Jun 272012
 

You’ve Been Trumped,  the highest rated documentary in UK history, will receive its official cinema release in Scotland just days before the ‘star’ of the film can hit the first golf ball on his troubled development near Aberdeen. With thanks to Anthony Baxter.

The feature, which scooped up 10 major awards during its global festival run, premieres on Friday July 6th in the home of golf, St. Andrews.

This will be followed by an unprecedented cinema run in Aberdeen, Inverness, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dundee, Stirling and the Highlands and Islands.

The film will also play in London and selected theatres elsewhere in the UK before opening in the United States in August through Manhattan based International Film Circuit. 

Hollywood star Alec Baldwin, who is a ‘great admirer’ of the film, has asked to host a screening during You’ve Been Trumped’s premiere week in New York.

The brand new cinema release version of the film, given a PG rating by the British Board of Film Classification, features fresh scenes – including a moment where Mr Trump appears uncertain as to whether his golf course is situated on the east or west coast of Scotland.  It also features a beautiful, but scathing, song by Scots folk favourite Karine Polwart.

Director Anthony Baxter, who recently received an apology from Grampian police for being thrown in jail while making the film, says:

 “The timing is no accident.  We felt it was essential to get the film in front of the Scottish public before Mr Trump’s global hype machine churns into action.  And what better place to open the film than St. Andrews, where you really do find the best golf course in the world.”

Donald Trump’s publicity efforts seem not to be as effective as they once were.  After a disastrous appearance at the Parliamentary committee looking into wind farms Mr Trump has had to change his plans for his opening fourball, which he once predicted would include Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond and Sir Sean Connery.  According to press reports, both men are avoiding the launch of the development on July 10th.

Meanwhile emeritus Professor Paul Cheshire from the London School of Economics, the leading economist who predicts in You’ve Been Trumped the economic benefits promised by Mr Trump and Mr Salmond would never materialise, says he has been proven right and that Donald Trump’s objections to wind farms are a diversion.

“Mr Trump seems to be using the offshore wind farm plan as a way of saving face while kicking sand in the face of the Scots.  The people of Aberdeenshire have sadly lost a habitat of wild beauty for no noticeable economic gain.”

“Thus far, only a handful of full time jobs have been created by the resort, just a fraction of the 6,000 promised by Mr Salmond and Donald Trump.”

Leading geomorphologist, Dr Jim Hansom of the University of Glasgow, who gave evidence against the Trump plans at Scotland’s Parliament on behalf of Scottish Natural Heritage, is warning fellow Scots not to be fooled by glossy newspaper and TV images of green fairways.

“What was once a wild, dynamic and inspirational place is now just another manicured and polished piece of coastal real estate.  Mountains of sand trucked in and bulldozed into shape are concealed by a superficial veneer of golf-course green.  A human-made place and a wilderness destroyed.”

  •  Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.
Jun 222012
 

Voice’s Old Susannah comments on current events and enlightens us with definitions of some tricky terms with a locally topical taste. By Suzanne Kelly.

Tally Ho!  I’m not sure if this past week was more vibrant than it was dynamic or more dynamic than it was vibrant – but it’s been good on the whole.  Gray’s School of Art degree and fashion shows took place, I went along to the Sunday movie at The Moorings, and there were lots of cocktails.

RGU was interesting; for some reason just as we arrived, I was puzzled as my friends abruptly scarpered in different directions.  I was told later that I’d been standing next to HoMalone, and my friends didn’t want to see what would happen next. Not that I would have confronted her; I would have said “Hello!  My deer!”, or asked her where she got the fluorescent mustard coloured blazer she wore at the vote count.

She was probably searching for the Gray’s designer who made clothing out of fur, or the jeweller using bone, or so I would imagine (NB there were some imaginative uses of fake fur on show – why use dead animals for decorative reasons?).

Before the RGU fashion show, Gray’s Head of School made a speech, concluding that Gray’s and RGU were firmly behind Aberdeen’s bid for the highly coveted ‘City of Culture’ title.  Hooray!

There were several interesting artists and designers on show; I particularly liked jewellery by Sarah Sidwick.  In a written statement Sarah claimed:-

“Body image dissatisfaction is on the rise, with more pressure than ever before put on both women and men to obtain society’s projected ideal beauty…. I believe we should all start taking the growing problem of bodily image dissatisfaction more seriously and question our view on what makes someone ‘beautiful’.

We all have different ideas of what is beautiful I guess.  As long as someone’s not to fat or too thin, or too tall or short, and doesn’t show any sign of ageing – and wears lots of designer gear, it’s safe to say they are beautiful.

For anyone who likes to watch a movie without interruptions or without listening to other people’s mobiles going off every five minute, I’d suggest the Sunday Movie at the Moorings Bar.  The lights are dimmed around 4pm-ish, the doors are locked, and the audience is quiet.  Last week’s movie was called ‘Dazed & Confused’.

Old Susannah found some of the film’s references difficult to follow, and was puzzled that the young people in it seemed to smoke roll-up cigarettes with excessive frequency; I can’t imagine why.

There were a few occasions for cocktails this week, and my first visit to 99 Back Wynd won’t be my last.  There is a ‘Painkiller’ cocktail which is delicious, and they have violet-flavoured alcohol, which I love.

  Saturday 23 June is nearly upon us, and the biggest party Union Terrace Gardens has ever seen will be on

Possibly best of all is that BrewDog is offering cocktails.  Beer cocktails.  BrewDog craft beer  cocktails.    These spirit-lifting cocktails include Pretty in Punk, Saint’s Delight, Hardcore Pornography and Orange Tide.   A girl in BrewDog had selected about 20 bottles of different beers to take away; she told me it was a birthday present for a friend.  I told her my birthday is 9 July.

And I launched an eBook this week.  It’s a very short work entitled ‘Old Susannah’s Handbook of Modern Manners – Part One’.  It is available on kindle via Amazon.  The introduction is available to read for free, but after that it gets a tiny bit sarcastic.  It is yours for about £1.90, and should I sell any copies, then 20% of any profit will be split between four animal welfare/sanctuary groups. No doubt the City of Culture Bid Committee will be interested.

It can be found at http://www.amazon.com/dp/B008C81M1I

Seeing as the City of Culture is the topic on everyone’s lips (why, I can barely sleep!), I will include a few relevant definitions.  Before that, just a reminder that Saturday 23 June is nearly upon us, and the biggest party Union Terrace Gardens has ever seen will be on.  Hope to see you there.

But amid all this fun, the Freedom of Information people wrote to me this afternoon about some of my deer cull questions.  It seems that despite public observation to the contrary, warning signs were posted at each and every entrance during the weeks the shooting took place.

The signs said ‘forestry operations’ were in effect.  Obviously, forestry operations meant hunters were shooting rifles and a lethal risk existed.  By the way, 23 deer were shot, none were just wounded (so the city says), and all were ‘clean kills’.  However, to shoot 23 deer, 33 rounds of ammunition were fired.

I put my hands up (especially if confronted with a high-powered rifle) – but if 23 animals were shot instantly dead, doesn’t this mean an extra 10 shots were taken?  Did it take more than one shot to kill the poor (hand-fed in some cases) creatures?  Did any bullets miss – therefore meaning there could have been some serious accidents?

Feel free to ask the City yourself about the cull, the correct warning signs as to lethal risk, and the 33 rounds needed to kill 23 deer.

Now onwards with a few definitions

Culture: (noun, Eng) 1.  the collective qualities, traits, idiosyncrasies that give an area, a group or a nation its individuality.

A Ms D Morgan sent a letter to the Press & Journal last week; in it she noted that Aberdeen has closed nearly a dozen of its museums and/or sold collections over the past decade and a bit.  We recently flogged off some of the Thomas Glover House artefacts as well.  And about time.

No one is interested in history, old buildings or old paintings; people want to see sharks in fish tanks, skulls covered with diamonds, and granite webs.  The sooner we can get more vibrant and dynamic the better.  This is how it works.

  • Sell off your old stuff.  Sell old trees for lumber in Hazlehead Park and use the money to plant trees on Tullos Hill (irrespective of the existing ecosystem, peoples’ wishes, or the fact the trees won’t grow).
  • Shoot the deer that lived on the hill and sell their carcasses for game meat.
  • Let your old buildings either rot, get burnt down, or just sell them.  Then you have cash in hand.
  • Close museums; throw any books you find in Marischal College’s basement museum into a skip.
  • Buy some trendy new art, and get lots of consultants in.
  • Build new venues, even if the existing venues have to be subsidised by the taxpayer.
  • Borrow lots and lots of money over what you got by selling the family silverware.
  • Give money to consultants.
  • Borrow more money.
  • Set up some private companies, preferably with the established quangos which you’ve helped to set up.
  • You will need more money.  Cut funds, stop benefits, close schools, pressure libraries.
  • Ask arts practitioners in the area what they want, and ignore those who are politically awkward, not dependent on you for funding, or who want a slice of the new pie.
  • Set up lots of meetings, think-tanks, new groups.
  • Select a random area of the city to be the quarter for arts.  Impose this new geography.  Then sit back and wait for the public’s grateful thanks, and grants to roll in, and tourists in their thousands to appear, hopefully generating the £122,000,000 you promised people your granite web and new ideas would bring in each year.  If you build it, they will come.

