my asking for clarification of a £44,000 debt for a failed tree planting on Tullos Hill.
  • Secondly, the ‘weed control’ has not had any mention whatsoever in any of the public consultation documents.  I find virtually no mention of weed problems in the Housing & Environment Committee minutes on this subject  – just a gung-ho desire to find a cheap way to kill the deer.

The public certainly did not agree to this and are justifiably angry that the cull was kept secret.  The city keeps repeating to me that the public consultation was not about the method to be used – yet it clearly talks about the method for keeping the rabbits out.

  • Thirdly, I think the Forestry Commission must be very generous:  if the scheme was rooted in 1996, and they were only chasing their £43,800 in 2010, then that represents some fourteen years of waiting for payment. ( I wish my creditors took a similar stance).  I would say that this old debt coming out of the city’s treasury at this tight financial time is something of a disaster.

So, in Ms Watts’ eyes, my asking about a ‘previous, failed planting’ and an approximate cost of £44,000:

“does not relate in any way to the current Tree for Every Citizen Project”.  

I had not asked her to relate the current plan to the past debt.  I had asked if there was a previous failed planting.  Ms Watts goes on to describe – in her own words:

“a grant repayment from a previous planting scheme in 1996 which failed….”

I would very much like to know if anyone who reads this piece sees a similarity between the previous failed planting I asked about and the “previous planting scheme in 1996 which failed”.  Does any reader see a similarity between the £44,000 I mentioned that I wanted clarified and the £43,800 repayment?  Perhaps it is just me.

The bigger picture here is why the city is so desperate to take this completely arbitrary gamble to turn an existing wildlife area into a forest – a forest which apparently cannot be created without killing some of the existing deer.  The residents do not want it, despite Ms Watts’ claims that they do.  Protesters are told time and time again that this scheme is ‘cost neutral.’ 

If we had to pay £43,800 – and may indeed need to make more  payments as the Forestry Commission letter hints at – then I for one cannot see any ‘cost neutral’ claim holding up.

Your help is needed – Urgently.   

If you can spare a minute to contact me with your opinion of this exchange, it will be greatly appreciated.  If you think I am right to now have serious questions on the honesty, integrity and suitability of Ms Watts to continue in her role , then please do let me and her know.

She is paid a higher salary than the Prime Minister, and is responsible for projects worth  millions of pounds  – but  is apparently incapable of seeing a relationship between my question and the facts she had.   If on the contrary you think that this £43,800 bill (note – in the Forestry Commission’s letter it emerges that we might wind up owing over £100K) is fair enough, that  the matter of Ms Watts reply is not important, and the cull is fine with you, then I want to know that as well.

The deer and existing wildlife and plants have very little time left, and I do not even know if the City can answer simple questions accurately – and/or honestly.  If you can in any way help to stop a slaughter which the Scottish SPCA calls ‘absurd and abhorrent’, please do speak up now.

It is known that many people inside the City government are concerned at the scheme’s details and some are looking for a way to end it.  Let’s help them with some hugely-deserved public pressure on those who are pressing ahead with the cull regardless.

Finally,  please come to a picnic on Tullos Hill next Sunday 21 August at 2pm.  It may well be your last chance to enjoy this habitat as it exists.

Image Credit: © Catalin Pobega | Dreamstime.com

Old Susannah’s Journal No.47 – Carbon (mis)Trust And A Lot Of Hot Air

 Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire, Articles, Community, Creative Writing, Environment, Information, Opinion, Satire and Humour  No Responses »
Aug 122011
 

Old Susannah looks back at the week that was and wonders who’s up to what and why. By Suzanne Kelly.

dictionary
Old Susannah’s fighting a nasty little digestive problem at the moment – but I’m more worried about the rioting that may soon hit Aberdeenshire.  I thought rioting had already broken out when I was making my way home on Friday night through town, but then I realised it was just the usual weekend crew and all was business as usual.

It’s just as well our highly-placed police officials have announced that crime levels are going down in the ‘deen, otherwise the recent spate of attacks and assaults would have me worried.

I am assured there is no correlation between any high-ranking police performance bonuses and the crime stats decreasing.  As we know, statistics are facts which can never be manipulated.  As for the average policeman on the beat, I am sure they will happily swallow the proposed cuts to their wages with good grace.

Looks like there might be a one-man riot in the Menie area; for some reason the Government is not doing what Donald Trump wants at the moment, and might actually allow a giant windfarm to obscure his view.