I do not think Aberdeen can be rivalled in its ambition.

City of Culture: (noun, mod. English) title bestowed upon a UK/European City by vote. 

The irreverent magazine ‘Private Eye’ has previously pointed out how Liverpool, previous City of Culture, spent a great deal of money on events which sadly people weren’t sophisticated enough to appreciate or support, and wasted a fortune.  But Valerie  Watts, our Chief Executive, came from Derry.  Derry won City of Culture, and she wants another similar victory here!

Only a minority of negative people in Derry think that money was wasted on this award.  £12  million or so was needed for Derry’s ‘Millennium Way’.  If you and I haven’t heard of it, it is because we are uncultured.    Here is some criticism of what I am sure was a brilliant idea:-  http://www.lurganmail.co.uk/news/local/city-of-culture-not-a-priority-1-3761381

But suddenly as I read these old stories, everything fell into place for Old Susannah as she remembered one of the huge white elephants of Liverpool.  Actually, it was not a white elephant

We have seen some of our quangos and LibDem / SNP politicians desperate to build a giant granite web.  I can now reveal the reason we are desperate for the giant web is that a city of culture must have:  A Giant Spider.

City movers and shakers in Liverpool,  (home of the Beatles, Echo  & the Bunnymen, classical performers, painters and sculptors) decided to ignore all that art nonsense and get really cultural – with a giant spider called ‘the princess project’.  The spider’s cost was nearly £2,000,000.  What a bargain!

Why DaVinci, Mozart, Bach, Turner and so on ignored the cultural importance of a giant spider is beyond me; I guess we’re just more enlightened now.  But ‘Liverpool Culture Company (in turn funded by the city, the Arts Council and the Department of Culture, Media and Sport) decided to get a giant Japanese spider.  I guess Godzilla, Mothra and Rodan were not available at the time.

Who were the creative geniuses behind this entire ‘city of culture’ invention?  Who wanted a giant spider above classical arts and indeed before serving the needs of the Liverpudlian citizen?

The entire concept of a Department of Culture, Media & Sport was an ancient dream we can thank Tony Blair for.  One of the first Ministers for this crucial cabinet post was the talented David Mellor.  He was famous for having his toes sucked by Antonia de Sancha, as reported widely at the time.

Was it a Shakespearean scholar, Tom Stoppard or another luminary who helped devise this spider scheme and run Liverpool’s year?  Indeed:  it was creator of Brookside Close, Phil Redmond, who was Liverpool Culture Company’s artistic director. To quote Wikipedia, which is quite accurate on this story, Redmond said :-

“At £1.5m I think it’s (the giant spider) actually cheaper than (booking) Macca (Sir Paul McCartney) and it has got us on the front of the South China Morning Post. So it’s good value for money.  However, the project has come in for criticism [whatever for? – Old Susannah asks] in some quarters: the UK mental health charity Anxiety has highlighted the potentially traumatic effect of the production upon those suffering with arachnophobia, and the TaxPayers’ Alliance has called the artwork an “outrageous waste of taxpayers’ money”.

The vast majority of the public response was … that “The Liverpool Princess’ performance was the highlight of the city’s Capital of Culture 2008 celebrations.”

I can well believe that was the highlight, remembering some of the other non-events Private Eye covered.  There were cancelled performances, people giving work to acquaintances, and all sorts of dubious goings-on.

None of that could happen here however.

Patronage: (noun) to support, pay for or otherwise assist an artist, project, sportsman, etc.

In a far distant past, the fine artist was paid by the rich to portray the wealthy patron in a favourable light.  The artists were obliged to do as they were told, but often they left clues behind in their work to say how they really felt about their patron (stone masons would leave small caricatures behind in the back of their work).

Later, the role of patron switched to the State.  If your artwork pleases the government, you get grants.

For instance the man who was paid £9,000 (or so) to paint our Lord Provost told the press:

”I think he ( Provost Stephens) is a really nice man.” 

Well, he would say that wouldn’t he? It’s not like he feels any obligation to the system that commissioned him; or that would mean we have the state controlling what artists do – heaven forbid! – whereas the negative, fault-finding, duo of Anthony Baxter and Richard Phinney were denied grants from Creative Scotland, as ‘no one would be interested in a documentary about Donald Trump and the Menie Estate’.

Thankfully, by letting the government dish out money to the artists they like is that we can try to prevent another ‘You’ve Been Trumped’ from getting made.  I wonder how many people with similar projects which were turned down didn’t find the resources to realize their artistic visions.

Thankfully, we will never find out.  Another benefit is we don’t have to think too much about what is good or bad art – the state chooses for us.  Result!

Old Susannah has already been a bit longer-winded than she had intended; apologies.

Next week:  No Creative Scotland commissions for me.

Jun 072012
 

What is the probability that the City Garden Project will actually happen? Mike Shepherd looks at some of the obstacles it currently faces.

The City Garden Project cannot proceed if £70 million of private finance is not in place to fund it:

The nominal cost for the City Garden Project is £140 million, with £70 million each to be contributed from the private and from the public sector.
So far, only £55 million of private money has been pledged, although £70 million has always been the target figure. The project will stall if the full £70 million of private funding is not committed.

Aberdeen Council voted in January to agree the following:

“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 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

A council vote to give final approval to signing the Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) agreement will probably come up this summer. This is basically a request for a £92 million loan from the Scottish Government, £70 million of which would fund the City Garden Project.

The £55 million of pledged private money has been on the table since early 2010 and the full £70 million remains an unfulfilled aspiration two years later. The funding gap of £15 million will be difficult to make up.

One issue is that big companies who could afford to make donations on the scale of millions may be reluctant to get involved with such a controversial project.  They will not want to come under severe criticism from either the public or their workers.

Sir Ian Wood could come up with the extra £15 million, perhaps anonymously.  This would however be an admission that the project has failed to motivate the business community in the place where it matters: the bank vault.

The TIF business case is risky:

Noted academic Professor Tony McKay has criticised the business case for public funding through TIF as “the worst he’s seen this year”.

Claims that the project will create up to 6500 jobs and add £122 million per year to the city’s economic output are ludicrous, he says. He thinks that the Scottish Government will reject the application for a loan from central funds.
dailyrecord.co.uk/aberdeen-city-garden-business-plan-is-worst-i-ve-seen

TIF funding is based on the idea that without the core project, new businesses will not happen. These are the “But For” criteria that give the green light for putting a new TIF scheme in place. The new businesses created provide business rates to pay for the loan.

The Aberdeen business case contends that much of the commercial activity in two new business parks in the north of the city, and in the city centre, will not happen without the City Garden Project.

I suspect that few truly believe this, as the new business parks will attract inward investment to the city on the back of a currently resurgent oil industry anyway.

Nevertheless, I suspect that the Scottish Government will give a few knowing nods and winks to the “But For” criteria here. They may be amenable to allowing new business rates to be captured to pay off the Council’s loan of £92 million for the proposed city centre redevelopment.

But will it be enough? The business case makes it clear that the revenue will pay off the £92 million loan and accrued interest with a small margin to spare after 25 years. And required to do this are 6,500 new jobs and £122 million added to the city’s economy each year for the next 25 years, a “ludicrous” estimate as mentioned previously.

Let’s take the lesser case whereby the city gets 5,000 new jobs and about £100 million per year of added value. This would also be miraculous news for Aberdeen if it were to happen, but it would be a disaster for Aberdeen City Council. The council would be left with a shortfall on a very large loan. It might have to sell off assets to pay the difference.

Audit Scotland was aware of these problems when it expressed concerns about the City Garden earlier this year, stating that “a key risk will be the affordability of the project and its impact on the council’s finances”.
[Audit Scotland: ACC Annual Audit Plan 2011/2012 p. 10]
http://committees.aberdeencity.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=18879&txtonly=1

The land issues are complex:

At some point Aberdeen Council will have to approve a deal transferring property rights to the Aberdeen City Garden Trust (or its equivalent). This deal would be likely to involve assigning a long-term lease, and the council have said that they will not sell the land.

There are major issues here, not least those arising from transferring what would be a property lease for public land, potentially worth millions, to a limited company.

Union Terrace Gardens lies on Common Good land and at some point the Council would have to apply to a Court of Session to allow development to take place.  Additionally, there are contracts in place for the use of Union Terrace Gardens as a park. A legal document from 1871 states that the area of  Union Terrace Gardens should on no account “be appropriated to any other use than that of a recreation ground for the public.”

The City Garden Project website mentions the following: 

The gardens will be run on a not for profit basis. All income will be put back into the running costs for ongoing upkeep and improvement of the gardens. The City Gardens will be able to generate income through activities held within the park; exhibitions, conferences and returns from coffee shops and restaurants.”
http://www.thecitygardenproject.com/faq.htm

I’m not a lawyer, but these issues look to be somewhat contentious. The January council meeting approved the allocation of up to £300,000 of council money to be spent on carrying out legal due diligence for the City Garden Project. The council lawyers must be very worried.

The new council make-up is not favourable to the City Garden Project:

The last council progressed the City Garden Project through its voting procedure with a comfortable majority on most occasions.

The new council looks to have an almost equal split between the ‘pros’ and the ‘antis’.
In addition, the Labour Party leading the new council administration has pledged to kill the City Garden Project.

There will be several votes to come, including a likely knock-out vote at the full Council meeting on August 22nd.

The City Garden Project will also need to survive the TIF business case approval, the development agreement and the planning submission.

This is an administration that will have other concerns. I’m told that central funding for Scottish councils is being cut by millions over the next three years, yet only 18% of the cuts have come through so far. The last thing any new administration will want is the divisive distraction of the City Garden Project and its potential to suck much-needed resources out of the council, for example the £300,000 on legal fees.

Council leader Barney Crockett is opposed to the City Garden Project. He has now been assigned as the Council representative on two bodies that support it: the City Garden Project management board and ACSEF. He will be a veritable cuckoo in what have previously been two cosy nests for the scheme.

The City Garden Project could itself be described as a cuckoo in the nest; its big yawning mouth crying to be fed with big gobbets of public money while other more deserving mouths lack succour. A hard landing beckons for this particular cuckoo.

  • Have your say in the comments box below. Note – All comments will be moderated. 
May 242012
 

By Bob Smith.

Some fowk doon Govan wye
Wi sad facies hiv bin seen
Fair dumfoonert aboot the news
Gers saved bi a mannie GREEN
.
Noo things cwid hae bin affa worse
An fair added ti Blue Noses plight
If Charles G an Craig W jined forces
Gers wid be ained  by Green an Whyte
.
The hail thing his noo becum
Jist like a  Brian Rix farce
They micht lan in liquidation
Sic a richt kick up the arse.
.
Seems Trumpie he wis sniffin aboot
Myn his auld mither cam fae Tong
Bit “The Donald” seen skedaddled
Fin Gers finances gid aff a pong
.
He widna hae hid windfairms
Doon the wye o Copeland Road
An he cwid hae biggit a big hoosie
On Murray Park as his new abode
Wull the SPL becum a coordly bunch
If  a New Co rises fae the mire
An vote ti keep the “licht blues” in
Lichtin Scottish Fitba’s funeral pyre
.
Fan’s wull think iss is the eyn
O sportin integrity in the game
A helluva lot hiv noo threatened
Ti bide awa an stey at hame
.
A final thocht as ti new ainers
Gers fans wid lose aa hope
If een o the fowk in the consortium
Wis the video film mannie Tim Pope
.
We maan tho hae some peety
Decent Gers fans fin it nae funny
A fyow eers they’ve bin supportin
A team wi nae bliddy money
.
.
.
.
©Bob Smith “The Poetry Mannie” 2012

.
Image Credit © Copyright G Laird and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence

May 242012
 

Voice’s Old Susannah comments on current events and enlightens us with definitions of some tricky terms with a locally topical taste. By Suzanne Kelly.

Tally Ho!  What was that great seismic shake, that sonic boom that was felt all up and down the coast this week?   The police were flooded with calls, so I’m sure the matter is all in hand and the usual suspects have been rounded up (I have an alibi, by the way).

I suspect it must be something to do either with wind farms, unsold copies of the P&J falling off a container ship, construction at the World’s Greatest Golf course, or a stampede of people leaving the Liberal Democrats.  Your theories are welcome.

And welcome to the Age of Austerity.

We’ve done the Stone Age (Isn’t that right Mr Wood – you might remember it, or am I thinking of the Granite Age?).  We’ve done Bronze, Iron and even a Golden Age (a mythical time when reason and the arts as well as science and exploration flourished).  Most recently we’ve had an Information Age (if not much of a ‘Freedom of Information’ Age as we’d been promised).  But here we are, ‘all of us in this together’, you know – it’s the Age of Austerity.

Our local millionaires are starting to feel the pinch, which is unacceptable.  It’s getting so a man can’t build houses on any greenbelt field he wants or even run a football club without people butting in, looking for tax.  It’s clearly getting harder for the Vodaphones and Oil barons to shelter money offshore in tax havens.

In yet more startling economic developments, Aberdeen Football Fans are threatening a boycott!

This is over whether or not Mr Milne acts a particular way over the fallen Rangers FC.  I would hate to think of the economic consequences of an AFC boycott – the stand might start looking a bit empty during games.  Let’s hope this never happens.  Could the remaining 31 fans keep buying tickets?  Many thanks – the economy depends on you!

But there is even more hope.  We have the talent and skills right here in Aberdeen to weather this storm.  It is just as well we can call on taxpayer-funded, unelected ACSEF and Scottish Enterprise to continue coming up with money-spinning schemes.

It’s taken years for our local business organisations and lobbyists to get Aberdeen to the shape it’s in today – another few years of more of the same is what we all want, I’m sure.  That and a granite web.

If we’re still paying Scottish Enterprise a mere £750 million per year to protect us (with a third of that going on their wages), perhaps we should have a whip-round and get them some more money?  Just a thought.

  I’m going to write to my MEP (whoever that is), and suggest they call in ACSEF

How exactly did we go from having a thriving Scotland to our current dismal position?  Old Susannah takes a look and makes some recommendations.

So  tighten those belts, re-use those tea bags, and settle down for some Austerity definitions.

European Union: (proper noun; English) the economic and social union of several European countries for the purpose of economic security, creation of a politically stable Europe, creation of a powerful economic entity, and for the guarantee of human rights.

You would have thought with the UK paying millions to the EU, (which still hasn’t managed to submit a set of independently audited accounts) we’d be nearly as successful financially as the economies of Greece, Spain and Italy.  I say give it a few more years and we will be.

Sadly, while the EU has given us peace throughout Europe, equality and human rights, it’s possibly not doing as well with the economy of Europe as it might.  In fact, I’m going to write to my MEP (whoever that is), and suggest they call in ACSEF.  ACSEF could no doubt fix whatever’s wrong with Europe.

If we just build a giant granite web linking Greece to Italy to Spain to Aberdeen, just think of the jobs creation and tourism that would mean!

Old Susannah recommends:  staying in the EU, scrapping the pound for the Euro (or maybe bring back the Greek drachma), giving more money to Greece and Italy, who have used their agricultural subsidies so well over the past decade that no one even knows how much they got or where the money went.

Special Kitty: (compound  noun) A fund set up for a certain purpose into which a variety of people or groups contribute.

Well, here comes the City Garden Project to help lift us out of austerity, raise our spirits, and raise the Denburn Valley to shopping mall street level.  Hooray!  The Evening Express tells us that no less a financial supremo than Colin Crosby says a special kitty is to be set up!  Wow!

I have two special kitties; they are Molly and Sasha, which I adopted from Cats Protection.  However Mr Crosby’s special kitty will find at least £15 million of the £140 million needed to bring us all the web of our dreams.

You know, it’s really surprising how easy it is to find some spare cash when you really need it.  If you’re not able to come up with £15 million in a pinch, then you probably deserve any austerity you’re experiencing.  I got about £0.37 from the back of my sofa, and expect there must be a spare million or two round the flat somewhere, perhaps in an old suit jacket.  I’ll keep looking.

In the meantime, Mr Crosby alludes to yet another great financial idea in the Evening Express story we all enjoyed reading.  And that is…

Endowment Fund: (compound noun; mod English) An endowment policy is a life insurance contract which would pay a lump sum after a specified period of time  – when it matures – or on death, or possibly on critical illness.

To make it even simpler, there are (according to Wikipedia) 1 Traditional With Profits Endowments , 2 Unit-linked endowment , 3 Full endowments , 4 Low cost endowment (LCE)5 Traded endowments 6 Modified endowments (U.S.).

Yes, the latest plan is to set up an endowment.  Clearly this is a great idea, as so many home-buyers who used this great scheme can tell you.  As well as the special kitty, we’re going to somehow take out an endowment.

Exactly how this will help build the granite dream of Mr Wood is abundantly clear, I’m sure. but if the scheme dies a death who gets the money? Who will fund this endowment?  Who will own the fund?  Who will manage it?

  I hear that a PR company exec is considering even more exciting funding schemes

All these are mere trivialities on the way to our economic recovery, so don’t worry about it.  If we needed to know, Colin Crosby would have told us in the Evening Express.