This windfarm could mean double-trouble.  Not only might all the rich people lined up to buy the 900  holiday homes now change their minds if it means looking at wind turbines, but any change in the wind might make someone’s hair (or wig) look funny.  More on that later, but I hope the government will see sense.

(By the way, I think windfarms have a long way to develop and I am not completely sure we are proceeding in the right manner.  But at least they are an attempt to solve our energy problems.  Whereas I think Donald’s development is obviously proceeding in the right manner, and will solve all of our employment and economic problems.  Then again, I am heavily medicated at present).

Time for some more medicine and some definitions.

In The Black

(modern English phrase) to be in profit; origin of this phrase from accountancy standard practice of recording positive figures in black ink and negatives in red ink. 

Aberdeen City Council may be millions in the red (with more debt to consultants piling up by the minute), but at least we are well in the black when it comes to carbon. The city produces an eye-watering quantity of the black stuff – here are some figures from an old City report: (insert picture here- table of carbon figures)

Aberdeen City Council, May 2004, “Carbon Management Programme – Outcomes & Action Plan”

1312917898-carbonfiguresfromcitydocument

So looking at this table, as a guess in 2004, staff survey figures indicated that some 22% of staff answering the survey said their car commute to work produced some 20,300 tonnes of carbon in 2002/03.  I’m told we’re doing a bang-up job of reducing carbon production now.

The construction of the Loirston Loch stadium will have a carbon footprint.  The buses being arranged to get all the fans to and from the stadium will have a carbon footprint.  The city didn’t count its air travel in the 2002/03 figures.  But other than these small blips, we’re going to plant some trees.  Problem solved.

Back in the day when the ‘tree for every citizen’ plan was new, Mr Lochhead of  the Scottish Government and Aileen Malone were quoted in a lovely, warm Aberdeen press release.  Here are some of the great things it said:-

“Many of the woodlands being created will be in the middle of communities – in one case right underneath a tower block – so they will provide a focal point for community involvement, leisure and recreation”. “They will also soften the urban environment and – by soaking up around 15,000 tonnes of CO2 over 50 years – help provide a greener, cleaner future for the people of Aberdeen.”

I can almost see the forest under the tower block now.

If the press release was referring to the one in Balnagask, I think they’ll find the trees were largely vandalised.   I can’t think of any crime, vandalism or fire risks associated with a woodland right under a tower block, so let’s move on.

Back to the carbon question.  Wow! –  Fifteen thousand tonnes of carbon sucked up by the 94,000 trees in only 50 years.

I’m sure that the lack of straightforward answers had nothing political about it at all

So – if in 2002/03 the City’s buildings, transport, street lights made 7,740,000 tonnes of carbon PER YEAR, then HoMalone’s trees – all of them if they all grow – will offset one year’s worth of City Carbon in a mere 50 years.

Or, looked at another way, if all the trees mature, then each year they would suck up around 0.2% of that pollution each year.  Shall I throw away my asthma inhaler now, or wait? (NB – I never had asthma until I moved to Torry.  I sometimes wonder if there are any pollutants in the sweet-smelling air, but I swiftly dismiss such thoughts as I cough on exhaust fumes on UnWellington Road).

This is almost enough to make me change my mind about killing – sorry ‘managing’ – the deer to plant HoMalone’s trees.  But not quite.

If you are out there Ms Malone, please be assured that I am thinking of you – and so are some ten thousand voters.  Go ahead and try killing the deer.  Just start hitting the ‘help wanted’ section if you continue to press on.  C’mon Aileen – time is wasting, call off your dogs.  And hunters/cullers/’managers’. If you want suggestions as to where to put the trees, several readers have written to me, and I would gladly pass their (uncensored) comments on.

Before I leave the subject of how our fearless, pioneering City officials are dealing with carbon pollution, two last thoughts.  I asked this question of several environment agencies and the council – and none would answer it:

“When the Loirston Loch stadium is in operation, will there be more, less, or the same amount of air pollution and particulates in the area as there are now?” 

That’s right – no one would commit to an answer.  Too difficult to guess, as all those trees (if not burnt to the ground) will be sucking up so much area carbon. I’m sure that the lack of straightforward answers had nothing political about it at all. The last thoughts contained in the City’s 2002/03 report are kind of scary ones unless you are a fan of the Big Brother school of government.