This endowment and special kitty are news and were worthy of a story in the Evening Express.

The City Garden Project plan has been kicking around for years, but this is news after all.  You see, the Wonder Web will cost a minimum of £140 million, and needs a £92 loan taken out by the taxpayer and yet is still short £15 million.  This is in no way related to the £15 million that we’ve been talking about for the past year and a bit – it’s a different, newsworthy £15 million.

But back to the endowment business and the Evening Express piece:

“The cash would be on top of £15 million of private money to be used to help bridge the £140 million project’s funding gap.  Colin Crosby, a director of Aberdeen City Gardens Trust, said: “Early indications reveal that the additional £15m donations will be forthcoming.” By creating an endowment fund, we will be securing the project’s long-term sustainability and ability to develop cultural programmes.”

Well, that’s good enough for me.  I am sure it’s as illuminating a piece of news and financial wizardry as we could have hoped for.

I hear that a PR company exec is considering even more exciting funding schemes..  I can only hope there is an opportunity to donate a few thousand and get your name carved in granite, or have a tree turned into mulch for a ton.  If not, I know a few graffiti artists who would paint your name on the web for a small fee.

Old Susannah recommends:  importing granite for the web from the third world, taking out an insured, index-linked modified endowment with Jennifer Claw as beneficiary, with Bling Crosby as administrator and executor, funding it via an increase in business rates amortised over time offset by a loan taken as an advance on the £122,000,000 which the web will bring to the local economy every year until 2023.

And that, as they say, is that.  Job done.

Next week:  A look at the A to Z of Aberdeen City Council.

PS:  To Dame Anne – I hope you’re on the mend!

PPS: Summer is here:  austerity or not, don’t scrimp on sunscreen, especially for your children.
Always get a nice high protection number for children, and at the start of the season for adults.  Reapply it every few hours – even if you are only going to be outside for quarter of an hour, you can still be damaged.  Old Susannah has already seen two crying toddlers who have been sunburnt, with baffled parents who had no idea why their child was upset.
Children burn far faster than we do and need lots of sunscreen all over, especially their faces (mind the eyes!!!).  The only reason I’m not more of  a wrinkled, grizzled old hag than I am is because of sunscreen.   And probably BrewDog.   To the man I saw in a beer garden who had turned beetroot red – no, you didn’t look tanned, you looked burnt (and I bet it hurt a lot when you were less lubricated).
If you want to look tanned, get there gradually (or get a spray job – it’s safer – but avoid the tango orange colour).  But if you want wrinkles, rashes, and potential skin cancer, then carry on without sunscreen. And another thing – if you are going to drag your dog all over town and/or the pub, please make sure it gets loads of water to drink frequently.  For the one or two dog owners every year who forget – don’t leave your dog alone in a car.  At all.  Ever.  That’s the official word from animal charities. Forget a dog for even a tiny amount of time in a hot, sealed car (because you’ve run into your pal, are trying on clothes in some exciting shopping mall, whatever) – and you’ve killed it. They don’t sweat.  Water won’t help – only cool.  Another reason for not leaving your dog in a car include the massive increase in pet thefts.  Sadly, most people who steal animals are not going to treat them well.  Thanks for paying attention to this stuff – it isn’t as important or as exciting, vibrant or dynamic as ACSEF – but it is important nonetheless.
May 142012
 

In the wake of the local council elections in which the issue of developing Union Terrace Gardens appeared to play a major role, Craig Adams was compelled to write to the newly elected council ahead of a meeting which may well determine the progress of the City Garden Project. Craig shares his letter with Aberdeen Voice readers.

Dear Councillors,

I am writing to you with regard to the upcoming vote on The City Garden Project. The issues surrounding this project have been extensively debated, and to revisit them would be a waste of an email.
I’m guessing that many of you will long ago have formed your own personal opinion on the project, whilst others will, like your constituents, remain in two minds.

Instead, this email will concentrate on issues surrounding the recent public referendum.

I am not a supporter of any particular political party. At local elections I vote solely on the credibility and apparent integrity on the individual candidates. In national elections I usually spoil my ballot paper (and make no excuses for doing so). There is no political agenda here.

Many experts are sceptical of referendums, a view that some of you no doubt share. The purpose of representative democracy is largely to ensure that the people taking the decisions have thoroughly researched the details. Few people voting in a referendum are unlikely to be as well – informed.

It’s somewhat counter-intuitive that the larger the response to a referendum, the less informed the decision is likely to be. While referendums are a necessary part of democracy they are only appropriate under certain circumstances, and must be applied with great discretion.

Referendums work best when the facts are few and the choice is simple. A divided result is not a good outcome. There also needs to be a clearly defined winning line, its position determined by the context of what is being proposed.

There were several other issues surrounding the referendum on The City Garden Project, beyond whether or not it was appropriate or conclusive. The first was the wording of the question. I recall as a teenager going shopping with my mother for a new school uniform. The trousers that she picked were unfashionable. She told me “well it’s either those or you go to school in your underpants”.

The referendum question was loaded in a similar way, in that it ignored any option for Union Terrace Gardens other than Sir Ian Wood’s desired outcome. The implication being – this or nothing. The propaganda that followed reinforced the message that Union Terrace Gardens would be left to rot unless the CGP was built. In my experience the electorate were not split into two camps as has been suggested, rather there were those who wanted:

(a) the CGP

(b) some sort of improvement

(c) any sort of improvement except the CGP

(d) UTG restored and improved or

(e) no money spent at all

You’ve doubtless encountered that same spectrum of views amongst your constituents.

The question was not a good fit for public sentiment. On the subject of Scottish independence it is claimed that minor syntactical changes could be worth a swing of 15%. While it’s debatable whether that figure is accurate, there’s no doubt that choice of wording does exert significant influence. In this case it’s not inconceivable that it exerted enough influence to alter the outcome.

The second issue concerns the fairness of the PR spend. The original consultation process was entirely about The City Garden Project. The design contest was also wholly about the CGP. Both of those exercises were orchestrated by a PR company. There’s also the whole controversy surrounding the ‘unregistered CGP campaign group'(?) who leafleted every home in the city.

Taking everything into account it’s clear that there was a substantial disparity in PR spend, and that is simply not fair. The problem with this is that it gives the wealthy and powerful the impression that PR companies can engineer referendums to produce specific outcomes, and that it boils down to a matter of risk vs. reward. Allowing that to pass without comment introduces a dangerous precedent.

Finally there is the issue around the integrity of the result. The Returning Officer has not permitted anyone to examine the marked register. While that position may comply with the specific lettering of ‘a law’, it certainly does not adhere to the spirit of The Law. This is extremely pertinent as the result was close and there is considerable contention surrounding various aspects of the voting.

For those reasons I’d like to make two basic points surrounding the referendum on The City Garden Project:

1) A referendum was not appropriate in this instance.

2) A poorly fitting, badly worded question and one-sided PR spend, resulted in an outcome that was far from conclusive.

Based on the above, and also taking into account questions over the integrity of the vote, it is clear that the course of this referendum was perverted. In my opinion, the closeness of the result, combined with disagreement over what constitutes conclusive, and the questions surrounding it’s integrity, effectively render the outcome of the referendum invalid…

…however from the result it can be inferred that the public are in favour of improving the gardens – just as they are generally in favour of regenerating the rest of the city centre, but we didn’t really need a referendum to discern that truth.

What I’m asking you to do, is to set aside the outcome of this disastrous referendum when you vote on the future of Union Terrace Gardens, and instead vote for whatever you believe is both right for this city, and truly representative of what people want. That’s why we elected you.

Walk in the Light
Craig Adams

Apr 192012
 

Old Susannah looks at recycled paper in the shape of old news and defines some tricky terms we will all too soon be bombarded with in the run up to the London Olympics.  By Suzanne Kelly.

What a week it has been in Aberdeen! This was the story everyone was talking about:

DEER FOUND DEAD AHEAD OF ABERDEEN’S CONTROVERSIAL CULL: 

“Animals ‘starved to death’ on tree-planting site” were the headline and tagline which greeted readers of the Evening Express online on Monday 16th April. My phones rang, my email filled up, and Facebook was buzzing with questions from those who saw this ground-breaking news story. ‘How did the deer die? When were they found? How old were they?’ were all questions people wanted answered.

It soon transpired that in the text of the printed news story, anyone who took the trouble to read the piece learnt that the deer died… in 2010. Yes, that’s right, the headline referred to deer which died two years ago.

Old Susannah is happy to say that after a wee chat with the EE’s deputy, a correction was made online (I did ask for something in print, but apparently this is not happening).

I told the EE’s deputy editor that this headline was akin to putting up a headline ‘Titanic sinks’ in a newspaper today. He seemed to think I was equating the loss of all those lives with two deer and he didn’t think that was the right thing to do.

But I happily explained to him that I was making an analogy as to printing old news in a paper, without making absolutely clear in the headline that the news is old. I think he got the idea in the end.

But someone came to the Evening Express ‘on Monday’ with ‘a report’ – which led to the story being written. Hmm. Can we think of anyone who would want people to believe deer need to be culled or they will starve? Someone who might perhaps want to get re-elected, stay in their job, get money for the tree scheme – could such a person be behind this? I think we should be told. I’ve asked the Evening Express and the Council who is responsible for this strange, belated tale. Please feel free to ask them, too.

I’ve told the Aberdeen Voice’s editor that I’m working on two similar stories myself.

The first to be called ‘WOOLY MAMMOTH DIED ON TULLOS HILL IN ADVANCE OF CULL’ – it will explain the hill is too small to support many mammoths, and the mammoth is thought to have died having been hunted to extinction by members of the primitive ‘LibDem’ tribe – ten thousand years ago.

The other story I am working on is ‘EVENING EXPRESS FOUND DEAD IN ADVANCE OF CULL: CAUSE OF DEATH BELIEVED RELATED TO POOR CIRCULATION.’

 The ConDems are proud to present (no expense spared): The 2012 Olympic Games!

Just when you think you have some kind of entente cordial with these guys, they plant the seed in everyone’s mind that deer are starving and that only by killing them can we prevent the tragedy of them dying.  How and why an ancient letter was not only presented to the EE and then turned into a ‘news’ headline is as much a mystery as the stone cairns on Tullos we will soon obscure with dead and dying tree saplings. Sigh.

Perhaps if I send the Eve Express the old letters I have which prove:

a) The cull was long planned and deliberately kept out of the public consultation and
b) The city was chased for not paying up on time the £43,800 it owed to the Forestry Commission, these letters too might be transformed into brand new news stories.

But I don’t think I’ll bank on it. It’s as if someone were playing silly games.

While we are on the subject of silly games (which I just got us onto of course), it won’t be long now until the London 2012 Olympics start! Result!

People don’t want to think about jobs, pensions, pollution, EU scandals, water companies that don’t fix their infrastructure which leads to drought: people want bread and circuses (another thing the Romans ever did for us). Therefore, the ConDems are proud to present (no expense spared): The 2012 Olympic Games! Result!

Let’s look lovingly at some definitions for the Olympics (even if they aren’t going to create as many jobs and as much wealth as our Granite Web will magically do)…

Logo: (noun) – an emblem or design linked to a movement, company or other entity.

You thought the ACSEF logo was brilliant; it was. Well, the boundaries have been pushed; thinking has taken place outside the box, and the beautiful, elegant 2012 logo was launched. It graces everything from chocolate bar wrappers (which I’m sure the athletes gulp down by the case) to chequebooks. Who will ever forget those precisely-formed, joined up ‘2012’ numbers?

The only thing I can think of that was as pretty and chunky was our own ‘Monolith’ design, which sadly won’t be built. Some people say the ‘2012’ lettering looks like it was done by a 9-year-old with a crayon in the back of a car with bad suspension, but this is just artistic jealousy. Whether or not the artistic talents behind the granite web had any input is unconfirmed.

Mascot: (noun) – a character or animal linked to a movement, company or other entity.

The American Olympic Games gave us a cuddly version of the American eagle wearing an ‘Uncle Sam’s hat’. The Moscow Olympics gave us a bear. How very passé.

The greatest British design teams toiled day and night, and have come up with Wenlock and his friends. What better way to sum up what our collective of nations is all about than a long, thin blob thing with a giant bloodshot eye on the top of it? I don’t know what it is – do you know what it is? Would you have this thing in your house?

Why would you buy one? Again – what the heck is it? I am sorry I started down the path of trying to define Wenlock – and think I’d best forget about his other little friends, too.

Commemorative stamps: (noun) a postal stamp or set of stamps issued to mark an historic event, occasion, person or place of importance.

Elvis had a stamp. The Beatles had a set of stamps. And now for the first time in recorded history – we will get a brand new stamp issued instantly every time a British Athlete wins a Gold Medal.  That’s going to be an awful lot of stamps I can tell you.

I intend to camp out at my post office with a portable tv so I can watch the women’s 25 meter tag shotput heptathalon event, and be the first person in Torry to get the Gold medal stamp. I trust you are all as excited about this development as I am.

The only thing I found more exciting is that it will soon cost £0.60 each time I want to send a first class letter. That is presuming whatever envelope I want to use can fit through that silly little guide thing they now have – kind of like a version of ‘The Wall’ for envelopes instead of people. Perhaps ‘The Wall’ should be an Olympic event?

Poetry Parnassus: (noun – modern English) – an event invented for the 2012 Olympics so that intellectuals will feel part of the whole wonderful Olympic thing, too.

This is the concept (although there aren’t enough poets yet – volunteers should call the Olympic HQ): there will be a helicopter drop of 100,000 poems printed on bookmark size paper onto the happy Olympic fans. Result! This will apparently take half an hour. I can’t decide whether to get down to London for this and then find a post office to wait at for the first Gold Medal Stamp or not.

I’m afraid all this Olympic excitement has overtired me. Otherwise I could have reminded everyone of the story of Native American, Jim Thorpe. Thorpe was perhaps the greatest athlete the modern Olympics ever knew. He won everything. Decathlon, everything – it was a great triumph and he fought a great deal of discrimination to get that far.

But it turned out he had once been paid for playing ball – and so was theoretically a professional. All of his medals were stripped away by our always-honest and rule-abiding Olympic authorities. However, his accomplishments still stand.

Today’s athletes have been known to endorse products, be paid professionals, and to use the occasional ‘enhancer’. But for me, none of them could hold a candle to Thorpe. Must remember to tell you about him sometime.

Next week: Election round up – and news flash! Ancient Pictish/Celtic warrior found dead on Tullos ahead of cull!

Feb 292012
 

Shakhaf Barak wrote to a friend highlighting the history behind the current referendum that is dividing the city. He has kindly allowed Voice to use it, almost verbatim as the deadline approaches for voting.

Dear Friend,
Here in Aberdeen there is a bitter referendum taking place, and it could go either way. Over 70,000 people have voted thus far, in a city of barely 212,000 souls, and both sides have reported each other to the police. Central to this story is a 250-year old city centre park, Union Terrace Gardens, and the billionaire oil tycoon seeking to redevelop it.

Union Terrace Gardens are similar to Edinburgh’s Princes Street Gardens, lying in the natural amphitheatre of the Denburn valley, the Denburn being a stream which flows right through the city, underground where it borders the Gardens. Much of Aberdeen’s best architecture was clearly envisaged to overlook this area.

The Gardens are home to a cluster of 260-year old elms trees that once formed part of the Corbie Haugh, a historic wood which ran through the valley. This is among the largest concentration of healthy mature elm trees in Europe, and they are reputed to have escaped Dutch Elm Disease, not only due to their isolation, but also because the pollution of the city has afforded some sort of protection from it.

Both the park and its beautiful Victorian toilets are Grade A-listed, and all of the trees are under preservation orders. Up until as late as 2003, the Gardens formed the centrepiece of Aberdeen’s Britain In Bloom entry, and they were truly stunning, but since then expenditure has all but ceased, and the toilets have been closed for several years.

In 2008 a local arts organisation, Peacock Visual Arts (PVA) was granted planning permission for an award-winning and sympathetically-designed arts centre to be built into the hillside of the Gardens. This would have meant felling a small number of trees but none of the elms. The design was universally acclaimed and it was hoped that this scheme would help regenerate interest in the Gardens.

Enter Sir Ian Wood, one of Scotland’s richest men, and chief of Wood Group PSN. Sir Ian decided that he’d like to redevelop the Gardens by building a five-storey bunker in their place, whilst covering over the adjoining railway line and urban dual carriageway, with the entire roof of this construction forming a flat civic square at street level. It was not entirely clear what would be installed in the bunker, although speculation was rife to say the least.

He offered the council £50m towards the cost of this project, which was mooted to cost £140m. This was possibly an optimistic figure since Union Square, a similarly sized shopping mall with none of the technical difficulties or prior excavation work, cost £250m to build. The council felt this offer was too good to refuse, but the some members of the public were up in arms.

Sir Ian decided to put the proposal out to public consultation and promised to walk away should the public reject it.

The ‘consultation’ was commissioned by Aberdeen City and Shire Economic Future (ACSEF), a publicly-funded unelected QUANGO, and conducted by The BiG Partnership, Scotland’s largest PR company.

It many ways it resembled a marketing exercise. The bulk of participation was via a website, which asked several questions with a somewhat loaded feel to them. For technical reasons, the question on whether or not to proceed with the plan defaulted to a YES vote.

If, during completion of the questionnaire, any previously-given responses were subsequently amended, this again defaulted back to a YES vote. When the results were released, it became apparent from the comments sections that may people who had intended voting NO had instead been recorded as YES voters.