At the end of the publication ‘Aberdeen City Council Carbon Management Programme Carbon Management Plan’ there is a list of ‘future possibilities’ which include:-

  • Install Active Directory software to PCs: This will allow PCs to be remotely monitored and will allow default printer settings (black and white/double sided) to be set to all corporate PCs. A test phase is to be conducted before March 2010 and roll out will be completed by April 2010.
  • Private Household Renovation: planners to only allow extensions if further work is done on the building to bring it up to current energy standards i.e. insulation levels.

Council staff take heart – your computers will be ‘monitored’.  Of course there are ways to print documents without having to monitor staff, but staff won’t mind shedding a few privacy rights for the privilege of improving the highly-scientific carbon stats.  Private homeowners – get ready to jump through future hoops if you want to renovate your home.   Rest assured in the knowledge it’s all for the best.

Put the wind up

(slang expression, English c WWII) to make someone anxious or nervous; specific origin unknown, but attributed to WWII English infantry.

Unfortunately, someone’s put the wind up Donald Trump. Instead of the usual hot air billowing out from the blowhole of this huge Moby Dick, he’s got aesthetic worries.

No, not about his hair or the one or two wrinkles around his eyes – but someone has the temerity to think about spoiling his view from the Menie Estate. If anyone knows about aesthetics it is the creator of Trump Tower, with its giant brassy-gold letter ‘Ts’ in the lobby and its shiny pink marble cladding – not to mention the gold-plating on the Trump jet.  Money can buy class.

Menie wrongs.  Donald is against wind power, you see, and a windfarm may go up near his estate.

Well, The Donald will not take that lying down (although a good long lie down might do him good). He’s threatening to take all legal action he can.   This apparently includes taking whatever Scottish entity he sees fit to an American court.

Can he do that ?  Yes he can.

Does the Don do this kind of thing often?  Yes he does.

Are any of his lawsuits frivolous means of attempting to intimidate (legally and financially) those he sues?  Obviously not. Do rest assured contractors and municipal governments – Donald Trump hardly ever sues your ilk, and doesn’t always win when he does.  Don’t let that thought get the wind up you, now.  You might wind up in court, but you have the gratitude of the electorate which you have earned, and you will get what you have earned from them.

Mis-statement

(modern English) to accidentally say something that is not completely accurate.  To be ‘economical with the actuality’.  Definitely not to lie.

Donald where’s your troosers?  Mr Trump was – believe it or not- caught in one or two ‘mis-statement’s in interviews in the past.  Come to think of it that is an understatement of mis-statements.  How such a privacy-loving man manages to get caught up in so much publicity is a mystery.

One of these factually-challenged statements concerned his Rancho Palos Verdes, California golf course; he said he was building 75 mansions on it.  In fact, six were built and three sold as of latest news reports.  I make that kind of mistake all the time; I can never remember if I have one flat in Torry, or 86.  Obviously the 900 homes he is building in Menie are all going ahead and will all be sold.

The two events are unrelated.  Aberdeenshire, RGU, Alex ‘fishy’ Salmond and a host of others believe in Trump.  That should be good enough for you and me. It’s not as if he’ll sell the land off now that the planning permission is in place – nothing short of creating the ‘world’s greatest golf course’ will do, and he won’t rest until he’s done it. I for one have complete faith in the intellectual prowess and ethics of our local government when it ensures my environment is protected and all land deals and planning consent matters are handled above board.

Question:  Who will be playing on this course? 

If it costs you at present over $695 a year to play golf at Trump’s LA course for only $160 a go, then I foresee a problem.  If you introduce such a low rate here in Scotland, then every oil exec will be skiving off work to spend all their time playing around.  Nothing will ever get done, and the greens will be crowded day and night.  See you there!  (When it’s finished).

I will keep an eye open on the flat-swapping sites to see if anyone will trade their new Menie home for my Torry Flat.  Or maybe not – I would far rather stay in Torry.

For some fine examples of the word ‘mis-statement’ in use, the following link will be of interest:  http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-eliot-spitzer-lawsuit-video-2011-4

Sometimes I wonder if the doings in Aberdeen aren’t what’s giving me a stomach ache.  But for now, back to bed for me, and at least I sleep sounder than some of our officials do – or should do anyway.  

Next week:  A deer update from the City which begs for the word ‘disingenuous’ to be defined.

 Older Entries  Newer Entries