Over 10,000 people participated in the consultation, and In spite of it’s technical oversights, the public voted against the Civic Square proposal by 54%-46%, a healthy and significant majority. However the PR machine kicked in and somehow spun that the 202,000 people who had not participated possibly represented a silent majority in favour of this scheme.

  Critics described it as a cross between Tellytubby Land and a skate park

Sir Ian decided not to walk away, and the project went to a council vote. The council voted in favour of taking the plan forward at the expense of PVA who by that time had 80% of their £20m funding in place. It has subsequently been alleged that some of the PVA funding was diverted into the new project.

The BiG Partnership now re-launched the plans under a new name, The City Garden Project (CGP). It was claimed that the outcome of the public consultation was that the public were broadly in favour of a garden as opposed to a civic square. Any implication that they were actually in favour of preserving the existing gardens was ignored.

The interested parties now felt that the best option was to redevelop the Gardens by building a five-storey bunker in their place whilst covering over the adjoining railway line and urban dual carriageway, with the entire roof of this construction forming a new garden at street level.

The whole thing had an air of déjà vu.

This time it was decided to hold an international design contest, paid for with public money. Six designs were shortlisted from hundreds of entrants. One, The Granite Web, bore a striking resemblance to Civic Square concept, albeit with less concrete and more greenery. Critics described it as a cross between Tellytubby Land and a skate park.

The local press heavily promoted the Granite Web design from the outset of the contest, leading with it on their front page and providing it with more photo coverage than the other designs. It was almost as though it had been ordained.

The public voted, and spoiled ballots aside, all indications were that The Winter Garden design proved the most popular. An independent poll confirmed this and put The Monolith in second place.

Tellingly both of these designs retained much of the topology of the existing Gardens. Word on the street was that The Granite Web was not a popular choice, but we’ll never know for sure, because a decision was taken not to release the results of the so-called public vote to the public.

It was then announced that the winner of the private-public vote would be put forward to the selection panel, along with another design. The self-appointed selection panel consisted of Sir Ian, some other influential people from the oil industry, an architectural consultant on the project payroll, and a councillor who backed the project.

The two designs discussed were the acknowledged public favourite, The Winter Garden, and you’ve guessed it, the joker in the pack, The Granite Web. When the panel announced the result, it should have come as no surprise to anyone that they had chosen The Granite Web, yet there was a shocked silence, and even those had come out in favour of the redevelopment initially appeared bemused if not downright confused.

The original Civic Square was mooted to cost £140m, with £50m coming from Sir Ian, £20m from the private sector, and the rest to be borrowed through a Tax Incremental Funding (TIF) scheme. Any over-run would be covered by the council (read local taxpayer) .

Only £5m of the private sector contribution has materialised thus far, but there has been an announcement that The Granite Web would be significantly less expensive to build than the previously-envisaged, but somewhat less complex, civic square. Sir Ian has offered to personally fund up to £35M of any cost over runs, should they occur.

The TIF proposal cheerfully bends all the guidelines of TIF funding. TIF is intended to be used to redevelop brownfield sites, with the loan being repaid over a 25 year period through increased rates recouped from any businesses setting up in the redeveloped area. The city council had already approved planning permission for two new industrial estates on the outskirts of town, under the business case for the TIF funding, these new estates become part of the TIF zone, so in The Granite Web’s case, sections of the TIF zone are located several miles away from the actual redeveloped area.

The predictions are for 6,500 jobs and £122m annual revenue to the local economy, all based on the new industrial estates, which have no obvious linkage to The Granite Web, operating at full capacity. Even if one were to accept that any new jobs could be somehow attributed to The Granite Web, the figure of 6,500 seems unlikely given that the London Olympics is only projected to create 3,500 jobs.

Either way, the setup feels a bit shaky; the truth is that these jobs and their associated revenue will accrue with or without The Granite Web.

By this time, councillors seemed to be getting edgy and unwilling to green-light the project, so they decided to hold a public referendum. Any group wishing to campaign was required to adhere to an £8,000 spending limit, and for this they were provided with 300 words of text in the voting pack.

The packs went out, but unfortunately some of the Retain lobby’s statements were mangled due to a ‘computer error’. The voting packs were closely followed by a big money public relations mail bombing campaign by The BiG Partnership promoting The Granite Web. Publicity materials went through every letter box, pro Granite Web articles dominated the press, and adverts were played around the clock on the local radio stations.

Apparently this expenditure was permitted by virtue of being funded by an ‘unregistered’, and as yet anonymous, campaign group – whatever that means! I guess it’s a bit like not having to pay tax because your parents never applied for a birth certificate, who knows? By this point, things were becoming surreal to say the least.

The referendum closes on 1 March and it’s a bitter fight that has divided the city. For example, an oil company boss has made a complaint to the police alleging mail hacking and cyber bullying. The police claim they are taking this allegation seriously. There have also been two arrests possibly related to claims of vote-rigging, but ultimately no one was charged.

The town has gone berserk and it’s civil war all over Facebook. It’s as if we’re all experiencing a really, really bad shared dream. I just dread to think what we’ll all be waking up to on Saturday morning.

Feb 282012
 

A person might think that a chamber of commerce exists to promote local businesses.  Here in Aberdeen this is true as well.  But as Aberdeen Voice’s Suzanne Kelly learns – the taxpayer is funding at least some of the PR work  for the City Gardens  Project – and the Chamber of Commerce and ACSEF seem to be leading the City Council by the nose.

The proposed City Gardens Project/Granite Web is a contentious idea which would see a mix of public and private interests building huge, granite ramps over Union Terrace Gardens.
While this idea may not even get off the ground, it has been a gold mine for some fortunate businesses via the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce – at the taxpayer’s expense.

This article will primarily deal with money that the City Council was invoiced by the Chamber of Commerce for PR-related work.  Before doing so, a little recap of other financial facts will add perspective.

PriceWaterhouse Coopers have come up with some grandiose projections including the creation of some 6,500 permanent jobs and £122 million flowing into Aberdeen every year until c. 2023:  all because of the granite web.  PriceWaterhouse Coopers were first paid £41,000 and change for TIF-related work in March 2010.  Other invoices followed, and so far I have been shown by Scottish Enterprise £71,000 worth of PwC invoices.

These invoices are made out to Scottish Enterprise, and Scottish Enterprise is funded by the taxpayer.  Unfortunately, these projections have been seized upon  by the press and turned into ‘facts’  (The Press & Journal published these and other items in a box entitled ‘facts and figures’ on 19 January next to an article about the PwC projections and the garden’s many projected benefits).

The unelected and free-spending and secretive ‘Vote for the City Gardens Project Group’ have likewise promoted these figures in their literature as being reliable facts as well.  They are projections, and arguably very optimistic ones at that.  Whether or not these glowing projections (that we will have more permanent jobs from our web than London expects from its 2012 Olympics) are based on the fact that PwC is being paid by the side that wants to build the web is something the referendum voters may wish to ponder.

A Freedom of Information request I lodged with Scottish Enterprise some time ago revealed (details of which I have previously published) included:-

Item Description Date Amount
1 Technical Feasibility Study to undertake an engineering, cost and design appraisal of the development options for UTG, each incorporating an arts centre. Jun 2009 £162k
2 Architect, Design & Project management fees for a Contemporary Arts Centre project Feb 09/May 10 £226k
3 Consultation Report – City Square Project.. Mar 2010 £113,915
4 Union Terrace Gardens (TIF)-Tax Increment Financing Mar 10
Oct 10
Nov 10
£71,959.65
5 Scottish Enterprise holds 22 copies of invoices relating to ACSEF approved spend for activities relating to stakeholder engagement, events management, and communcations. [sic] 2009-10
2010-11
£51,766.60
£22,712.72

(source – Scottish Enterprise email exchange with Suzanne Kelly May 2011)

While this £648,000 was being spent, Aberdeen City Council was battling with potential job and service cuts in order to balance its books.  It seems that these costs have largely been paid by the taxpayer via Scottish Enterprise and other vehicles, and I can find nothing to show that the Wood Family Trust, which has offered £50,000,000 to further the project, has paid towards any of these costs.  The PR and promotional invoices referred to at Item 5 have been paid by the Aberdeen City taxpayer.

Before moving on to Item 5, which is the subject of this article, some of these other items are worth a further glance.

At Item 2 you will notice we are now talking about some kind of ‘Contemporary Arts Centre project’ – is Peacock already being edged out of the picture at this point?

Item 4 would seem to correspond to PriceWaterhouse Coopers invoices which I referred to.  How much more money has been spent on PWC since this May 2011 exchange is unknown.

From what I have been subsequently sent by Scottish Enterprise, the bulk of the invoices at Item 5 were from the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce to the City Council.  In the words of Scottish Enterprise:-

  • 9 invoices relate to financial year 2009/10 – these total £51,766.60
  • 16 invoices relate to financial year 2010/11 – these total £36,692.95. This total is higher than the original figure stated due to the invoices received after the date of that response
  • There has been no spend on the City Garden Project from the ACSEF budget during the current financial year  (SK notes – it is only February – there is time)

(source – Scottish Enterprise email to Suzanne Kelly February 2012)

Arguably a mere £88,459 is small change as Aberdeen City contemplates borrowing £92,000,000 (minimum) if the project goes ahead. However, this is money which the City paid from its own budgets – it is taxpayer money.  Should a financially-pressured city use pubic money for propaganda purposes – PR, events and photos designed to promote the City Garden Project?  Is the Wood Family Trust contributing any money towards these expenses yet?  I simply do not know.

A spreadsheet of the expenses comprising Item 5 can be found online at http://oldsusannahsjournal.yolasite.com/  I would recommend looking at these 50 or so items.

If you look at the wording in the table above, ACSEF is apparently approving this expenditure.  ACSEF is a public-private quango, and at the time of writing, Stewart Milne is on its board.  He owns the Triple Kirks land adjacent to Union Terrace Gardens, and he wants to turn this landmark into an office complex which will likely enrich him if it goes ahead in my opinion.

Despite several emails, no one in a position of power has the slightest qualm with Mr Milne potentially having a conflict of interest.    Why precisely ACSEF is allowed to commission and recommend for payment invoices to the City Council is a matter I personally find worrying.

Virtually none of the invoices from the Chamber to the City specify who / what company actually performed the services in question.  What company got all the PR work?  Who took the photos?  I do note that Zoe Corsi of the BIG Partnership is on the Chamber’s Board of Directors – as are other key players such as Tom Smith, one of the two directors of the private entity, Aberdeen City Gardens Trust.  This company seems to be in the thick of the decision-making processes; it is apparently the company which is holding onto the results of the design finalist public vote – which it refuses to release at present.

The taxpayer apparently paid for that exhibition and the public vote – and yet a private company seems to be withholding the results.  The argument has been put forth that it is no longer relevant.  Many people took the opportunity to write on the voting papers that they were against all the schemes and wanted the gardens retained and improved.

The public should have had this ‘no’ option at the final selection vote, but it seems councillors who asked for a ‘no’ option were outmoded by the Project Management Board (note – see the website listed previously for details of how all these companies and entities have interesting personnel overlaps).

It may be of interest to accountants that the party which actually performed the work not specified on these invoices, and with only a rare exception is VAT ever charged.  It would be interesting to know whether or not the Chamber of Commerce adds any fees or commission charges to the work it is invoicing the City for.

Highlights of the list of invoices include:-

  • £180 paid for a photograph showing ‘inaccessibility of Union Terrace Gardens’
  • over  £25,000 paid for ‘Stakeholder engagement’ events and so on since October 2009 to August 2010
  • £3500 paid to ‘Comedia’ for Charles Landry to attend event / speak
  • Redacted line items and handwritten notes adorn several of the invoices
  • One invoice – No. 42407 shows only one line relating to ‘coach hire’ – this is £246.  However, the total shown on this one page invoice is for £7444 – what has happened?
  • A January 2010 Advertising bill from Aberdeen Press & Journals for £ 2,820 ( See: http://fraserdenholm.blogspot)
  • £11,000 in February 2010 charged from the Chamber to the City for “Development of images, movie, powerpoint and exhibition material for City Square Project as per attached sheets”

As to the redacted text on the invoices, redacted text has started showing up in Project Monitoring  Board minutes and reports again, despite Councillor McCaig’s previous intervention to cease this practice.  One company which has had its name redacted from recent documentation is Brodies.

The value of three Brodies invoices which I received copies of is around £12,000.  One of these invoices from April 2011 is for:

“City Gardens Project – Development Constraints Report (Legal  [sic] To fee for professional services in connection with the preparation of a development constraints report relating to the title of Union Terrace Gardens, Aberdeen, and surrounding land.”

I suppose our City’s in-house legal department cannot be expected to know whether or not it has free title to Union Terrace Gardens.   Happily, experts have demonstrated the land is Common Good Land.  As such, whether any of these garden projects can or should be legitimately carried out will be a big question in the future.

Earlier we saw how ACSEF was allowed to recommend these expenditures; we have seen how the Chamber of Commerce invoices the City for ACSEF-approved costs.  If we were to put in some of the over-lapping names from ACSEF and the Chamber of Commerce into the equation, we would be able to see that:

ACSEF [including Stewart Milne, Jennifer Craw (of Wood Family Trust), Tom Smith (Director, Aberdeen City Gardens Trust), Colin Crosby (Director, Aberdeen City Gardens Trust), Callum McCaig (ACC) ]

approved invoices generated by the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce [Colin Crosby; Zoe Corsi (BIG Partnership) , former director Tom Smith]

for the City Council [Callum McCaig]

to approve to further the aims of the Garden Project (CGP entity members include John Michie, Colin Crosby, Jennifer Craw).

Given the above, I suggest that the time is right for an entire re-think of how this project has been allowed to develop, and a full investigation into the demise of the Peacock plan and an investigation into the genesis of the current state of affairs might not be a bad idea as well.

While this is going on, a local care home has announced it will no longer provide 24/7 on-site staff as there is not enough money.  Residents were told to drink less fluids at night time.

Feb 172012
 

Old Susannah looks at the Granite Web, and the impressive effort it has taken to spin.

By Suzanne Kelly.

Tally Ho! Yet another vibrant and dynamic week in the Granite Web City.  Whilst Friends of Union Terrace Gardens, Aberdeen against Austerity, and Democracy Watch engaged in some inexpensive grassroots campaigning by flyer, the mysterious Vote for the CGP group pulled out all the stops and spent, spent, spent.

You could be forgiven for thinking that Northsound is playing City Garden Project commercials non-stop. The Art Gallery has a swish new display showing the Garden plan in its Alice-in-Wonderland perspective and garish colours, and issues of The Granite Web compete in the ugly stakes with the A3 VFTCGP colour flyer sent out before.

News reaches Old Susannah that visitors to Aberdeen Royal Infirmary are being cheered up no end by pro-City Garden Project posters on the walls. There is no escape at work either, as employees of Wood Group (no surprise really), Nautronix, and Taqa all seem to have received lovely e-mails from bosses hinting gently that they should vote for the CGP.

I do find it very touching that employers are looking after their employees so well and giving gentle guidance which puts no pressure on them at all.

Why do I call the VFTCGP members secret? Because I was told in so many words by the BIG Partnership, which does PR for this group and, coincidentally, the artwork for the CGP, that “if the members want to stay secret, it’s up to them.”

But before I return to my Myth-busting busting activities started last week – I only got through the first four of the ten Myths the CGP team say we’re suffering from – condolences to Rangers fans.

Was this one of the top Scottish clubs? Yes.

Will this leave a massive hole in Scottish football? Yes.

Will other sides face similar financial clubs? Looks like it.

I believe one tycoon is still paying some £60,000 of his own money each time his team plays. I do hope this mogul is not getting overly financially stretched. I’d again ask the question if Loirston Loch land – in a Special Area of Conservation – should really be turned into a 21,000 seat football ground with offices and museum in this climate.

  Donald’s granny was Scottish. This gives him good cause to call Alex Salmond ‘insane’

Well, I would ask, but the continuous concrete covering of anything green in Aberdeen seems unstoppable. Thankfully, we all have one tireless, gentle campaigner who is not giving up the fight for ‘Scotland’s heritage’. Step forward, Mr Donald Trump.

You might have seen one or two small news items saying that this gentle giant wants to build the galaxy’s greatest golf course on a no-doubt-underused stretch of coastline. He’s got rid of many of the view-blocking trees, but there are horrible plans to build windfarms offshore which could actually be seen by his guests, if you can believe that!

Now, windfarms don’t actually work very efficiently yet. The technology can, and should improve. But I guess we’re all agreed there are few things in life worse than being a rich golfer who might have to look at an offshore wind farm. For those people in favour of this kind of blot on the seascape, I would remind you that you’re forgetting something very important.

Donald’s granny was Scottish. This gives him good cause to call Alex Salmond ‘insane’ for supporting renewable energy. Please try to keep that in mind, thank you.

Finally, it might have been Valentine’s Day this week, but it looks like the May to December romance between Callum McCaig and Aileen ‘Ho’Malone is over. One of them is an over-blown, over-hyped, over-rated, naïve, headline-seeking soul, blissfully unaware that they are dangerously out of their depth. The other is Callum McCaig.

No more will they share a coalition; there will be no more romps on Tullos Hill; there will be no more late-night negotiations. Maybe yet the SNP will change its tune over the ridiculous cull of deer to plant trees that cannot possibly grow on Tullos Hill. Watch this space.

  the taxpayers’ side of this great granite garden bargain is to borrow £92m and pay the loan, and its interest, back over decades.

There is certainly a current in that direction, not least fuelled by public anger and the wasting of some £43,800 to date. Still, a break-up is hard to take. Final confirmation of this great bust-up comes in newspaper stories announcing that the coalition is still absolutely fine. I am thinking of offering my condolences to Mrs Robinson, sorry, I mean Aileen.

I’m still thinking on it. PS. Message to Irene – feel better soon!

And now back to debunking the debunking of the Myths. The City Garden Project seems to be the only entity that’s been presented with these Myths, and I commented on the first four last week. Here are a few choice words on the remaining five Myths. Thank you CGP for printing these not-at-all-wild and not-at-all-made-up Myths – we’re all really onside now. Their comments are in bold. Old Susannah’s are in regular type

5. It will cost the taxpayer millions of pounds – FALSE.

Sure. All this happens for free, and you’ve not paid a penny, and you won’t pay a penny. I wonder if the CGP forgot about the £422,000, or probably more, of taxpayers’ money Scottish Enterprise has already spent on this project? And, no doubt, our CGP friends don’t think it matters that some of your city councillors voted to set aside up to £300,000 of your money for legal costs.

Old Susannah is still mulling that one over. A billionaire is ‘giving’ Aberdeen £50m, but there isn’t enough money on his side of the fence to pay the legal costs the city will incur? So, rather than getting granny a new wheelchair, or providing 24/7 care at homes which have just announced cuts etc etc, Wood wants your £300,000. But this £722,000, nearly quarter of a million pounds, is small change.  we’re going to chop down existing, healthy trees, thus getting rid of wildlife that’s called the trees home for decades, if not centuries

Multiply that figure by ten and you get close to the amount of interest on the loan Aberdeen City Council has to sign for this project to go ahead, according to one of last night’s radio show speakers. Thanks to Original FM (on 105FM) for hosting last night’s debate. Anyway, the taxpayers’ side of this great granite garden bargain is to borrow £92m and pay the loan, and its interest, back over decades.

If the 6500 new jobs don’t come in and we don’t make £122m each year (I can’t wait to see how this happens), if we go over budget, if anything goes wrong – then it will cost us an unknown additional amount of money in repayments. The trams fiasco has reached a cost of nearly one billion pounds.

But this won’t cost you a cent. Honest, guv.

6. Fake, plastic trees – FALSE.

It’s a great Radiohead song but a lousy Myth. It has been suggested that fake plastic trees will be planted in the City Gardens to act as vents for the giant car park underneath. If any fake trees are seen they will be beside the flying pigs. 186 new trees will be planted, some of them mature and many will be Scots Pines.

Old Susannah doesn’t know where to start with this alleged Myth. She does find it reassuring to find that a job in public relations entails so much creative writing talent. I know of no-one who’s heard of plastic trees being part of the plan. However, if we’re building underground, then we’ll need plants with very tiny root systems. Goodbye 250-year old elm trees, one of only a few surviving clusters of elms free from disease, and home to wildlife. In comes progress. Who needs fresh air, wildlife, shade and beauty when you can have ramps?

   we’re going to chop down existing, healthy trees, thus getting rid of wildlife that’s called the trees home for decades, if not centuries

My favourite bit is the announcement that the trees stay in the Gardens forever, as wood chip and seating. Well, you can’t say that’s not sensitive to nature. Still, the BIG Partnership’s student placement has managed to make a meal of a non-existent plastic tree myth. Perhaps someone will explain how mature trees are going to be magically planted in the new Gardens?

Where will their roots go, as there is meant to be underground parking? How do we get to have a thriving pine forest in the city centre – something that doesn’t seem possible according to experts including local architects?

If Old Susannah has this right, we’re going to chop down existing, healthy trees, thus getting rid of wildlife that’s called the trees home for decades, if not centuries, plant some new trees, and have the world’s only pine forest in a city centre.

The pines must grow faster than genetically-modified Leylandii hedges if the drawings I’ve seen are correct, and of course, no-one can fault the accuracy of these precision drawings. I like the giant transparent child romping over the flowerbeds best. So, replacing grass and trees with grass, concrete and trees can be done for only £92m. RESULT!

7. It will cost people their jobs – FALSE.

As a result of the project a projected 6500 new jobs are to be created, not taking into account the hundreds of jobs that will come as a result of the construction. In addition, a transformed city centre will breathe new life across the city, helping us become a World Energy City long after oil and gas has run dry in the North Sea. Existing businesses will be retained meaning existing jobs will be safe-guarded.

These 6500 jobs are going to be wonderful! What will they be? Well, for openers we’ve seen how well Union Square has protected high street businesses. Our small high street shops are struggling whilst multinationals got a cheap rent deal in Union Square. But clearly what we need is….more shops. Surely there is nothing we’d rather do than shop, and you can’t have enough shops can you? It’s not as if a glut of shops will ever result in shop closures, price wars and endless sales, especially ‘Going out of business’ sales.

I wonder if there is any reason that a cafe culture has never really taken off in Aberdeen? Could it be that it’s often too cold, too windy or too rainy? Could it be because the City Council consistently refused to allow anyone to run a snack bar or coffee kiosk in the shelter of Union Terrace Gardens? Clearly not. One wave of the granite wand, and just like those convincing concept drawings, we’ll all be sitting outdoors in short-sleeved shirts, drinking decaf mocha lattes while Toto play on the brand new stage, in front of the existing indoor theatre.

Right. The taxpayer is propping up the AECC with extra money since it can’t make enough by holding events. Same for the Lemon Tree. But the new theatre won’t have any problems making a massive profit and creating loads of jobs.

 So, ‘how many theatres should a taxpayer prop up?’ is one question.

I for one can’t wait to sit through an outdoor electronic folk music competition in February. But, by winter, this theatre will be an ice rink, thereby competing with the ice rink the city tried to kill off before.

But no, there won’t be any harm to jobs. We’ll need people to cut down the trees and get rid of the wildlife. Then there will be jobs cleaning the graffiti off the Web. Yes, the Web will create more permanent jobs in small Aberdeen than the 2012 Olympics will create in Greater London. Rest as assured as I am on that point.

8. It will be entirely made from concrete – FALSE.

Obviously concrete will be used – would you like to relax, visit an exhibition or attend a concert on top of a cardboard box? The project has been carefully designed so there will be 95% more open, green space with a series of pathways providing access for people through, across and in and out of the gardens. These paths will be made of granite, crushed granite and wood.

By now, Old Susannah is finding the content of the dispelled Myths by BIG just a little bit patronising and smarmy. They thought they had to talk us out of believing in plastic trees. Now they explain that we need to sit on something more robust than a cardboard box. Thanks for that! Appreciated.

So, ‘how many theatres should a taxpayer prop up?’ is one question. ‘How many competing businesses should Scottish Enterprise suggest?’ is quite another. They used to have rules on displacement and suchlike, but these seem to have gone, probably about the same time as your employer started to tell you how to vote.

This project has been carefully designed. Of course it has. More green space, but somehow it manages to have a giant concrete, sorry, granite theatre which takes up some 15% minimum of the existing Gardens. They count the giant granite potato-crisp shaped thingy over the stage as green space.

 what if the architects were to give us some drawings showing how these ramps will work safely now rather than later?

Of course it won’t sustain any wildlife, and at best will be a thin wedge of sod over concrete, but if they want to call it green space, fine.

I guess these people call anything green space if they can colour it green with Crayolas on their paper plan.

Looking at the slope of the ramps both up and downwards, I’m wondering how the aged, infirm or wheelchair-bound are going to find this system easier than the current access. The current access could use an additional ramp and you could probably do this for less than £92m as well. For the truly baffled, there is ground level access on the north side, not far from the theatre. This is where vehicles somehow manage to get in.

Clearly there is no other way to ‘relax and visit an exhibition or attend a concert in this town.’ Let’s borrow £92 million and build this beauty.

9. There will be no railings in the Granite Web, people will fall from the paths – FALSE.

Safety will be paramount. The concept design shows the various walkways at different levels but the final design will show how these work safely. And, seriously, do you think any development in a country obsessed with health and safety would get off the ground without proper safety measures?

Our PR work placement is patronising us again. I might be old, but here’s a crazy idea – what if the architects were to give us some drawings showing how these ramps will work safely now rather than later? Are they going to be enclosed, and of course, not at all potential rat traps? Are they going to have fencing that somehow won’t look like Stalag 17? How will wheelchair users go up and down these steep ramps? Details, details.

Well, Old Susannah has run out of space for one week. We will return to normal definitions next week, and take a closer look at who is behind ‘Vote for the City Garden Project’. You will, of course, want to know what businesses are in this group, to make sure you can reward them with your custom. Or not.

Finally, many thanks to those brave business people who have stuck out their necks in favour of saving our city’s only unique, free, green garden.

That’s you, J Milne. It is appreciated.